tv 1984 Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate CSPAN February 18, 2016 11:30pm-2:02am EST
for our nation. the events of the past 48 hours, however, make us pause and reflect on the very fragile and the grave state of world affairs. the leader of the soviet union is dead. our president has never met with him, spoke with him, shaken his hand or looked him in the eye. relations with russia have only rarely been as bad as they are now. in lebanon we find ourselves in an undeclared war with an unknown enemy. war grows wider. the stakes grow higher. i opposed sending the marines to lebanon in the first place, but once there i argued strongly that their mission should be secure and should be better defined. but such is not the case. what the president is doing in lebanon is involving us in a civil war. it's wrong. it's flat wrong. it's worse than, that it's irresponsible, and it's a moral outrage. the president is playing politics as he tries to save face and protect a bankrupt
foreign policy. just last tuesday the president led the american people to believe that he is withdrawing our marines immediately. in fact, he is not. we're now told that redeployment might take many months. even though it could be done in just a matter of hours. in the meantime, the president has ordered naval bombardment of beirut and those 16-inch shells are tearing into villages, killing women and children, while our marines are kept in place to become even more the targets for fanatical retribution. there's little military justification for what the president is doing and no moral justification whatsoever. because of our steadily deteriorating relationship with the soviets and because of our ill-conceived and morally outrageous position in lebanon, we need new leadership both at home and in the world. together we can make a difference and together we can make a more sane, sensible, and
secure future for ourselves and for our children. >> thank you, senator glenn. our next opening remark will be from senator hollings. >> well, i too believe in the importance of our foreign policy. we democrats have always been strong with respect to building up our world around, respect for the values that we hold dear. specifically with respect to the marines over a year ago. prior to their deployment i said if they were put there to fight there were too few. if they were put there to die, there were far too many. but i think the target really is ronald reagan. and i'm looking at the fact that we've lost the last three out of four races as democrats because we'll come here in the next 2 1/2 hours and we'll promise you literally everything. we will give you a program for the retirees, the senior citizens, the pensioners, and everybody else. but we'll never talk about paying for it.
we'll get lockjaw. and unless we can prove our reliability as being able to manage that any, we're not going to get ronald reagan out of that white house. i have accordingly submitted the freeze proposal where we take just last year's budget. people say how are you going to do that politically? three readings by the house, three readings by the senate. signed just in november. i'm saying take that budget, not only just politically but k3e7bd it for one year. we will immediately pick up $100 billion. and then we will be able to get back the value of the dollar. then iowa farmers would be able to sell their products without that 32% tax or penalty due to the overvalued dollar. then industry would be able to invest and reemploy. then we would be able to get our country moving again. and finally then we would be able to pay for the programs. but we democrats are going to
talk for 2 1/2 hours and not mention anything realistic like that. we're going to say i am concerned. any question y'all are going to ask we are concerned but we're not going to pay for it. [ applause ] . >> next is senator hart. >> thank you, mr. gannon. i want to take this occasion to thank the people of iowa for their hospitality and kindness to leigh and myself throughout the course of the last year. we appreciate it very much. i'm a democrat, and i'm proud of it. but this election this year is not just between the democrats and the republicans. or just between liberals and conservatives. he it's between our future and our past. i believe the new leadership this country is asking for is different in several ways. first, that new leadership believes in solving problems and not just debating old ideologies. nowhere is this clearer than on the issue of defense and
national security. ronald reagan clearly wants to give not only a blank check but a blank checkbook to the pentagon to prosecute and increase cold war. others in our party want to cut our national defenses almost arbitrarily regardless of the consequences. i believe that this country needs a strong national defense by reforming our conventional forces to make them the most effective and not just the most expensive. second the new leadership of this country believes in innovation. not just supporting old programs but doing what franklin roosevelt advised, and that is bold, persistent experimentation. why not individual training accounts to protect the jobs of our working americans? why not a freeze on the production of plutonium used to make nuclear weapons? why not a tiered price support system to save the family farmer in this country? third, i think the new leadership the american people want puts principle above politics. nowhere is that clearer than on
the issue of lebanon. there are some candidates for this highest office of this land that delayed in terms of coming out to bring the marines out. others on capitol hill held back in an effort to achieve some political advantage. i think if all of us had joined together, all of us on this platform, to pull the marines out as i recommended in september of 1982, possibly 300 would be alive today, and that's the kind of bold leadership i think this country needs. >> thank you, senator hart. [ applause ] our next speaker is reverend jackson. >> today i've come to learn and to participate and to greet the great moral imperatives of our day, to feed the hungry and to end war. i'm not a farmer, but i'm concerned. we have the options of mutual development or mutual annihilation in this world. we'll either freeze the weapons or we will burn the people and
