Debate 1984, President, Democrats; Iowa Democratic Debate With Gary Hart, Jesse Jackson, John Glenn, Walter Mondale, George Mcgovern, Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, Alan Cranston And Reuben Askew.

Yes I'd still go with the previews and thereafter I would reallocate from the be won by almost 40 billion and Amex Mistral of 30 billion the money for this particular program the children of America are worth at least one weapon system. Or two. Thank you Mr Friedman. Our third panelist is Martha Nash. She is director of the Martin Luther King Jr. Center for education and vocational training in Waterloo Iowa. We will begin the answers to the question from Mrs. Nash with the Senator Glenn. You have covered it during this discussion at various times on certain facets of the civil rights in that area. But as a black person living in Waterloo Iowa and as director of the center I am distressed and I am angered by the president ministrations as well as this nation's going out of its way to coin a phrase to have just a 20 year commitment to equal opportunity. If you were elected president

what will you do to see that the federal government particularly the executive branch over which the president has direct control. Well actively implement programs that will ensure a recommitment to equal opportunity in all areas of American life. I think it's a tragedy that in this day of ours 29 years after Brown versus Board of Education and two decades after the Civil Rights Acts were being passed that we still find ourselves with an administration today that cutback in every single enforcement function of government every single one of them right across the board. Now we should be trying to carry out the intent of those laws and get on with trying to live on this earth as God intended us to live together without regard to race or creed or color. And this administration is not doing that and it's been evidenced by the what they tried to do with the Equal Rights Commission and packing that. Has been evidence in their cutback on

minority appointments all across the whole government scale from one end of the government to the other. It's not just a matter now of saying that we have those rights on the books so it's all taken care of. It's having presidential leadership that gets on with carrying out the intent of that law so we can be the first nation in history to ever get racism and bigotry behind us once and for all and that would be my objective to accomplish that. Senator Cranston. The first thing the first thing we have to do to advance the cause of blacks women and all other subjected to discrimination in our society is to defeat Ronald Reagan in the next. The next president should see to it that we have a Civil Rights Commission that advances the cause of civil rights doesn't try to kill it. As Ronald Reagan's commission has done. Then you need an attorney general to enforce all the laws written relating to civil rights and voting rights and against discrimination. Third and this is terribly important in terms of the next presidency. There must be a president who will appoint to the Supreme Court. And there

probably be many appointments by the next president. God forbid it's Ronald Reagan people who will understand the struggle for equality in a country and maintain the progress with the supreme court's rules. Fourth or Next we need a president absolutely committed to full employment. Because we need opportunities for blacks and all others for jobs and until we create that opportunity there will be inequality finally we have to deal with the problems of the ghetto kids that is the worst injustice in America. Reverend Jackson. I suppose on the most basic lessons to be learned in this nation is that every civil right law has been taxes always applied to every American citizen. So when the public accommodations bill was passed it covered everybody who would have been denied. The Voting Rights Act was passed. It protected Hispanics for the first time and bilingual provisions and it protected teenagers for the first time. The point is that this administration has

radically cut back on equal protection on the law a broad class of people women 70 percent of all poor children live in a house at about woman where there is no man and women are not enfranchise they cannot protect those children. So women civil rights are not been protected and Hispanic civil rights and Asian-Americans the disabled and those who are poor and I would hope that this time around that we would make certain that the civil rights thrust will be tracked to rise not just by color but bought the rainbow of colors and be characterized by the locked out. We have the base that brawl and all that can we not be pushed back. We also can retard this repressive regime. Mr. Mondale. Not not far north of here. I grew up and my dad was a minister and my mom was a music teacher and I was taught that to discriminate was a sin. And I believe it is. I think what we're talking about is not policy

differences over policy. We're talking about a radical assault on the right of children of God to be treated as equals in American society. And I'm not just disappointed I'm mad that we hear from our White House that when a hungry child is hungry it's a hustler and that people in America are homeless because they like it that way. It's enough to suffer but to be insulted by people in the highest office of this land when you need some help and some love is totally intolerable. And that's why Mr. Reagan must go to pubs. Well any administration that believes that people choose to sleep on outdoor grates and that there is no hunger is administration fully capable of

seeking to reverse 20 or 30 years of civil rights and civil justice in this society. This is an administration outside the mainstream of American life and is Fritz Mondale as properly said. That alone should be the cause for its defeat but it will not be defeated merely by us saying we're going to appoint people who are more committed to the Civil Rights Commission than others. We must have an open party. I applaud what Reverend Jackson is standing for and what he's trying to do to open up this party to make its rule such that we can elect more black people Hispanics and others in the public office. Second we have to do more than promised jobs. We have to promise people the ability to create jobs. Black people Hispanic people and women ought to be owning and operating their own business. And finally this party must stand for a foreign policy that absolutely reverses our present relationship in South Africa and which establishes our commitment abroad to be the same thing that we claim to stand for here at

