Good evening from Belmont University in Nashville,
Tennessee. I'm Tom Brokaw of NBC News, and welcome to this second
presidential debate sponsored by the Commission on Presidential
Debates.
Tonight's debate is the only one with a town hall format. The
Gallup Organization chose 80 uncommitted voters from the Nashville
area to be here with us tonight, and earlier today each of them gave
me a copy of their question for the candidates.
From all these questions and from tens of thousands submitted
online, I have selected a long list of excellent questions on domestic
and foreign policy. Neither the commission or the candidates have
seen the questions. And although we won't be able to get to all of
them tonight, we should have a wide-ranging discussion, one month
before the election.
Each candidate will have two minutes to respond to a common
question, and there will be a one-minute follow up.
The audience here in the hall has agreed to be polite and
attentive, no cheering or outbursts. Those of you at home, of course,
are not so constrained. The only exception in the hall is right now,
as it is my privilege to introduce the candidates, Senator Barack
Obama of Illinois and Senator John McCain of Arizona.
Gentlemen? (Cheers, applause.)
Gentlemen, we want to get under way immediately, if we can.
Since you last met at Ole Miss 12 days ago, the world has changed a
great deal, and not for the better. We still don't know where the
bottom is at this time. As you might expect, many of the questions
that we have from here in the hall tonight and from online have to do
with the American economy and, in fact, with global economic
conditions.
I understand that you've flipped a coin and Senator Obama you'll
begin tonight. And we're going to have our first question from over
here in Section A, from Allen Schaffer.
first question from over here in Section A, from Allen Schaffer.
Allen?
With the economy on the downturn, and retired and older
citizens and workers losing their incomes, what's the fastest, most
positive solution to bail these people out of the economic ruin?
Well, Allen, thank you very much for the question.
I want to first obviously thank Belmont University. Tom, thank you,
and to all of you who are participating tonight and those of you who
sent e-mail questions in.
I think everybody knows now we are in the worst financial crisis
since the Great Depression. And a lot of you, I think, are worried
about your jobs, your pensions, your retirement accounts, your ability
to send your child or your grandchild to college. And I believe this
is a final verdict on the failed economic policies of the last eight
years, strongly promoted by President Bush and supported by Senator
McCain, that essentially said that we should strip away regulations,
consumer protections, let the market run wild, and prosperity would
rain down on all of us.
It hasn't worked out that way, and so now we've got to take some
decisive action.
Now step one was a rescue package that was passed last week.
We've got to make sure that works properly, and that means strong
oversight, making sure that investors -- taxpayers are getting their
money back and treated as investors.
It means that we are cracking down on CEOs and making sure that
they're not getting bonuses or golden parachutes as a consequence of
this package. And in fact, we just found out that AIG, a company that
got a bailout, just a week after they got help went on a $400,000
junket. And I tell you what, the Treasury should demand that money
back and those executives should be fired.
But that's only step one. The middle class need a rescue
package, and that means tax cuts for the middle class. It means help
for homeowners so that they can stay in their homes. It means that we
are helping state and local governments set up road projects and
bridge projects that keep people in their jobs. And then long term
we've got to fix our health care system, we've got to fix our energy
system that is putting such an enormous burden on families.
You need somebody working for you. And you've got to have
somebody in Washington who's thinking about the middle class and not
just those who can afford to hire lobbyists.
Senator McCain?
Well, thank you, Tom.
Thank you, Belmont University.
And Senator Obama, it's good to be with you at a town hall
meeting.
And Allen, thank you for your question. You go to the heart of
America's worries tonight.
Americans are angry, they're upset, and they're a little fearful.
And it's our job to fix the problem.
Now, I have a plan to fix this problem, and it's got to do with
energy independence.
We've got to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don't
want us very -- like us very much. We have to keep Americans' taxes
low, all Americans' taxes low.
Let's not raise taxes on anybody today. We obviously have to
stop the spending spree that's going on in Washington. Do you know
that we've laid a $10 trillion debt on these young Americans who are,
who are here with us tonight? Five hundred billion of it we owe to
China.
We've got to have a package of reforms, and it's got to lead to
reform, prosperity and peace in the world. And I think that this
problem has become so severe, as you know, that we're going to have to
do something about home values. You know that home values of retirees
continues to, to decline. And people are no longer able to afford
their mortgage payments.
As president of the United States, Allen, I would order the
secretary of the Treasury to immediately buy up the bad home-loan
mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes,
at the diminished value of those homes, and let people make those --
be able to make those payments and stay in their homes.
Is it expensive? Yes. But we all know, my friends, until we
stabilize home values in America, we're never going to start turning
around and creating jobs and fixing our economy.
And we've got to give some trust and confidence back to America.
I know how to do that, my friends. And it's my proposal. It's
not Senator Obama's proposal; it's not President Bush's proposal. But
I know how to get America working again, restore our economy and take
care of working Americans.
Thank you.
Senator, we have one minute for a discussion here.
Obviously, the powers of the Treasury secretary have been greatly
expanded, the most powerful officer in the Cabinet now. Hank Paulson
says he won't stay on. Who do you have in mind to appoint to that
very important post? (Pause.) Senator McCain?
Not you, Tom. (Laughter.)
(Chuckles.) (Inaudible.) With good reason.
(Laughter.)
You know, that's a tough question. And there's a
lot of qualified Americans. But I think the first criteria, Tom,
would have to be somebody who immediately Americans identify with,
immediately say, we can trust that -- that individual.
Supporter of Senator Obama's is Warren Buffet. He's already
weighed in and helped stabilize some of the difficulties in the
markets and with companies and corporations, institutions today.
I like Meg Whitman. She knows what it's like to be out there in
the marketplace. She knows how to create jobs.
Meg Whitman was the CEO of a company that started with 12 people and
is -- now 1.3 million people in America make their living off eBay.
Maybe somebody here has done a little business with them.
But the point is, it's going to have to be somebody who inspires
trust and confidence, because the problem in America today, to a large
extent, Tom, is that we don't have trust and confidence in our
institutions because of the corruption on Wall Street and the greed
and excess and the cronyism in Washington, D.C.
Yup. All right.
Senator McCain -- Senator Obama, who do you have in mind for a
Treasury secretary?
Well, Warren would be a pretty good choice, Warren
Buffett, and I'm pleased to have his support. But there are other
folks out there.
The key is making sure that the next Treasury secretary
understands that it's not enough just to help those at the top.
Prosperity's not just going to trickle down. We've got to help the
middle class.
And we've -- you know, Senator McCain and I have some fundamental
disagreements on the economy, starting with Senator McCain's statement
earlier that he thought the fundamentals of the economy were sound.
Part of the problem here is that for many of you, wages and incomes
have flatlined. For many of you, it is getting harder and harder to
save, harder and harder to retire.
And that's why, for example, on tax policy, what I want to do is
provide a middle-class tax cut to 95 percent of working Americans --
those who are working two jobs, people who are not spending enough
time with their kids -- because they are struggling to make ends meet.
Senator McCain is right that we've got to stabilize housing
prices, but underlying that is loss of jobs and loss of income.
That's something that the next Treasury secretary's going to have to
work on.
Senator Obama, thank you very much.
May I remind both of you, if I can, that we're operating under
rules that you signed off on, and when we have a discussion it really
is to be confined within about a minute or so.
We're going to go now, Senator McCain, to the next question for
you from the hall here. And it comes from Oliver Clark, who is over
here in Section F. Oliver?
Well, Senators, through this economic crisis, most of the
people that I know have had a difficult time. And through this
bailout package, I was wondering what it is that's going to actually
help those people out.
Well, thank you, Oliver.
And that's an excellent question because, as you just described
it, "bailout" when I believe that it's "rescue." Because -- because
of the greed and excess in Washington and Wall Street, Main Street was
paying a very heavy price, and we know that.
I left my campaign and suspended it to go back to Washington to
make sure that there were additional protections for the taxpayer in
the form of good oversight and the form of taxpayers being the first
to be paid back when our economy recovers, and it will recover, and a
number of other measures.
But you know, one of the real catalysts, really the match that
lit this fire was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I'll bet you, you may
never even have heard of them before this crisis.
But you know, they're the ones that with the encouragement of
Senator Obama and his cronies and his friends, in Washington, that
went out and made all these risky loans, gave them to people that
could never afford to pay back.
And you know, there were some of us that stood up two years ago
and said, we've got to enact legislation to fix this. We've got to
stop this greed and excess.
Meanwhile the Democrats in the Senate and some and some members
of Congress defended what, what Fannie and Freddie were doing. They,
they resisted any change.
Meanwhile they were getting all kinds of money in campaign
contributions. Senator Obama was the second highest recipient of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac money in history, in history.