freeze the planet. today we're witnessing the most severe farm crisis since the depression. but there's a parallel urban crisis. record foreclosures on family farms. family farms wrecked. the rate is three times higher for blacks. 6 million farmers in 1945. about 2.3 million today. our food, the water and air is poisoned. i akind of self-imposed chemical warfare. a rise in the misery and the danger index. a crisis in industrial integrity. the number one agricultural system in the world and yet 20 million people malnourished in this country, a half billion in the world. just over in kansas city there are over $6 billion worth of food stored. the cost of $383 million a year. more than a million dollars a day to store food while people are stafrk. the response, the pick program for the rich, pickpocket program for the poor. $2 billion cut in food stamps. 4 million people out of welfare or food stamps or out of
options. we need leadership. we must move from nuclear threat with russia to some form of mutual survival. we need not compete on overkill but compete with agriculture and trade and technology. we need to restructure agriculture relations. the ag department must function for the poor and the family farmer. we must convene the leaders of the world. not just to end nuclear confrontation but use this vast resource to feed this world and to add -- we need to put food above politics. we need more than a new president. we need a new direction. thank you very much. [ applause ] >> thank you, reverend jackson. we now go to senator cranston. >> what we must do in this debate is set the agenda that will defeat ronald reagan. we failed to do that in 1980, and he beat us. ronald reagan has taken us to
tragedy in lebanon, to the invasion of grenada, and to the brink of war in central america. he's given us a trillion-dollar deficit, and he's thrown 5 million of us out of work. but if we're going to win this time, the democratic party must realize that the american people want a president with a clear vision of where he will lead america. we need a democratic vision that revives the work ethic in america, that says people who work should be able to earn a good living, that commits us to preserve the small american businessman and woman and the family farm as a way of life in our country. the democratic vision must lead the way to peace. we must have the guts not to use guns just because we've got bigger and better guns than the other guy. we must see to it that america helps feed a starving world and shines again as the beacon of
freedom and justice. this clear democratic commitment to peace and jobs must be at the center of our vision. we must give america leadership that will make us respected but not feared again in the world. that vision, that clear vision will beat ronald reagan in 1984. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you, senator cranston. >> mr. mcgovern. >> on october 8th i opened my campaign here in iowa with a statement of ten steps that i would take as president of the united states. i would like to restate those steps today. first of all, terminate right now all u.s. military operations in central america. we must stop embracing and arming these miserable military
dictators who caused revolution in central america in the first place. secondly, bring our marines home in lebanon right now. why this further delay and why the shelling of lebanese muslims and druze with whom we have absolutely no real quarrel. so let's put the marines on the ships today and start those ships back to the usa. how about that poem, jesse? >>. [ applause ] >> fourth, with enough weapons already to utterly destroy the world many times over he, let's invoke the nuclear phrase right now and then go after the enormous waste in the pentagon procurement of weapons, other boondoggles in in that system. if we do that we could save 25%
in president reagan's current military budget. and fritz, that's the way to pay for these programs that you say people aren't thinking about. fifth, let's stop paying farmers $12 billion a year not to produce. guarantee them a decent parity program. and then use the surplus to end hunger in this country and around the world. [ applause ] the remaining steps i'll get to after i get to the white house. [ applause ] >> mr. mondale. >> on february 20th the voters of iowa, the democrats will be the most powerful citizens on earth. mr. reagan has announced that he's coming to des moines that night.
and i hope that you'll all send him a very strong message while he's here. there are three objectives that must be achieved by the next president. the first is to elect a president who will use america's strength to lead this world toward safety. this president has led us in a way that the world is now as dangerous as it's ever been before in the history of the world. no arms control talks. an arms race instead. the tragedy, the bloodshed in the middle east and central america and all the rest. his leadership has made the world much more dangerous, and we cannot tolerate it. secondly, his leadership has resulted has resulted in the
deterioration of america's posture in international competition. we are now in full and utter retreat. this will be the worst trade year in american history by all odds. some 4 million americans have lost their jobs. it has been the worst thing to ever happen to the american farmer. and he's providing no leadership to restore competitiveness or to train the next generation. the third objective must be the restoration of a fair nation. in a radical way this president is trying to teach us to disregard our fundamental sense of fairness. and the average american family in every conceivable way has been asked to bear the full burden of these unfair and uncaring policies. we must beat mr. reagan. i'm convinced i can do it. >> thank you, mr. mondale. [ applause ] we will complete this round of opening statements with mr. askew.