home. Thank you Senator Hatch. Civil rights has played a part in almost every election I've ever had. I'm not sure because of some votes in the Florida legislature I could've gotten elected governor without the Voting Rights Act of 1965. One of the goals that I really said to myself when I ran for governor of Florida is that I wanted to appoint so many black people so many minorities when I left office it wouldn't be news of their appointment that they were black or minorities it would simply be that if they were who they were I think I would carry that same record into the White House. I would appoint an attorney general who is sensitive as well as to other offices and I would have a civil rights commission that would really monitor the law because I was a governor for eight years and have more teef executive experience than anyone's sitting up here but I want to tell you that really no one likes to be monitored but everybody needs to be monitored

fought for for legal services for the poor because sometimes government needs to be sued. And so it's a matter of what you've done in a Patsy says what you can do in the future. And I think I could have a fair policy that would treat people fairly and I think that's essentially what they're really talking about. Senator Hollings. 10 years before my distinguished governor friend was governor I led the way for the peaceful integration of Clemson University and Harvey Gantt and would not have received the four times I've been elected to the United States Senate. Ninety nine percent of the black and minority vote had I not been leading and continued to lead in that direction. Number one on the program women's infants and children speeding is only meeting and reaching one third start with that little infant child come in with a healthy body and mind and fulfill that program. Put back the cuts. I would take the title one for the disadvantaged whether it's sad to stay the course. Two million of those little kids had to drop the cost. I would have that daycare center cuts in the amount of the Head Start program re-establish with the get

out of no question in my mind that inner city teacher all received $1000 I don't want to renew buildings I want to renew children they are. And then as Teddy Roosevelt said the White House and the presidency as a bully pulpit to admonish to jolt and persuade and lead. You've got to stand for civil rights you've got to speak civil rights and lead for civil rights as that symbol as pride of the United States. Thank you Mr. McGovern. The present administration has moved on three broad pass first of all it has granted a major tax reduction for the rich. Secondly it has escalated military spending beyond anything we've ever known before and thirdly it has cut programs designed to improve the lives of poor people black people of women of children all three of these things had damaged the position of black people and other minorities in this country.

If you want to see in one sentence The net result of what has happened the last three years with these kinds of priorities people who earn ten thousand dollars a year or less families with that kind of end had 17 billion dollars taken away from them. Those families earning $100000 a year or more were given 55 billion dollars in tax breaks. This is an indication of a collapse of moral values that I think goes to the heart of your question. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thank you. The next questioner is Matthew Buck's Bohm of Des Moines. Mr. Bucks mom is president of General growth companies a real estate development concern. The responses to his question will begin with Mr. Cranston. Senator Cranston if you are in business today you're getting a lot of mixed signals. In the past high interest rates were blamed on the high rate of

inflation and now that inflation has subsided and interest rates are still high the high rates are attributed to the large budget deficits. Commonsense tells us that there are two ways to reduce the deficit raise taxes or reduce spending. This gives us nothing but painful choices. If you were elected president would you be willing to recommend or endorse the following tax changes one raise personal income taxes to increase capital gains tax rates and three institute a national sales tax. No. I favor raising income taxes once again and those in the higher brackets who are not now pain their fair share and they aren't after the Reagan Kemp-Roth tax cuts but I would not raise them on other people too. I would not raise capital gains. I think capital gains should be low

to encourage investment in new jobs and new productivity new opportunities in our country three I would not favor a national sales tax because that is regressive. It is not fair to people in the lowest income brackets it makes no impact on the people in the higher income brackets what I would do to deal with the problem that causes us to question Is move toward a balanced budget to get interest rates down. Change Federal Reserve Board policy to get interest rates down and deal with the productivity and production problems of our country to achieve full employment. How do you balance a budget. One restore taxes as I said to get interest rates down so you cannot 50 billion dollars off the deficit three get people back to work so theyre paying taxes and not needing assistance. And forget the arms race off our backs forever Jack. First of all I believe we need a strong industrial base. Because a corporation must pay their share of the taxes to whom was given was required. If Mr.