So this rescue package means that we will stabilize markets. We
will buy -- we will shore up these institutions, but it's not enough.
That's why we're going to have to go out into the housing market. And
we're going to have to buy up these bad loans. And we're going to
have to stabilize house, home values.
And that way Americans can -- like Allen -- can realize the American
dream and stay in their home.
But Fannie and Freddie were the catalysts, the match that started
this forest fire. There were some of us -- there were some of us that
stood up against us; there was others who took a hike.
Senator Obama.
Well, Oliver, first let me tell you what's in the
rescue package for you.
Right now, the credit markets are frozen up. And what that means
as a practical matter is that small businesses and some large
businesses just can't get loans. If they can't get a loan, that means
that they can't make payroll. If they can't make payroll, then they
may end up having to shut their doors and lay people off.
And if you imagine just one company trying to deal with that, now
imagine a million companies all across the country. So it could end
up having an adverse affect of everybody. And that's why we had to
take action, but we shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Now, I've got to correct a little bit of Senator McCain's
history, not surprisingly. Let -- let's first of all understand that
the biggest problem in this whole process was the deregulation of the
financial system. Senator McCain, as recently as March, bragged about
the fact that he is a deregulator.
On the other hand, two years ago I said that we've got a subprime
lending crisis that has to be dealt with. I wrote to Secretary
Paulson, I wrote to Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke, and told them
this is something we have to deal with, and nobody did anything about
it.
A year ago I went to Wall Street and said we've got to
reregulate. And nothing happened. And Senator McCain during that
period said that we should keep on deregulating because that's how the
free enterprise system works.
Now, with respect to Fannie Mae, what Senator McCain didn't
mention is the fact that this bill that he talked about wasn't his own
bill. He jumped on it a year after it had been introduced, and it
never got passed.
And I never promoted Fannie Mae. In fact, Senator McCain's
campaign chairman's firm was a lobbyist on behalf of Fannie Mae, not
me.
So -- but look, you're not interested in hearing politicians
pointing fingers. What you're interested in is trying to figure out
how is this going to impact you.
This is not the end of the process, this is the beginning of the
process. And that's why it's going to be so important for us to work
with homeowners to make sure that they can stay in their homes.
The secretary already has the power to do that in the rescue
package, but it hasn't been exercised yet. And the next president has
to make sure that the next Treasury secretary is thinking about how to
strengthen you as a home buyer, you as a homeowner, and not simply
think about bailing out banks on Wall Street.
Senator Obama, time for a discussion. I'm going to
begin with you.
Are you saying to Mr. Clark and to the other members of the
American television audience that the American economy is going to get
much worse before it gets better, and they ought to be prepared for
that?
No. I am confident about the American economy, but
we are going to have to have some leadership from Washington that not
only sets out much better regulations for the financial system; the
problem is we still have a(n) archaic, 20th-century regulatory system
for 21st-century financial markets. We're going to have to coordinate
with other countries to make sure that whatever actions we take work.
But most importantly, we're going to have to help ordinary
families be able to stay in their homes, make sure that they can pay
their bills, deal with critical issues like health care and energy,
and we're going to have to change the culture in Washington so that
lobbyists and special interests aren't driving the process and your
voices aren't being drowned out.
Senator McCain, in all candor, do you think the
economy's going to get worse before it gets better?
I think it depends on what we do.
I think if we act effectively -- if we stabilize the housing
market, which I believe we can if we go out and buy up these bad loans
so that people can have a new mortgage at the new value of their home;
I think if we get rid of the cronyism and special interest influence
in Washington so we can act more effectively -- my friend, I'd like
you to see the letter that a group of senators and I wrote warning
exactly of this crisis.
Senator Obama's name was not on that letter.
The point is -- the point is that we can fix our economy.
Americans -- workers are the best in the world. They're the
fundamental aspect of America's economy. They're the most innovative.
They're the best -- they're most -- best -- we're the best exporters.
We're the best importers. They're most effective. They are the best
workers in the world. And we got to give them a chance. They got --
we got to give them a chance to do their best again.
Yeah.
And they are the innocent bystanders here in what
is the biggest financial crisis and challenge of our time. We can do
it.
Thank you, Senator McCain.
We're going to continue over in Section F, as it turns out.
Senator Obama, this is a question from (sic) you, from Teresa Finch.
Teresa?
How can we trust either of you with our money when both
parties got us into this global economic crisis?
Well, look, I understand your frustration and your
cynicism, because while you've been carrying out your
responsibilities, most of the people here -- you've got a family
budget; if less money's coming in, you end up making cuts.
cuts.
Maybe you don't go out to dinner as much. Maybe you put off buying a
new car. That's not what happens in Washington. And you're right,
there's a lot of blame to go around. But I think it's important just
to remember a little bit of history.
When George Bush came into office, we had surplus. And now we
have a $0.5 trillion deficit annually. When George Bush came into
office, our debt, national debt was around 5 trillion. It's now over
$10 trillion. We've almost doubled it.
And so while it's true that nobody's completely innocent here, we
have had, over the last eight years, the biggest increases in deficit
spending and national debt in our history. And Senator McCain voted
for four our of five of those George Bush budgets.
So here's what I would do. I'm going to spend some money on the
key issues that we've got to work on. You know, you may have seen
your health care premiums go up. We've got to reform health care to
help you and your budget.
We are going to have to deal with energy because we can't keep on
borrowing from the Chinese and sending money to Saudi Arabia. We are
mortgaging our children's future. We've got to have a different
energy plan. We've got to invest in college affordability.
So we're going to have to make some investments. But we've also
got to make spending cuts. And what I've proposed -- you'll hear
Senator McCain say, well, he's proposing a whole bunch of new
spending. But actually I am cutting more than I'm spending, so that
it will be a net spending cut.
The key is whether or not we've got priorities that are working for
you as opposed to those who have been dictating the policy in
Washington lately, and that's mostly lobbyists and special interests.
We've got to put an end to that.
Senator McCain.
Well, Teresa, thank you. And I can see why you
feel that cynicism and mistrust, because the system in Washington is
broken.
And I have been a consistent reformer. I have advocated and
taken on the special interests, whether they be the big-money people
by reaching across the aisle and working with Senator Feingold on
campaign finance reform, whether it being a variety of other issues --
working with Senator Lieberman on trying to address climate change --
I have a clear record of bipartisanship.
The situation today cries out for bipartisanship. Senator Obama
has never taken on his leaders of his party on a single issue. And we
need to reform. And so let's look at our records as well as our
rhetoric. That's really part of your -- your mistrust here. And now
I suggest that maybe you go to some of these organizations that are
the watchdogs of what we do, like the Citizens Against Government
Waste or the National Taxpayers Union or these other organizations
that watch us all the time. I don't expect you to watch every vote.
And you know what you'll find? This is the most liberal, big-spending
record in the United States Senate.
I have fought against excessive spending and outrageous; I have
fought to reduce the earmarks and eliminate them. Do you know what
Senator Obama has voted for -- is proposing? $860 billion of new
spending now, new spending.
Do you know that he voted for every, for every increase in
spending that I saw come across the floor, of the United States
Senate, while we were working to eliminate these pork barrel earmarks?
He voted for nearly $1 billion in pork barrel earmark projects
including, by the way, $3 million for an overhead projector at a
planetarium in Chicago, Illinois.
My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money? I think you
have to look at my record and you have to look at his. Then you have
to look at our proposals for our economy -- not $860 billion in new
spending but for the kinds of reforms that keep people in their jobs,
get middle-income Americans working again and getting our economy
moving again.
You're going to be examining our proposals tonight and in the
future. And energy independence is the way to do that, is one of
them. And drilling offshore and nuclear power are two vital elements
of that.
And I've been supporting those. And I know how to fix this economy
and eliminate our dependence on foreign oil and stop sending --
Senator --
-- $700 billion a year overseas.
We've run out of time. We have this one-minute
discussion period going on here.
There are new economic realities out there, that everyone in this
hall and across this country understands, that there are going to have
to be some choices made. Health policies, energy policies and
entitlement reform. What are going to be your priorities, in what
order? Which of those will be your highest priority your first year
in office, and which will follow, in sequence?
That was --
Senator McCain.
The three priorities were health --
The three, health -- health care, energy, and
entitlement reform -- Social Security and Medicare. In what order
will you put them in terms of priorities?
I -- I think you can work on all three at once,
Tom. I think it's very important that we reform our entitlement
programs. My friends, we are not going to be able to provide the same
benefit for present-day workers that we are going -- that present-day
retirees have today.
We're going to have to sit down across the table, Republican and
Democrat, as (he ?) did in 1983 between Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill.
I know how to do that. I have a clear record of reaching across the
aisle, whether it be Joe Lieberman or Russ Feingold or Ted Kennedy or
others. That's -- that's my clear record.