>> it's no accident that ronald reagan is in the white house. and he'll stay there unless we democrats have the political will to be candid with the american people. our party has lost touch with the mainstream, the middle class, the working people, small busine business, and with the forgotten majority of the american people. and now we're allowing a few within our party to dictate the choice of our nominee for president. i'm the different democrat. i'm reaching beyond those few to speak for the forgotten majority. i speak for those who want america to live within it's means. i speak for those who want both a strong defense and arms reductions. i speak for those who want jobs and profits and opportunity and a competitive economy that doesn't have to rely on domestic content or other forms of undue protection. i speak for those who value both
the potential of life before birth and after birth. and i speak for those who want a president who's willing to be different, who's willing to risk losing some votes so you can get there the right way, so that you can governor on behalf of all the people. i speak for those looking for real leadership, that can deal release t realistically in the real world. >> thank you, mr. askew. [ applause ] for the next hour the candidates are going to question one another. prior to the debate each candidate drew the names of three others and prepared questions for threes three candidates. i will call the order of this questioning as determined by those drawings. i remind the categories that the question should be brief and to the point. no speeches, please. answers will be limited to two minutes. the first question from mr. glenn is for mr. cranston.
>> alan, there are those who are trying to make our vote on the august 1981 tax bill a litmus test as to whether or not we're real democrats. we lost the white house and the senate back in those days. do you feel less a democrat for supporting a change in the nation's economic policy at that time? >> no. but frankly i wasn't seeking the change that we got. i voted against kemp-roth every time we had a vote on, that 12 times. i voted for the final passage of the bill that had kemp-roth in it, we couldn't defeat it, because it had some good measures in it. like reducing the marriage penalty. like i.r.a.s. there were some good things that i thought outweighed the bad. as it turned out the deficit got totally out of hand because of that tax cut along with the huge increase in military expenditures. and i now think that tax cut was -- that vote was a mistake.
but what we've got to do is look to the future. what do we do about what reaganomics turned out to be? and i think what we must do is restore taxes on well-to-do people not now paying their fair sure. we should close loopholes like the loophole that permits people to have a tax shelter by buying a farm and then not farming. we should get americans back to work. so they're paying taxes and don't need entitlements and don't need assistance, thus revenues go up and expenditures go down. that's the way to cut entitlements. not cut out what people need but cut out what they don't need what they're back at work. that's the way to save there. get down interest rates. if we cut interest rates from 12% to 6% we'd knock $50 billion off the deficit. finally, get the arms race off our backs. ronald reagan wants to suspend $2 trillion in the next five years on military matters. i don't believe we can do that and balance the budget anytime soon. i don't believe we need to do
that to protect ourselves. we are the strongest nation on earth now. we don't need to squander our money in the arms race when it deprives us of what we need for democracy needs. >> our next question will be from mr. jackson for senator hollings. >> senator hollings, in these debates there's an awful lot of focus on what the government can or cannot do, should or should not do. we're talking about a $900 billion, $930 billion public economy. it's a $3 trillion private economy. almost no focus on corporate accountability or industrial integrity. take our tax dollars and close plants on workers without notice. or they replace robert with robot and make us feel guilty about losing our jobs on the one hand. or they engage in chemical warfare on the american people, acid in the rain, contaminate our water and our straepz. if you were president what would you do with the industrial integrity and accountability? >> right to the point, jesse. i think the first thing to do --
[ laughter ] i'll answer your question on the environmental end. of course i have the bill in with senator mitchell relative to acid rain. with respect to the industrial integrity, robots, we are moving to a technological age. we're not going to stop that technological development because we are competing in an international competition and every one of these great modern industries right here in iowa know that. but what we realize is that we're competing with those pay scales offshore. we need a trade council just like we have a national security council to correlate our trade effort and give us a fair chance to compete somewheone mentioned roosevelt, in order to keep the banks open he closed the doors in order to save the farmers he planted under the crops. we might have to raise a barrier to give our steel and basic industries a chance to compete.
but the real bottom line of it all is about those closing of plants, we're causing it. this crowd right here in washington. we babble along on $200 billion deficits as far as the eye can see. worse than an arms race. we've got a spending race going on between republicans and democrats. ronald reagan doesn't want to do anything about it. he's asked for another 100 billion increase in the budget he submitted last week. the democrats are dancing around the fire. but if we could just get a hold of ourselves, we can get that white house back. and the way to do it is just re-enact last year's budget, where no one would really suffer, it would be a shared sacrifice. then they'd quit closing, talk about corporate integrity, get back to political integrity. then they'd start closing -- stop closing those plants down, reemploying, and their recovery would be complete rather than tapering back at the president time.