Reagan's tax rate meant that corporations would get this additional incentive and then accept the obligation to reinvest in this economy. Re industrialized economy and retraining our workforce into creative things like put daycare centers at the job where parents can come to work and and have that kind of creative thrust that would have been a good idea but not pay their share of taxes they've used their. High priced lawyers to jump in the loopholes the only reason a major corporation pays taxes now. And there's the finance accounting corporation not pulling their share. In my judgment I think for all over that if corporations began to begin to strengthen our economy we can then compete with the real economy and not have to run out the back door and content legislation. I will never be satisfied until we reach it until we address in a major way corporate responsibility because I said this last night. I cannot be satisfied just with having a job and a foreign boss. Full employment is not enough. We had that in slavery everybody had a job but we had no

self-respect. Cooperation must assume their share of responsibility. Thank you Mr Mack. There's no question but that small business and entrepreneurship is crucial to our future. We must get those deficits down and get them down dramatically to get real interest rates down that's the best thing you can do for business and create a healthy economic climate. That's why I proposed reducing Reagan's deficit by more than 50 percent by cutting spending by 70 billion dollars and restoring revenue by 60 billion. Everybody's going to restore revenue or raise taxes whether they admit it or not. Reagan's wait until after the election to tell his plan what his plan is because he plans to stick it to the sane middle and moderate income Americans that got the business in the 81 tax bill and not restore revenues from the very wealthy from those who gets tremendous tax preferences to some 90000 profitable corporations

that don't pay a dime in taxes. My revenue would be restored in that way. We also need to look at the tax package to make certain it helps investment. And I would repeal the capital gains tax for certain kinds of small business investments and make the R&D tax credit permanent. Thank you Senator. Thank you. I do not support any of the three initiatives that you suggested but I do support the following things. And by the way let me just say I I not only voted against Kemp-Roth 12 times I voted against it the 13th time when it counted because I felt that. I felt that was a very uneven and very unjust tax cut and it was. We can we can raise revenues one of two ways by increasing the taxes on those who are already working or by putting people back to work and broadening the tax base. A long term jobs program dedicated to reemployment over a long term of the structurally unemployed

will raise more revenues than anything else we can do. Certainly more than just increasing incrementally the taxes of working people. But second we have to have. Incentives for people to invest their money and form capital for businesses like yours. I proposed some time ago something called a new capacity stock which would give people a tax break for saving their money and putting it in to stock in young and new businesses so that people such as you would have the capital necessary to expand. Mr. Ashton I do not believe that we're going to get a handle on the deficit except a fair combination of tax increases and spending cuts it just won't happen any other way and it's going to require credibility to moderate defense spending and then be able to look at the whole broad area of entitlements except those affecting the poor. In response to your question the personal income tax. Yes I would look at some adjustments on a personal income tax because I think we went far too far during the camp are often adjusting

those income tax brackets increased capital gains I would oppose that except that I would also support actually reducing or exempting certain small businesses and national sales tax. I would not support that because I think that that would be even more regressive but we do know that a value added tax which is something like that could help us on an import export basis might be something to look at but it would present a lot of problems and being essentially a national sales tax. Thank you Senator Talent person I mean correct. Record with respect to my friend Gary Hart because I've told him about this before when Reaganomics passed the seven hundred fifty billion dollar package when it counted on August the 3rd that's the conference report. They were to vote on a motion to recommit by Senator Kennedy and then of course the passage of the conference report. Sound of the heart was not present and did not vote. That's when it counted. Now with respect to your tactics polls all three of them I have it right. I'll vote for you.

And what you need to do is first freeze all entitlements freeze defense spending and national polls ever want to your particular tax increases and go to the indexing bolded fall as a part of Reaganomics. Abolish that and go to the corporate. Tax itself. They say in New York if you paid any taxes as a business last year you better fire your accountant. We need a minimum corporate tax and not that it discriminatory taxes against individuals to abolish the middle class as you recommend. Much MUCH. He Mr. McGovern. Dr. Martin Feldstein President Reagan's top economic advisor says that the deficit is a time bomb that's going to go off after the election. He also says the two causes of it are bad tax law and excessive wasteful military spending. I agree with Dr. Feldstein he's probably going to get fired for what he says because the

president doesn't agree with them. But I see no way to bring down this deficit other than the two ways that Feldstein is suggested number one straightening out that tax law. I would recommend closing off a lot of the write offs and loopholes right at the top of the Encompass Gail a situation that permitted General Electric two years ago to earn 1.6 billion dollars and not pay a dime in federal taxes it's not fair. And the other thing we have to do is to cut about 20 or 25 percent of all the boondoggle and waste in the Pentagon and we can balance that budget. Thank you he. Senator Senator Glenn. I wish we had more than just one minute to answer this because we've gotten around finally to an area where we really do have some differences. I have done what you have proposed you have said we want we cut budgets where we can we want to pay as you go system. We put an across the board surcharge on devoted solely to deficit