We can -- we can work on nuclear power plants, build a whole
bunch of them, create millions of new jobs. We -- we have to have all
of the above -- alternate -- alternative fuels, wind, tide, solar,
natural gas, clean coal technology. All of these things we can do as
Americans, and we can take on this mission, and we can overcome it.
My friends, some of this $700 billion ends up in the hands of
terrorist organizations.
As far as health care is concerned, obviously everyone is
struggling to make sure that they can afford their premiums and that
they can have affordable and available health care. That's the next
issue.
But we can do them all at once. There's no -- and we have to do
them all at once. All three you mentioned are compelling national
security requirements.
I'm trying to play by the rules that you all
established: one minute for discussion.
Senator Obama, if you would, give us your list of priorities.
There are some real questions about whether everything can be done at
once.
We're going to have to prioritize, just like a
family has to prioritize.
Now, I've listed the things that I think have to be at the top of
the list. Energy we have to deal with today, because you're paying
3.80 here in Nashville for gasoline, and it could go up. And it's a
strain on your family budget, but it's also bad for our national
security, because countries like Russia and Venezuela and, you know,
in some cases countries like Iran are benefitting from higher oil
prices.
So we've got to deal with that right away.
That's why I've called for an investment of $15 billion a year
over 10 years. Our goal should be, in 10 years' time, we are free of
dependence on Middle Eastern oil, and we can do it. When JFK said
we're going to the Moon in 10 years, nobody was sure how to do it.
But we understood that if the American people make a decision to do
something, it gets done. So that would be priority number one.
Health care is priority number two, because that broken health
care system is bad not only for families, but it's making our
businesses less competitive.
And number three, we've got to deal with education so that our
young people are competitive in a global economy.
But just one point I want to make, Tom. Senator McCain mentioned
looking at our records. We do need to look at our records. Senator
McCain likes to talk about earmarks a lot, and that's important -- I
want to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and
eliminate programs that don't work, and make sure that those that do
work work better and cheaper.
But understand this: we also have to look at where some of our
tax revenues are going. So when Senator McCain proposes a $300
billion tax cut -- a continuation not only of the Bush tax cuts but an
additional $200 billion that he's going to give to big corporations,
including big oil companies, $4 billion worth -- that's money out of
the system.
And so we've got to prioritize both our spending side and our tax
policies to make sure that they're working for you. That's what I'm
going to do as president of the United States.
All right. Gentlemen, I want to just remind you one
more time about time.
(Laughs.)
We're going to have a larger deficit than the
federal government does if we don't get this under control here before
too long. (Laughter.)
We -- Senator McCain, for you, we have our first question from
the Internet tonight. A child of the Depression, 78-year-old Fiorra
from Chicago: "Since World War II, we have never been asked to
sacrifice anything to help our country except the blood of our heroic
men and women. As president, what sacrifices" -- sacrifices -- "will
you ask every American to make to help restore the American dream and
to get out of the economic morass that we're now in?"
Well, Fiorra, I'm going to ask the American people
to understand that there are some programs that we may have to
eliminate. I first proposed a long time ago that we would have to
examine every agency and every bureaucracy of government, and we're
going to have to eliminate those that aren't working.
I know a lot of them that aren't working. One of them is in
defense spending, because I've taken on some of the defense
contractors. I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion in a deal for an Air
Force tanker that was done in a corrupt fashion.
I believe that we have to eliminate the earmarks. And sometimes
those projects, not the overhead projector that Senator Obama asked
for but some of them that are really good projects, will have, will
have to be eliminated as well. And they'll have to undergo the same
scrutiny that all projects should, in competition with others.
So we're going to have to tell the American people that spending
is going to have to be cut in America. And I recommend a spending
freeze that except for Defense, Veterans Affairs and some other vital
programs, we'll just have to have across-the-board freeze. And some
of those programs may not grow as much as we would like for them to.
But we can establish priorities with full transparency, with full
knowledge of the American people and full consultation, not done
behind closed doors and shoving earmarks in the middle of the night
into programs we don't, sometimes we don't even know about until
months later.
And by the way, I want to go back a second. Look, we can attack
health care and energy at the same time. We're not, we're not, we're
not rifle shots here. We are Americans. We can, with the
participation of all Americans, work together and solve these problems
together.
Frankly I'm not going to tell that person without health
insurance that, I'm sorry, you'll have to wait. I'm going to tell
you, Americans, we'll get to work right away and we'll get to work
together.
And we can get them all done, because that's what America's been
doing.
Senator McCain, thank you very much.
Senator Obama?
You know, a lot of you remember the tragedy of 9/11
and where you were on that day and, you know, how all of the country
was ready to come together and make enormous changes to make us not
only safer but to make us a better country and a -- and a -- and a
more unified country. And you know, President Bush did some smart
things at the outset, but one of the opportunities that was missed
when he spoke to the American people, he -- he said: Go out and shop.
That wasn't the kind of call to service that I think the American
people were looking for.
And so, you know, it's important to understand that the -- I
think the American people are hungry for the kind of leadership that
is going to tackle these problems not just in government but outside
of government.
And let's take the example of energy, which we already spoke
about. There is going to be the need for each and every one of us to
start thinking about how we use energy. I believe in the need for
increased oil production. We're going to have to explore new ways to
get more oil, and that includes offshore drilling.
It includes telling the oil companies, that currently have 68
million acres that they're not using, that either you use them or you
lose them. We're going to have to develop clean coal technology and
safe ways to store nuclear energy.
But each and every one of us can start thinking about how can we
save energy in our homes and in our buildings. And one of the things
I want to do is make sure that we're providing incentives so that you
can buy a fuel-efficient car that's made right here in the United
States of America, not in Japan or South Korea; making sure that you
are able to weatherize your home or make your business more fuel-
efficient. And that's going to require effort from each and every one
of us.
And the last point I just want to make. I think the young people
of America are especially interested in how they can serve. And
that's one of the reasons why I'm interested in doubling the Peace
Corps, making sure that we are creating a -- a volunteer corps all
across this country that can be involved in their community, involved
in military service, so that military families and our troops are not
the only ones bearing the burden of renewing America. That's
something that all of us have to be involved with, and that requires
some leadership from Washington.
Senator Obama, as we begin very quickly our
discussion period, President Bush, you'll remember last summer said
that Wall Street got drunk. A lot of people now look back and think
the federal government got drunk and in fact the American consumers
got drunk.
How would you, as president, try to break those bad habits of too much
debt and too much easy credit, specifically, across the board for this
country not just at the federal level, but as a model for the rest of
the country as well?
Well, I think it starts with Washington. We've got
to show that we've got good habits because if we're running up
trillion-dollar debts that we're passing on to the next generation,
then a lot of people are going to think, well, you know what, there's
easy money out there.
It means -- and I have to, again, repeat this -- it means not
just looking at the spending side, but also at the revenue side. I
mean, Senator McCain has -- has, you know, been talking tough about
earmarks, and that's good. But earmarks account for about $18 billion
of our budget. Now, when Senator McCain is proposing tax cuts that
would give the average Fortune 500 CEO an additional $700,000 in tax
cuts, that's not sharing a burden. And so part of the problem I think
for a -- a lot of people who are listening here tonight is they don't
feel as if they are sharing the burden with other folks.
I mean, you know, it's tough to ask a -- a teacher who's making
30 (thousand dollars) or $35,000 a year to tighten her belt when
people who are making much more than her are living pretty high on the
hog. And -- and that's why, I think, it's important for the president
to set a tone that says all of us are going to contribute, all of us
are going to make sacrifices.
And it means that, yes, we may have to cut some spending, although I
disagree with Senator McCain about an across-the-board freeze.
That's an example of an unfair burden-sharing. That's using a
hatchet to cut the federal budget. I want to use a scalpel, so that
people who need help are getting help. And those of us, like myself
and Senator McCain, who don't need help aren't getting it. That's how
we make sure that everybody is willing to make a few sacrifices.
Senator McCain.
You know, nailing down Senator Obama's various tax
proposals is like nailing Jell-O to the wall. There's been five or
six of them. And if you wait long enough, there will probably be
another one. But he wants to raise taxes.
My friends, the last president to raise taxes during tough
economic times was Herbert Hoover. And he practiced protectionism as
well which, I'm sure, we'll get to at some point.
You know, last year, up to this time, we've lost 700,000 jobs in
America. The only bright spot is that 300 -- over 300,000 jobs have
been created by small businesses.
Senator Obama's secret that you don't know is that his tax
increases will increase taxes on 50 percent of small-business revenue.
Small businesses across America will -- will have to cut jobs and will
have their taxes increase and won't be able to hire because of Senator
Obama's tax policies.