he. >> thank you, senator. our next question will be from mr. askew for reverend jackson. >> reverend jackson, i noticed in one of our last appearances you had indicated what i thought possibilitiy was a different position that you might have taken in the past on abortion. i guess one of the reasons that i'm different on it is that i do favor a constitutional amendment to reverse roe v. wade in order to let congress set a national standard. what is your position on that right now, sir? >> my position is i'm not pro abortion. i'm for freedom of choice. even as a matter -- [ applause ] >> i remind the audience that you're using up jesse jackson's time. >> even theologically god gives us choice. we're not robots. we're people. we have choice. within the law we have the choice. i would never encourage
abortion. i would not embrace it. i put more focus on sex education before the fact and self-discipline before the fact. that people might be responsible and disciplined and mature and make the decision the day before so they don't make the decision the day after. the fact is it is one's choice and also one's consequence that's must be lived with. for me it's a matter of fear and trembling but it's a position i take and i stand with that position. >> thank you. [ applause ] our next question will come from senator mcgovern to mr. askew. >> ruben, i understand that you've been cultivating the support of the so-called right to life movement while at the same time opposing the nuclear freeze. now, in vuft faiew of the fact already have enough weapons to utterly kill everybody on earth without building any more, wouldn't you make a great contribution to the right to
life if you came out for the nuclear freeze? [ applause ] i would if it was the surest path to peace. i don't believe the nuclear freeze goes far enough. i think you literally need to put caps on the number of warheads we have. caps of the number of missiles. caps on the overall destructive capability. more like a frost than a freeze. something that covers everything. puts a lid on it. that doesn't put a lid on our ability to have a strong deterrent. and then to build down. taking away those, a certain amount, whatever the formula might be for each ones we employ. and then in the process negotiate much more seriously. you and i both know that up until the build down which was the result of a non-partisan,
bipartisan consensus, not consensus but the people in the senate, what we were talking about was giving them, knowing they wouldn't accept them. them giving us proposals and knowing we wouldn't accept them. and all during the time the third world -- and we have the nuclear proliferation that i think that senator glenn has been a leader in this area. that's the great danger right now, that the third world's going to get in possession of it and set off something none of us can stop. because there's no such thing as a limited nuclear war once it starts. but please understand that i am as committed as you are toward saving this planet but i'm also fully cognizant that we've denied 15 million children a chance to have a life during this period since roe v. wade. i'm concerned both ways, sir. >> and now senator cranston has a question for mr. mcgovern. >> george, you were the only one
who is up here who has been the democratic standard bearer for president in a presidential campaign. what lessons have you learned from that experience? to beat ronald reagan. because that's what we've got to do. >> i think the first lesson i learned about this, allen, i want to win as badly as you do, but i've learned that in 1972 there are some things that can happen to you in politics that are even worse than losing an election. i wouldn't change places with the man who won in 1972. [ applause ] having said that, let me -- let me give all of you a little practical advice. work hard but don't work so hard you get fatigued to the point
where your judgment becomes cloud cloud clouded. most of the mistakes that are made in presidential campaigns are made because of fatigue. so don't work so hard trying to catch up with me that you're -- [ applause ] that you wear yourselves out. one final -- one final serious note. to all of us. let's try to stay with what we really believe. let's not watch those changing and unpredictable public opinion polls too much. let's lay out the weaknesses of the present administration as clearly as we can. instead of worrying too much about knocking each other over the head, let's lay bare the malfunctions, the weaknesses of this present administration and then lay out as clear an
alternative agenda as we can of what we as democrats stand for and what we propose to do in terms of the directions of the country. [ applause ] >> senator hart, it's your turn to direct a question to senator glenn. >> i first of all want to thank george for not mentioning his campaign manager. [ laughter ] senator glenn, you unfortunately were not able to join with us in the farm debate we had here a few weeks ago, and so the people didn't get a chance to get your views on agriculture. you and fritz mondale disagree on a lot of things. one thing you do agree on is the domestic content bill. would you care to state why you think that will not severely impact iowa's farmers and farm
implement industries? >> sure. i was sorry i could not be at that. as a matter of fact, i had other commitments in florida at that time. 245id been on for a long time. i was sorry i could not join you for that forum. but as far as domestic content goes, there are two functions on domestic content. one is making trade fair. and right now we're not being dealt with fairly in that trade area. i come from a farming state also, ohio. it has major industrial interests also. but in the area of affecting farmers, i don't feel it does affect farmers because while we're making it fair we're also keeping our industrial industry up. and that's important to keep our steel industry up to above the 20% it was you have to two years and two months ago. that was one of the reasons for voting for the local content was to avoid a government subsidy to aur steel industry. but the main thing with farming is to have it as fair as we can possibly make it. the four points i've been making on agriculture have been that we want to expand those markets. that means indeed getting
control of the deficit. so we do not have the huge interest rates we have that cut our farm marketing down. about 1/3 of our farm produce normally goes overseas. we have seen that reduced by about a fourth over the last two years mainly because of the rise in interest rates. the dollar too strong, distorted against other currencies.
next, road to the white house rewinds. a look at past presidential rices, we begin with president bill clinton's 1992 speech. then a look at some of the campaign ads from that year. after that, barry goldwater's 1964 campaign film. and later a 1980 interview with candidate ronald reagan. each week until the 2016 election, road to the white house rewind brings you archives of the presidential races. remarks from bill clinton on the