reduction. We defer indexing. Those things will gain us some 80 billion by 1988. Mr. Mondale has criticized me for this tax proposal claiming it would cost people 900 a year that's not true. I would point out some differences between our bases I based my tax proposals and what they will do and cutting the deficit back by half by the end of the first term. On the Congressional Budget Office figures Mr. Mondale to make the rosy scenario projection that he makes use the administration's figures of projections of inflation and unemployment and gross national product. We all can balance a budget if we follow Reagan's lead in this thing. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Buckstone. Our final panelist is Denise O'Brien. Denise O'Brien and her husband operate a diversified farm near Atlantic Iowa where they raise pigs dairy cows and beef cattle grain crops fresh fruit and three small children. Responses to the question from Denise O'Brien

we'll begin with Reverend Jackson. First of all I'd like to suggest that as a as a citizen I'd like to suggest to you eight candidates here that you all go to Russia to the funeral I think that that would be a good thing to do. Anyway thanks. As a farmer the guidelines for establishing my social security income are discriminating and archaic. I have been paying into the Social Security system on an equal basis with my husband yet my income will probably be less than a homemaker who has not contributed in this instance so security favors those who pay in less or nothing at all. However if I had not contributed to so security I would not be eligible for disability and certain other benefits. How would you as president. Reverend Jackson correct these inequities in contributions and benefits to farm women. Think that is a basic issue. Women in general to be and protect it and appreciate the fact that even when women are out of the traditional labor market raising families that they are

in fact making a contribution in the range of adjustments that must be made to provide women equal protection on the law all that must be a major consideration. I would hope that that would just be a basic commitment. All of us know that all of us basically do to a floor in the mockery that was spat women in agony that is based solely upon their sex. And furthermore a commitment to protect women infants children and poor people. I think that is the fundamental moral challenge that we have today not only to cut the budget off freeze the budget but use it in such a way the women such as that to not feel the pain and the anxiety of being female be in the rural lobby and pool. Thank you Mr. Mondale. This issue cuts clear across women everywhere. And that's why the Congress in the Social Security Committee report directed the administration to come up with a recommendation and a study on

the unfairness of earning sharing as it applies to women. You've given a good example. This same thing occurs in pensions occurs in insurance and that's the reason why most people in poverty are women. And by the end of this century if we keep Reagan and Reagan his type around they'll all be women and children. They did other things they repealed the minimum payment for Social Security. That is always women who are the poorest. They're the ones that got singled out. They repealed the payments for the dependents usually of widows going on to college the repeal that were ever women were found and their rights under Social Security were found. This president Mr. Reagan and Mr. Stockman and the rest with their flinty eyed approach went after women this is a good reason why all women ought to throw him out and get a good president in there. Thank you. A great American named Martha

Keyes was a Congresswoman from Kansas for two terms and served on the House Ways and Means Committee and also on the Reform Commission on the SO security laws. She just happens to be my sister in law as well. Recommended very strongly the earning sharing income sharing proposal which Vice President Mondale is mentioned it's a proposal I strongly support. It is directly addressed or directly designed to address the very inequitable situation in the SO security laws that you mention. They are most profound among foreign women no question about it. Your experience I think is is typical of many to many but they are also shared throughout the working economy there has to be a situation in which the wife and the husband can comingle their incomes so that the wife. Who is systematically discriminated against until we get pay equity can receive the same or qualify for the same amount of benefits that her husband does on retirement. And I think we have to adopt that as a basic reform of the so security laws. MR as well as a good case first of all for the ratification

passes and ratification the Equal Rights Amendment sect second. When you're looking at just this problem I don't think you can be separated from all the others that the others have attempted to address. But I believe that in too we seek to find ways in which we can have fairness in terms of a sharing of income because ultimately that's what this is what it's all about is the sharing of income would you ever really have equity. And I hearken back to the question of a lady in regard to women. I grew up and saw this firsthand and I certainly would commit to you to do what I could in this regard. The only thing I would want to caution you to on is that every time we make a change in Social Security we compound the problem on the deficit. So I think you have to be careful as we talk about the deficits to ensure that we don't create unrealistic expectations but from the standpoint of the issue the issue is genuine and I'm committed to try to help. Thank you Senator Hollings. Some 35 years ago as a trial lawyer I had just sat cash to prove the worth. Of a home swayed a farmer's wife.