You know, he said some time ago -- he said he would forego his
tax increases if the economy was bad. I got some news, Senator Obama:
the news is bad. So let's not raise anybody's taxes, my friends, and
make it be very clear to you I am not in favor of tax cuts for the
wealthy. I am in favor of leaving the tax rates alone and reducing
the tax burden on middle-income Americans by doubling your tax
exemption for every child from $3,500 to $7,000; to giving every
American a $5,000 refundable tax credit and go out and get the health
insurance you want, rather than mandates and fines for small
businesses as Senator Obama's plan calls for. And let's create jobs
and let's get our economy going again, and let's not raise anybody's
taxes.
Senator Obama, we have another question from the
Internet.
Tom, can I respond to this briefly, because --
Well, look, guys, the rules --
I understand.
-- were established by the two campaigns. We worked
very hard on this.
Right.
This will address, I think, the next question --
The -- the -- the tax issue, because I think it's
very important. Go ahead.
(Laughs.) There are lots of issues that we're going
to be dealing with here tonight.
Let's go.
And we have a question from Langdon (sp) in Ballston
Spa, New York, and that's about huge unfunded obligations for Social
Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs that will soon eat
up all the revenue that's in place and then go into a deficit
position.
Since the rules are pretty loose here, I'm going to add my own to
this one. Instead of having a discussion, let me just ask you, as a
coda to that, would you give Congress a date certain to reform Social
Security and Medicare within two years after you take office, because,
in a bipartisan way, everyone agrees that that's a big ticking time
bomb that will eat us up, maybe even more than the mortgage crisis?
Well, Tom, we're going to have to take on
entitlements, and I think we've got to do it quickly. We're going to
have a lot of work to do, so I can't guarantee that we're going to do
it in the next two years, but I'd like to do it in my first term as
president.
But -- but I think it's important to understand we're not going
solve Social Security and Medicare unless we understand the rest of
our tax policies. And you know, Senator McCain, I think, you know,
the Straight Talk Express lost a wheel on that one. So let's be clear
about my tax plan and Senator McCain's, because we're not going to be
able to deal with entitlements unless we understand the revenues
coming in.
I want to provide a tax cut for 95 percent of Americans -- 95
percent. If you make less than a quarter million dollars a year, you
will not see a single dime of your taxes go up. If you make $200,000
a year or less, your taxes will go down.
Now, Senator McCain talks about small businesses. Only a few
percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So the
vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan.
And we provide a 50 percent tax credit so that they can buy health
insurance for their workers, because there are an awful lot of small
businesses I meet all across America that want to do right by their
workers but they just can't afford it. Some small-business owners, a
lot of them, can't even afford health insurance for themselves.
Now in contrast, Senator McCain wants to give a $300 billion tax
cut; 200 (billion dollars) of it to the largest corporations, and
100,000 of it -- 100 billion (dollars) of it going to people like CEOs
on Wall Street. He wants to give the average Fortune 500 CEO an
additional $700,000 in tax cuts. That is not fair, and it doesn't
work.
Now, if we get our tax policies right so that they're good for
the middle class, if we reverse the policies of the last eight years
that got us into this fix in the first place, and that Senator McCain
supported, then we are going to be in a position to deal with Social
Security and deal with Medicare because we will have a health care
plan that actually works for you, reduces spending and costs over the
long term, and Social Security that is stable and solvent for all
Americans and not just some.
Senator McCain, two years for reform of entitlement
programs?
Sure. Hey, I'll answer the question. (Laughter.)
Look, it's not that hard to fix Social Security, Tom. It's just
tough decisions.
And Medicare.
I want to get to Medicare in a second.
Social Security is not that tough. We know what the problems
are, my friends, and we know what the fixes are. We've got to sit
down together across the table. It's been done before.
I saw it done with our, our wonderful Ronald Reagan, the
conservative from California, and the liberal Democrat, Tip O'Neill,
from Massachusetts. That's what we need more of and that's what I've
done in Washington.
Senator Obama has never taken on his party leaders on a single
major issue. I've taken them on. I'm not too popular sometimes with
my own party, much less his.
So Medicare, it's going to be a little tougher. It's going to be
a little tougher, because we're talking about very complex and
difficult issues. My friends, what we have to do with Medicare is
have a commission, have the smartest people in America come together,
come up with recommendations. And then like the base-closing
commission idea we had, then we should have Congress vote up or down.
Let's not let them fool with it anymore. There's too much
special interest and too many lobbyists working there. So let's have
and let's have the American people say, fix it for us.
Now, just back on this, on this tax, you know, again, it's back
to our first question here about rhetoric and record. Senator Obama
has voted 94 times to either increase your taxes or against tax cuts.
That's his record.
When he ran for the United States Senate from Illinois, he said
he would have a middle-income tax cut. You know, he came to the
Senate and never once proposed legislation to do that?
So let's look at our record. I've fought higher taxes. I have
fought excess spending. I have fought to reform government. Let's
look at our records, my friends, and then listen to my vision for the
future of America. And we'll get our economy going again, and our
best days are ahead of us.
Senator McCain, thank you very much.
I'm going to stick by my part of the pact and not ask a follow-up
here.
(Laughs.)
The next question does come from the hall for
Senator McCain.
It comes from Section C over here and it's from
Ingrid Jackson. Ingrid?
Senator McCain, I want to know -- we saw that Congress
moved pretty fast in the face of a(n) economic crisis. I want to know
what you would do within the first two years to make sure that
Congress moves fast as far as environmental issues like climate change
and green jobs.
Well, thank you.
Look, we are in tough economic times. We all know that. And
let's keep -- never forget the struggle that Americans are in today.
But when we can -- when we have an issue that we may hand our children
and our grandchildren a damaged planet -- I have disagreed strongly
with the Bush administration on this issue.
I traveled all over the world, looking at the effects of greenhouse
gas emissions. Joe Lieberman and I -- and I introduced the first
legislation, and we forced votes on it. That's the good news, my
friends. Bad news is, we lost. But we kept the debate going, and we
kept this issue to -- to posing to Americans the danger that climate
change opposes (sic).
Now how -- what's -- what's the best way of fixing it? Nuclear
power. Senator Obama says that it has to be safe or disposable or
something like that. Look, I've -- I was on Navy ships that had
nuclear power plants. Nuclear power is safe, and it's clean, and it
creates hundreds of thousands of jobs. And -- and I know that we can
reprocess the spent nuclear fuel. The Japanese, the British, the
French do it, and we can do it too. Senator Obama has opposed that.
We can move forward and clean up our climate and develop green
technologies and alternate -- alternative energies for -- for hybrid,
for hydrogen, for battery-powered cars, so that we can clean up our
environment and at the same time get our economy going by creating
millions of jobs. We can do that -- we, as Americans -- because we're
the best innovators, we're the best producers, and 95 percent of the
people who are our market live outside of the United States of
America.
Senator Obama?
This is one of the biggest challenges of our times,
and it is absolutely critical that we understand this is not just a
challenge, it's an opportunity, because if we create a new energy
economy, we can create 5 million new jobs easily here in the United
States.
It can be an engine that drives us into the future the same way the
computer was the engine for economic growth over the last couple of
decades.
And we can do it, but we're going to have to make an investment.
The same way the computer was originally invented by a bunch of
government scientists who were trying to figure out, for defense
purposes, how to communicate, we've got to understand this is a
national security issue as well. And that's why we've got to make
some investments. And I've called for investments in solar, wind,
geothermal. Contrary to what Senator McCain keeps on saying, I favor
nuclear power as one component of our overall energy mix.
But this is another example where I think it is important to look
at the record. Senator McCain and I actually agree on something. He
said a while back that the big problem with energy is that for 30
years politicians in Washington haven't done anything. What Senator
McCain doesn't mention is, he's been there 26 of them. And during
that time, he voted 23 times against alternative fuels. Twenty-three
times.
So it's easy to talk about this stuff during a campaign, but it's
important for us to understand that it requires a sustained effort
from the next president.
One last point I want to make on energy. Senator McCain talks a
lot about drilling, and that's important.
But we have 3 percent of the world's oil reserves and we use 25
percent of the world's oil. So what that means is that we can't
simply drill our way out of the problem. And we're not going to be
able to deal with the climate crisis if our only solution is to use
more fossil fuels that create global warming. We're going to have to
come up with alternatives, and that means that the United States
government is working with the private sector to fund the kind of
innovation that we can then export to countries like China that also
need energy and are setting up one coal power plant a week. We've got
to make sure that we're giving them the energy that they need or -- or
helping them to create the energy that they need.
Gentlemen, you may not have noticed, but we have
lights around here.
(Laughs.)
They have -- they have red and green --
All right.
-- and yellow, and they are to signal to --
Tell you what --
I'm just trying to keep up with John, you know?
Tell you what --
Okay, here --
Tell you what, Tom: wave -- wave like that way and
I'll look at you.
All right, Senator.
Okay.
Here's a follow-up to that, one-minute discussion.
Sure.
It's a simple question.
Sure.
Should we fund a Manhattan-like Project -- that
developed the nuclear bomb -- to deal with global energy and
alternative energy? Or should we fund 100,000 garages across America,
the kind of industry and innovation that developed Silicon Valley?
I think pure research and development investment on
the part of the -- of the United States government is certainly
appropriate. I think once it gets into productive stages that we
ought to obviously turn it over to the private sector.
By the way, my friends, I, I know you grow a little weary of this
back and forth. There was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate
loaded down with goodies, billions for the oil companies. And it was
sponsored by Bush and Cheney. You know who voted for it? You might
never know. That one. You know who voted against it? Me.
I have fought time after time against these pork barrel -- these,
these, these bills that come to the floor. And they have all kinds of
goodies and all kinds of things in them, for everybody, and they buy
off the votes.
I vote against them, my friends. I vote, I vote against them.
But the point is also on oil drilling, oil drilling offshore now is
vital, so that we can bridge the gap. We can bridge the gap between
imported oil which is, which is a national security issue as well as
any other. And it will reduce the price of a barrel of oil, because
when people know there's a greater supply, then the cost of that will
go down.
That's fundamental economics. We've got to drill offshore, my
friends, and we've got to do it now. And we can do it. And as far as
nuclear power is concerned again, again look at the record. Senator
Obama has approved storage and, and reprocessing of spent nuclear
fuel.
And I'll stop, Tom, and you didn't even wave. Thanks.
(Laughs.) Thank you very much, Senator.
Next question for you, Senator Obama, and it comes from the E
section over here. And it's from Lindsey Trella.
Lindsey.
Senator, selling health care coverage in America as a
marketable commodity has become a very profitable industry. Do you
believe health care should be treated as a commodity?
Well, you know, as I travel around the country, this
is one of the single most frequently asked issues that I get, is the
issue of health care.
It is breaking family budgets. I can't tell you how many people I
meet who don't have health insurance. If you've got health insurance,
most of you have seen your premiums double over the last eight years.
and your copayments and deductibles have gone up 30 percent just in
the last year alone. And if you're a small business, it's a crushing
burden.
So one of the things that I have said from the start of this
campaign is that we have a moral commitment as well as an economic
imperative to do something about the health care crisis that so many
families are facing. So here is what I would do.
If you've got health care already, and probably the majority of
you do, then you can keep your plan if you are satisfied with it. You
can keep your choice of doctor. We're going to work with your
employer to lower the cost of your premiums by up to $2,500 a year.
And we're going to do it by investing in prevention. We're going to
do it by making sure that we use information technology so that
medical records are actually on computers instead of you filling forms
out in triplicate when you go to the hospital. That will reduce
medical errors and reduce costs.
If you don't have health insurance, you're going to be able to
buy the same kind of insurance that Senator McCain and I enjoy as
federal employees. Because there's a huge pool, we can drop the
costs. And nobody will be excluded for preexisting conditions, which
is a huge problem.
Now, Senator McCain has a different kind of approach. He says
that he's going to give you a $5,000 tax credit. What he doesn't tell
you is that he is going to tax your employer-based health care
benefits for the first time ever.
So what one hand giveth, the other hand taketh away. He would also
strip away the ability of states to provide some of the regulations on
insurance companies to make sure that you're not excluded for
preexisting conditions or your mammograms are covered or your
maternity is covered. And that is fundamentally the wrong way to go.
In fact, just today, business organizations like the United
States Chamber of Commerce, which generally are pretty supportive of
Republicans, said that this would lead to the unraveling of the
employer-based health care system. That I don't think is the kind of
change that we need. We've got to have somebody who's fighting for
patients and making sure that you get decent, affordable health care,
and that's something that I'm committed to doing as president.
Senator McCain?
Well, thank you for the question. You -- you --
you really identified one of the really major challenges that America
faces.
Copayments go up, costs go up -- skyrocketing costs which make
people less and less able to afford health insurance in America -- and
we need to do all of the things that are necessary to make it more
efficient. Let's put health records online. That'll reduce medical
errors, as -- as they call them. Let's have community health centers.
Let's have walk-in clinics. Let's do a lot of things to impose
efficiencies.
But what is at -- at stake here in this health care issue is the
fundamental difference between myself and Senator Obama.
As you noticed, he starts talking about government. He's talked --
said government will do this and government will do that and then
government will -- and he'll impose mandates. If you're a small
business person, and you don't insure your employees, Senator Obama
will fine you, will fine you. That's remarkable. If you're a parent
and you're struggling to get health insurance for your children,
Senator Obama will fine you.
I want to give every American a $5,000 refundable tax credit they
can take anywhere, across state lines. Why not? Don't we go across
state lines when we purchase other things in America? Of course it's
okay to go across state lines, because in Arizona they may offer a --
a better plan that suits you best than it does here in Tennessee.
And if you do the math, those people who have employer-based
health benefits -- if you put the tax on it, and you have what's left
over, and you add $5,000 that you're going to get as a refundable tax
credit, do the math. Ninety-five percent of the American people will
have increased funds to go out and buy the insurance of their choice
and to shop around and to get -- all those people will be covered,
except for those who have these gold-plated Cadillac kinds of policies
-- you know, like hair transplants. I might need one of those myself.
But the point is that we have got to give people choice in
America and not mandate things on them, and give them the ability --
every parent I know would -- would acquire health insurance for their
children if they could.
Obviously small-business people want to give their employees health
insurance. Of course they all want to do that. We've got to give
them the wherewithal to do it. We can do it by giving them, as a
start, a $5,000 refundable tax credit to go around and get the health
insurance policy of their choice.
Quick discussion: Is health care in America a
privilege, a right, or a responsibility? Senator McCain.
I think it's a responsibility in this respect, in
that we should have available and affordable health care to every
American citizen, to every family member. And with the plan that --
that I have, that will do that. But government mandates I'm always a
little nervous about.
But it is certainly my responsibility. It is certainly small-
business people and others. And they understand that responsibility.
American citizens understand that. Employers understand that. But
they certainly are a little nervous when Senator Obama says if you
don't get the health care policy that I think you should have that
you're going to get fined. And by the way, Senator Obama has never
mentioned how much that fine might be. Perhaps we might find that our
tonight.
Well, why don't -- why don't -- let's talk about
this, Tom, because there -- there was just a lot of stuff out there
that --
Privilege, right or responsibility? Let's start
with that.
Well, I think it should be a right for every
American. In a country as wealthy as ours, for us to have people who
are going bankrupt because they can't pay their medical bills -- for
or my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the
last months of her life in a hospital room arguing with insurance
companies, because they're saying that this may be a preexisting
condition and they don't have to pay her treatment, there's something
fundamentally wrong about that.
So let me, let me just talk about this fundamental difference.
Tom, I know that we're under time constraints, but Senator McCain
threw a lot of stuff out there.
Number one, let me just repeat, if you've got a health care plan
that you like, you can keep it. All I'm going to do is help you to
lower the premiums on it. You'll still have choice of doctor.
There's no mandate involved. Small businesses are not going to
have a mandate. What we're going to give you is a 50 percent tax
credit to help provide health care for those that you need.
Now, it's true that I say that you are going to have to make sure
that your child has health care, because children are relatively cheap
to insure, and we don't want them going to the emergency room for
treatable illnesses like asthma.
When Senator McCain says that he wants to provide children health
care, what he doesn't mention is, he voted against the expansion of
the Children's Health Insurance Program that is responsible for making
sure that so many children who didn't have previously health insurance
have it now.
Now, the final point I'll make on this whole issue of government
intrusion and mandates -- it is absolutely true that I think it is
important for government to crack down on insurance companies that are
cheating their customers, that don't give you the fine print.
So you end up thinking that you're paying for something, and when you
finally get sick and you need it, you're not getting it.
And the reason that it's a problem to go shopping state by state
-- you know what insurance companies will do? They will find a state
-- maybe Arizona, maybe another state -- where there are no
requirements for you to get cancer screenings, where there are no
requirements for you to have to get preexisting conditions, and they
will all set up shop there. That's how in banking it works.
Everybody goes to Delaware because they've got pretty loose laws when
it comes to things like credit cards. And in that situation --
Senator.
-- what happens is, is that the protections you
have, the consumer protections that you need, you're not going to have
available to you. That is a fundamental difference that I have with
Senator McCain.
He believes in deregulation in every circumstance.
That's what we've been going through for the last eight years. It
hasn't worked. And we need fundamental change.
Senator, we want to move on now. We come back to
the hall here. We're going to shift gears here a little bit and we're
going to go to foreign policy and international matters, if we can.
Before we leave that, did we hear the size of the
fine? (Chuckles.)
Phil Elliot is over here in this section, and Phil
Elliot has a question for Senator McCain. Phil?
Yes, Senator McCain. How will all the recent economic
stress affect our nation's ability to act as a peacemaker in the
world?
Well, I thank you for that question because there's
no doubt, and history shows us, that nations that are strong
militarily over time have to have a strong economy, as well.
And that is one of the challenges that America faces.
But having said that, America -- and we'll hear a lot of
criticism and have heard a lot of criticism about America and our
national security policy and -- and all that, and much of that
criticism is justified. But the fact is, America is the greatest
force for good in the history of the world. My friends, we have gone
to all four corners of the Earth and shed American blood, in defense,
usually, of somebody else's freedom and our own.
So we are peacemakers, and we're peacekeepers. But the challenge
is -- is to know when the United States of America can beneficially
affect the outcome of a -- of a crisis, when to go in and when not,
when American military power is worth the expenditure of our most
precious treasure. And that question has -- can only be answered with
someone with the knowledge and the experience and the judgment -- the
judgment to know when our national security is not only at risk but
where the United States of America can make a difference in preventing
genocide, in preventing the spread of terrorism, in doing the things
that the United States has done, not always well, but we've done
because we're a nation of good.
And I convinced that my record, going back to my opposition from
sending the Marines to Lebanon, to supporting our efforts in Kosovo
and Bosnia and the first Gulf War -- and my judgment, I think, is
something that I'm -- a record that I'm willing to stand on.
Senator Obama was wrong about Iraq and the surge, he was wrong
about Russia when they committed aggression against Georgia. And in
his short career, he does not understand our national security
challenges. We don't have time for on-the-job training, my friend.
Senator Obama, the economic constraints on U.S.
military action around the world.
Well, you know, Senator McCain, in the last debate
and today again, suggested that I don't understand. It's true; there
are some things I don't understand. I don't understand how we ended
up invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 while Osama bin
Laden and al Qaeda are setting up base camps and safe havens to train
terrorists to attack us. That was Senator McCain's judgment, and it
was the wrong judgment.
When Senator McCain was cheerleading the president to go into
Iraq, he suggested it was going to be quick and easy; we'd be greeted
as liberators. That was the wrong judgment. And it's been costly to
us.
So one of the difficulties with Iraq is that it has put an
enormous strain first of all on our troops, obviously -- and they have
performed heroically and honorably, and we owe them an extraordinary
debt of gratitude -- but it's also put an enormous strain on our
budget. We've spent, so far, close to $700 billion.
And if we continue on the path that we're on, as Senator McCain is
suggesting, it's going to go well over $1 trillion.
We're spending $10 billion a month in Iraq at a time when the
Iraqis have a $79 billion surplus, $79 billion. And we need that $10
billion a month here in the United States, to put people back to work,
to do all these wonderful things that Senator McCain suggested we
should be doing but has not yet explained how he would pay for.
Now, Senator McCain and I do agree, this is the greatest nation
on earth. We are a force of good in the world. But there has never
been a nation in the history of the world that saw its economy decline
and maintained its military superiority.
And the strains that have been placed on our alliances, around
the world, and the respect that's been diminished over the last eight
years has constrained us being able to act on something like the
genocide in Darfur, because we don't have the resources or the allies
to do everything that we should be doing.
That's going to change when I'm president. But we can't change
it unless we fundamentally change Senator McCain's and George Bush's
foreign policy. It has not worked for America.
Senator Obama, let me ask you -- see if we can
establish tonight the Obama doctrine and the McCain doctrine for the
use of United States combat forces in situations where there's a
humanitarian crisis but it does not affect our national security.
Take the Congo, where four-and-a-half million people have died since
1998, or take Rwanda in the earlier and dreadful days, or Somalia.
What is the Obama doctrine for use of force that the United States
would send when we don't have national security issues at stake?"
Well, we may not always have national security
issues at stake, but we have moral issues stake. I mean, if -- if --
if we could have intervened effectively in the Holocaust, who among us
would say that we had a moral obligation not to go in? If we could
have stopped Rwanda, surely if we had the ability that would be
something that we would have to strongly consider and act.
So you know, when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is
happening somewhere around the world, and we stand idly by, that
diminishes us. And so I do believe that we have to consider as part
of our interest, our national interest, in intervening where possible.
But understand that there's a lot of cruelty around the world.
We're not going to be able to be everywhere all the time. That's why
it's so important for us to be able to work in concert with our
allies.
Let's take the example of Darfur just for a moment. Right now
there is a peacekeeping force that has been set up and we have African
Union troops in Darfur to stop a genocide that has killed hundreds of
thousands of people. We could be providing logistical support,
setting up a no-fly zone, at relatively little cost to us, but we can
only do it if we can help mobilize the international community and
lead.
And that's what I intend to do when I'm president.
Senator McCain, the McCain doctrine, if you will.
Well, let me just follow up, my friends. If we had
done what Senator Obama wanted done in Iraq, and that was set a date
for withdrawal, which General Petraeus and our chief of -- chairman
(and/in ?) our Joint Chiefs of Staff have said would be a very
dangerous course to take for America, then we would have had a wider
war. We would have been back -- Iranian influence would have
increased, al Qaeda would have reestablished a base.
There was a lot at stake there, my friends. And I can tell you
right now that Senator Obama would have brought our troops home in
defeat. I'll bring them home with victory and with honor. And that
is a fundamental difference.
The United States of America, Tom, is the greatest force for
good, as I said. And we must do whatever we can to prevent genocide,
whatever we can to prevent these terrible calamities that we have said
never again. But it also has to be tempered with our ability to
beneficially affect the situation. That requires a cool hand at the
tiller. This requires a person who understands what our -- the limits
of our capability are.
We went in to Somalia as a peacemaking organization. We ended up
trying to be -- excuse me, as peacekeeping organization. We ended up
trying to be peacemakers, and we ended up having to withdraw in
humiliation.
In Lebanon I stood up to President Reagan, my hero, and said if we
send Marines in there, how can we possibly beneficially affect this
situation and said we shouldn't. Unfortunately, almost 300 brave
young Marines were killed.
So you have to temper your decisions with the ability to
beneficially affect the situation and realize you're sending America's
most precious asset, American blood, into harm's way.
And again, I know those situations. I've been in them all my
life. And I can tell you right now the security of your young men and
women who are serving in the military are my first priority, right
after our nation's security. And I may have to make those tough
decisions. But I won't take them lightly. And I understand that we
have to say, "Never again" to a Holocaust and "Never again" to Rwanda.
But we also better be darn sure we don't leave and -- and make the
situation worse, thereby exacerbating our reputation and our ability
to address crises in other parts of the world.
Senator McCain, thank you very much.
Next question for Senator Obama. It comes from the F Section,
and it's from Katie Hamm. Katie?
Should the United States respect Pakistani sovereignty and
not pursue al Qaeda terrorists who maintain bases there, or should we
ignore their borders and pursue our enemies, like we did in Cambodia
during the Vietnam War?
Well, Katie, it's a terrific question.
And we have a difficult situation in Pakistan. I believe that
part of the reason we have a difficult situation is because we made a
bad judgment going into Iraq in the first place when we hadn't
finished the job of hunting down bin Laden and crushing al Qaeda.
So what happened was we got distracted, we diverted resources, and
ultimately bin Laden escaped, set up base camps in the mountains of
Pakistan in the northwest provinces there.
They are now raiding our troops in Afghanistan, destabilizing the
situation. They're stronger now than at any time since 2001. And
that's why I think it's so important for us to reverse course because
that's the central front on terrorism. They are plotting to kill
Americans right now. As Secretary Gates, the Defense secretary, said,
the war against terrorism began in that region, and that's where it
will end.
So part of the reason I think it's so important for us to end the
war in Iraq is to be able to get more troops into Afghanistan, put
more pressure on the Afghan government to do what it needs to do,
eliminate some of the drug trafficking that's funding terrorism.
But I do believe that we have to change our policies with
Pakistan. We can't coddle, as we did, a dictator, give him billions
of dollars, and then he's making peace treaties with the Taliban and
militants. What I have said is we're going encourage democracy in
Pakistan, expand our non-military aid to Pakistan so that they have
more of a stake in working with us, but insisting that they go after
these militants.
And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani
government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that
we have to act, and we will take them out.
We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our
biggest national security priority.
Senator McCain.
Well, Katie, thank you.
You know, my hero is a guy named Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy
Roosevelt used to say, walk softly -- talk softly but carry a big
stick. Senator Obama likes to talk loudly. In fact, he said he wants
to announce that he's going to attack Pakistan. Remarkable.
You know, if you are, if you are a country and you're trying to
gain the support of another country, then you want to do anything you
can that they would act in a cooperative fashion.
When you announce that you're going to launch an attack into
another country, it's pretty obvious that you have the effect that it
had in Pakistan. It turns public opinion against us.
Now, let me just go back with you very briefly. We drove the
Russians out, with the Afghan freedom fighters, drove the Russians out
of Afghanistan. And then we made a most serious mistake.
We washed our hands of Afghanistan. The Taliban came back in; al
Qaeda. And we then had the situation that required us to conduct the
Afghan War.
Now, our relations with Pakistan are critical, because the border
areas are being used as safe havens by the Taliban and al Qaeda and
other extremist organizations.
And we have to get their support.
Now, General Petraeus had a strategy, the same strategy, very
different because of the conditions and the situation, but the same
fundamental strategy that succeeded in Iraq. And that is, to get the
support of the people. We need to help the Pakistani government go
into Waziristan, where I visited, a very rough country, and get the
support of the people and get them to work with us and turn against
the cruel Taliban and others, and by working and coordinating our
efforts together, not threatening to attack them, but working with
them, and where necessary, use force, but talk softly, but carry a big
stick.
Tom --
Senator McCain --
Tom, just a quick follow-up on this. I think --
If we're going to have follow-ups, then I will want
follow-ups as well.
No, no, I know that.
Be fine with me.
I think we'll get at it, if I can, with this
question.
Be fine with me.
Let's have one.
All right, let's have a follow-up.
Be fine with me.
Just a quick follow-up, because I think this is
important.
Sure.
I'm just the hired help here, so, I mean --
(laughter).
You're doing a great job, Tom.
Look, I want to be very clear about what I said. Nobody called
for the invasion of Pakistan. Senator McCain continues to repeat
this. What I said was the same thing that the audience here today
heard me say, which is, if Pakistan is unable or unwilling to hunt
down bin Laden and take him out, then we should. Now that, I think,
has to be our policy because they are threatening to kill more
Americans.
Now, Senator McCain suggests that somehow, you know, I'm green
behind the ears and, you know, I've -- just spoutin' off and he's
somber and responsible. I --
Thank you very much. (Laughs.)
Senator McCain, this is the guy who sang "Bomb,
Bomb, Bomb Iran;" who called for the annihilation of North Korea.
That I don't think is an example of speaking softly. This is the
person who, after we had -- we hadn't even finished Afghanistan, where
he said, next up, Baghdad.
So I agree that we have to speak responsibly and we have to act
responsibly. And the reason Pakistan -- the popular opinion of
America had diminished in Pakistan was because we were supporting a
dictator, Musharraf; had given him $10 billion over seven years; and
he had suspended civil liberties. We were not promoting democracy.
This is the kind of policies that ultimately end up undermining our
ability to fight the war on terrorism, and it will change when I'm
president.
Tom, if -- if we're going to go back and forth, I
then -- I'd like to have equal time to go -- to respond to --
Yeah, you get to --
-- to -- to this.
Last word here, and then we have to move on.
I mean, not true. Not true. I have obviously
supported those efforts that the United States had to go in
militarily, and I have opposed those that I didn't think so.
I understand what it's like to send young Americans into harm's
way. I say -- I was joking with a veteran -- I hate to even go into
this -- I was joking with an old veteran friend who joked with me
about Iran.
But the point is that I know how to handle these, these, these crises.
And Senator Obama, by saying that he would attack Pakistan -- look at
the context of his words.
I'll get Osama bin Laden, my friends. I'll get him. I know how
to get him. I'll get him no matter what. And I know how to do it.
But I'm not going to telegraph my punches, which is what Senator Obama
did.
And I'm going to act responsibly as I have acted responsibly
throughout my military career and throughout my career in the United
States Senate. And we have fundamental disagreements about the use of
military power and how you do it. And you just saw it in response to
previous questions.
Can I get a quick response from the two of you about
developments in Afghanistan this week?
The senior British military commander, who is now leaving after a
second tour, and their senior diplomatic presence there, Sherard
Cowper-Coles, who is well known as an expert in the area, both have
said that we're failing in Afghanistan.
The commander said, we cannot win there; we've got to get it down
to a low-level insurgency, let the Afghans take it over. Cowper-Coles
said, what we need is an acceptable dictator.
If either of you becomes president, as one of you will, how do
you reorganize Afghanistan strategy? Or do you? Briefly if you can.
I'll be very brief.
We are going to have to make the Iraqi government start taking
more responsibility, withdraw our troops in a responsible way, over
time, because we're going to have to put some additional troops in
Afghanistan.
General McKiernan, the commander in Afghanistan right now, is
desperate for more help, because our bases and outposts are now
targets for more aggressive Afghan -- Taliban offensives.
We're also going to have to work with the Karzai government, and
when I met with President Karzai, I was very clear that you are going
to have to do better by your people in order for us to gain the
popular support that's necessary. I don't think he has to be a
dictator. We -- we want a democracy in Afghanistan. But we have to
have a government that is responsive to the Afghan people, and frankly
it's just not responsive right now.
Senator McCain, briefly.
General Petraeus has just taken over a position of
responsibility, where he has the command and will really set the tone
for the strategy and tactics that are using -- I've had conversations
with him. It is the same overall strategy.
Of course we have to do some things tactically, some of which
Senator Obama is -- is correct on.
We have to double the size of the
Afghan army. We have to have a streamlined NATO command structure.
We have to do a lot of things. We have to work much more closely with
the Pakistanis.
But most importantly, we have to have the same strategy which
Senator Obama said wouldn't work, couldn't work -- still fails to
admit that he was wrong about Iraq. He -- he still will not admit
that he was wrong about the strategy of the surge in Iraq. And -- and
that's the same kind of strategy of go out and secure and hold and
allow people to live normal lives.
And once they feel secure, then they lead normal
social/economic/political lives, the same thing that's happening in
Iraq today.
So I have confidence that General Petraeus, working with the
Pakistanis, working with the Afghans, doing the same job that he did
in Iraq, will again. We will succeed and we will bring our troops
home with honor and victory, and not in defeat.
Senator McCain, this question is from you, from the
Internet. It's from Alden (sp) in Hewitt, Texas.
"How can we apply pressure to Russia for humanitarian issue in an
effective manner without starting another Cold War?"
First of all, may I say I don't think -- we're not
going to have another Cold War with -- with Russia. But have no doubt
that Russia's behavior is certainly outside the norms of behavior that
we would expect for nations which are very wealthy, as Russia has
become because of their petro-dollars.
Now, long ago I warned about Vladimir Putin. I said I looked
into his eyes and saw three letters: a K, a G and a B. He has
surrounded himself with former KGB apparachiks. He has gradually
repressed most of the liberties that we would expect for nations to
observe. And he has exhibited most aggressive behavior obviously in
Georgia; as I said before, watch Ukraine. Ukraine right now is in the
sights of Vladimir Putin, those that want to reassemble the old Soviet
Union.
We've got to show moral support for Georgia.
We've got to show moral support for Ukraine. We've got to advocate
for their membership in NATO. We have to make the Russians understand
that there are penalties for this kind of behavior, this kind of naked
aggression into Georgia, a tiny country and a tiny democracy. And so
of course we want to bring international pressures to bear on Russia
in hopes that that will modify and eventually change their behavior.
Now, the G-8 is one of those, but there are many others. But the
Russians must understand that these kinds of actions and activities
are not acceptable, and hopefully, we will use the leverage --
economic, diplomatic and others -- united, with our allies, with our
allies and friends in Europe who are equally disturbed as we are about
their recent behavior.
Senator Obama? We're --
It will not be a reignition of the Cold War, but
Russia is a challenge.
Senator Obama? We're winding down, so if we can
keep track of the time.
Well, the resurgence of Russia is one of the central
issues that we're going to have to deal with in the next presidency.
And for the most part, I agree with Senator McCain on many of the
steps that have to be taken.
But we can't just provide moral support. We've got to provide
moral support to the Poles and Estonia and Latvia and all the nations
that were former Soviet satellites, but we've also got to provide them
with financial and concrete assistance to help rebuild their
economies. Georgia in particular is now -- (inaudible) -- of enormous
economic challenges. And some say that that's what Putin intended in
the first place.
The other thing we have to do, though, is we've got to see around
the corners. We've got to anticipate some of these problems ahead of
time.
You know, back in April, I put out a statement saying that the
situation in Georgia was unsustainable because you had Russian
peacekeepers in these territories that were under dispute. And you
knew that if the Russians themselves were trying to obtain some of
these territories or push back against Georgia, that that was not a
stable situation.
So part of the job of the next commander in chief in keeping all
of you safe is making sure that we can see some of the 21st-century
challenges and anticipate them before they happen. We haven't been
doing enough of that. We tend to be reactive; that's what we've been
doing over the last eight years. And that has actually made us more
safe.
That's part of what happened in Afghanistan, where we rushed into
Iraq. And Senator McCain and President Bush suggested that it wasn't
that important to catch bin Laden right now and that we could muddle
through, and that has cost us dearly. We've got to be much more
strategic if we're going to be able to deal with all the challenges
that we face out there.
And one last point I want to make about Russia, energy is going
to be key in dealing with Russia. If we can reduce our energy
consumption, that reduces the amount of petro-dollars that they have
the -- to make mischief around the world. That will strengthen us and
weaken them when it comes to issues like Georgia.
This requires only a yes or a no.
Ronald Reagan famously said that the Soviet Union was the "evil
empire." Do you think that Russia under Vladimir Putin is an evil
empire?
I think they've engaged in evil behavior, and I
think that it is important that we understand they're not the old
Soviet Union, but they still have nationalist -- you know, the
impulses that I think are very dangerous.
Senator McCain?
Maybe. (Laughter.)
Maybe?
Depends on how we respond to Russia and depends on
a lot of things. If I say yes, then that means that we're reigniting
the old Cold War. If I say no, it ignores their behavior.
Obviously energy is going to be a big, big factor, and Georgia
and Ukraine are both major gateways of energy into Europe. And that's
one of the reasons why it's in our interest.
But the Russians -- I think -- I think we can deal with them, but
they got to understand that they're facing a very firm and determined
United States of America that will defend our interest and that of
other countries in the world.
All right. We're going to try to get in two more
questions, if we can, so we have to move along.
Over in Section A, Terry Shirey. Do I have that right, Terry?
Senator, as a retired Navy chief, my thoughts are often
with those who serve our country. I know both candidates -- both of
you expressed support for Israel. If, despite your best diplomatic
efforts, Iran attacks Israel, would you be willing to commit U.S.
troops in support and defense of Israel? Or would you wait on
approval from the U.N. Security Council?
Well, thank you, Terry, and thank you for your
service to the country.
I want to say, everything I ever learned about leadership I learned
from a chief petty officer. And I thank you. And I thank you, my
friend. Thanks for serving.
Let, let, let me say that we obviously would not wait for the
United Nations Security Council. I think the realities are that both
Russia and China would probably pose significant obstacles. And our
challenge right now is, the Iranians continue on the path to acquiring
nuclear weapons. And it's a great threat.
It's not just a great threat to the state of Israel. It's a
threat to the stability of the entire Middle East. If Iran acquires
nuclear weapons, all the other countries will acquire them too. The
tensions will be ratcheted up.
What would you do if you were the Israelis, and the president of
a country says that they are, they are determined to wipe you off the
map; calls your country a stinking corpse?
Now, Senator Obama, without precondition, wants to sit down and
negotiate with them, without preconditions. That's what he stated,
again, a matter of record.
I want to make sure that the Iranians are put enough -- that we
put enough pressure on the Iranians by joining with our allies,
imposing significant, tough sanctions to modify their behavior. And I
think we can do that.
I think joining with our allies and friends, in a league of
democracies, that we can effectively abridge their behavior.
And hopefully they would abandon this quest that they are on for
nuclear weapons.
But at the end of the day, my friend, I have to tell you again --
and you know what it's like to serve and you know what it's like to
sacrifice -- but we can never allow a second Holocaust to take place.
Senator Obama.
Well, Terry, first of all, we honor your service,
and -- and we're grateful for it.
We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a
game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our
strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the
world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons
falling into the hands of terrorists. So it's unacceptable, and I
will do everything that's required to prevent it.
And we will never take military options off the table. And it is
important that we don't provide veto power to the United Nations or
anyone else in acting in our interests.
It is important, though, for us to use all the tools at our
disposal to prevent the scenario where we've got to make those kinds
of choices. And that's why I have consistently said that if we can
work more effectively with other countries diplomatically to tighten
sanctions on Iran, if we can reduce our energy consumption through
alternative energy so that Iran has less money, if we can impose the
kinds of sanctions that -- say, for example, Iran right now imports
gasoline even though it's an oil producer because its oil
infrastructure has broken down.
If we can prevent them from importing the gasoline that they
need, and the refined petroleum products, that starts changing their
cost benefit analysis, that starts putting the squeeze on them. Now,
it is true, though, that I believe that we should have direct talks
not just with our friends but also with our enemies, to deliver a
tough, direct message to Iran that if you don't change your behavior,
then there will be dire consequences. If you do change your behavior,
then it is possible for you to re-join the community of nations.
Now, it may not work, but one of things we've learned is that
when we take that approach -- whether it's in North Korea or in Iran,
then we have a better chance at better outcomes. When President Bush
decided we're not going to talk to Iran, we're not going to talk to
North Korea, you know what happened? Iran went from zero centrifuges
to develop nuclear weapons to 4,000. North Korea quadrupled its
nuclear capability. We've got to try to have talks understanding that
we're not taking military options off the table.
All right. Gentlemen, we've come to the last
question, and you'll both be interested to know -- this comes from the
Internet and it's from a state that you're strongly contesting, both
of you. It's from Peggy in Amherst, New Hampshire. It has a certain
Zen-like quality, I'll give you fair warning.
She says: What don't you know? And how will you learn it?
(Laughter.)
Senator Obama, you get first crack at that.
My wife, Michelle, is there, and she could give you
a much longer list than I do. (Laughter.) And most of the time, I
learn it by asking her.
But look, the nature of the challenges that we're going to face
are immense. And one of the things that we know about the presidency
is that it's never the challenges that you expect, it's the challenges
that you don't that end up consuming most of your time.
But here's what I do know. I know that I wouldn't be standing
here if it weren't for the fact that this country gave me opportunity.
You know, I came from very modest means. I had a single mom, and my
grandparents raised me, and it was because of the help of scholarships
and my grandmother scrimping on things that, you know, she might have
wanted to purchase, and my mom at one point getting food stamps in
order for us to put food on the table. Despite all that, I was able
to go to the best schools on Earth. I was able to succeed in a way
that I could not have succeeded anywhere else in this country. The
same is true for Michelle, and I'm sure the same is true for a lot of
you.
And the question in this election is, are we going to pass on
that same American dream to the next generation? Over the last eight
years, we've seen that dream diminish.
Wages and incomes have gone down. People have lost their health care
or are going bankrupt because they get sick.
We've got young people who have got the grades and the will and
the drive to go to college. But they just don't have the money. And
we can't expect that if we do the same things that we've been doing,
over the last eight years, that somehow we are going to have a
different outcome.
We need fundamental change. That's what's at stake in this
election. That's the reason I decided to run for president. And I'm
hopeful that all of you are prepared to continue this extraordinary
journey that we call America. But we're going to have to have the
courage and the sacrifice, the nerve to move in a new direction.
Thank you.
Senator McCain, you get the last word. Senator
Obama had the opening. You're last up.
Well, thank you, Tom. And I think what I don't
know is what all of us don't know. And that's what's going to happen
both here at home and abroad. The challenges that we face are
unprecedented.
Americans are hurting tonight in a way they have not in our
generation. There are challenges around the world that are new and
different. And they will be different. We will be talking about
countries sometime in the future that we hardly know where they are on
the map -- some Americans. So what I don't know is what the
unexpected will be.
But I have spent my whole life serving this country. I grew up
in a family where my father was gone most of the time because he was
at sea and doing our country's business. My mother basically raised
our family. I know what it's like in dark times. I know what it's
like to have to fight to keep one's hope going through difficult
times. I know what it's time -- what it's like to rely on others for
support and courage and love in tough times. I know what it's like to
have your comrades reach out to you, and your neighbors and your
fellow citizens, and pick you up and put you back in the fight.
That's what America's all about.
I believe in this country. I believe in its future. I believe
in its greatness. It's been my great honor to serve it for many, many
years, and I'm asking the American people to give me another
opportunity. And I'll rest on my record, but I'll also tell you that
times are tough; we need a steady hand at the tiller. And the great
honor of my life was to always put my country first.
Thank you, Tom.
Thank you very much, Senator McCain.
That concludes tonight's debate from here in Nashville. We want
to thank our hosts here at Belmont University in Nashville and the
Commission on Presidential Debates. And you're in my way of my script
there, if you will move. (Laughter, applause.) In addition to
everything else.
There is one more presidential debate, on Wednesday, October 15th
at Hofstra University in New York, moderated by my friend Bob
Schieffer of CBS News.
Thank you, Senator McCain.
Thank you, Senator Obama.
Good night, everyone, from Nashville. (Applause.)