They said she wasn't worth anything she was killed in an action that there was no LOL. And I started back thinking of these things some 35 years ago and as a result I am a co-sponsor of the economic equity act the fair insurance Practices Act and the other measures that we've been talking about to correct the situation that you speak of. I think this is definitely one of the things that we must move on and freshened as best I can. Thank you Mr. McGovern. I think we all know why you asked the question with the urgency that you did because there's no group in our whole society that works any harder than farm women and no group more discriminated against. We talk a lot about the discrimination against working women and usually we use that term working to apply only to those who work outside of the home but there's a lot of hard work done in the home and on the farm. That requires all of the intelligence and all of the

energy that day anyone can muster. And yet those are the areas where the Social Security program the pensions the IRA accounts and other things work discrimination I think every man on this platform has been sensitized to those problems. One thing that I say with complete confidence the women of this country are going to be better off in the presidency with one of the men on this platform than with the man who holds that job now who. These problems really start in the working years of course where women only earn about 62 cents on the dollar for what men earn those women that are out in the workplace not the specific situation that you talked about as the reason why I'm a co-sponsor of been a sponsor of the way in the economic equity act I don't think anyone up here would disagrees with that

everyone is sponsoring that. But it goes beyond that in the earning sharing area that we have to specifically address and that's one that whether whichever one of the partners is employed the other would share that earnings under Social Security and I think that's very important to address the problem if you suggest on the I'm on the Senate Special Committee on Aging. We've had hearings on this very subject on how elderly women are being dealt with very very unfairly. And it was as a result of those hearings I became a sponsor and advocate of going out giving speeches on this and I think that's one of the things we have to correct very soon. Senator Cranston the reason Congress passed. A provision in the Social Security reform act that ordered a study of the unfair treatment of women under Social Security is that I offered an amendment to the SO security bill when it was before the Senate and that was adopted. That starts a study that will lead to a recommendation

to solve the problem you pose and we will then solve it. I took that action because representatives of the National Organization of Women and of the National Women's Political Caucus and my own wife Norma. Pointed out this unfairness and said do something about it. And so I did. Plainly we have to go beyond the our way the women's Equity Act equity under insurance and all these other provisions our vision must be an America where there is no more discrimination against anyone where it's finally gets through to all the American people the discrimination against anyone is a threat to all ask not for whom the bell tolls the bill tolls for thee. And that requires and a president who will speak inspirationally and lead the nation in that direction. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Obama. Thank you thank you. That completes our panel discussion. It is time now for the closing statements by the

candidates. The order has been determined by a lot and we will begin with Mr. Mondale. I began this discussion by saying that on February 20th the Democrats of Iowa would be the most powerful citizens on earth. And that you will be if you'll use that power in Iowa. Politics is open. Everybody's invited. And you don't push very well. You'll do what you want to do. If there was ever a time that your country needed you it's this time as I've often said this administration is neither moderate or conservative on most issues. But in fact radical they have radically departed from 40 years of bipartisan commitment to arms control. And we have a much more dangerous world. They've radically committed it. When away from the concept that you have to have a responsible deficit budget and we've got a

deficit that is the highest in the history of civilization with all the problems they've radically departed from a commitment to train this next generation prepare for our future. And in the area of fairness whether it's civil rights or equal rights or the problems of Social Security or fair taxes and name it this administration has been on the side of icy indifference for all of those reasons. You must help your nation speak clearly for a change and for a Democrat who will make a difference. I'm committed for change in every one of those courses. The final point which we've not discussed tonight is that if Mr. Reagan is re-elected. He will select. The nominees to the Supreme Court when these great judges resign. And that could well be the end of the rest of Justice in America. That court for 40 years has defended us often we haven't given

them credit. It has been a remarkable institution for liberty and justice. Do not let Mr. Reagan get his hands on that court. Thank you. I'm on the tip of the month of. Next will be Senator Hart. We used to have Democratic presidents who ask us what we could do for our country and now we have candidates who promise everybody everything. We used to have candidates who challenged us to express our idealism and now we have candidates who ask only our price. I think this country can do better than that. I am not willing to turn this country back one more time to the Reagans and Weinberger's and Wicks. Nor am I satisfied to let our party move backward. To an older establishment that seeks only to protect its previous gains and refuses to move this country

forward. We are at a critical time in this nation's history. This is an election about our future versus our past. You are being told that a decision has been made by the party establishment in Washington by the pundits by the party establishment that has controlled this party that you have only one choice in Iowa and that is to ratify their decision. I believe the people of Iowa and New Hampshire have the power to change the course of American history. I am running and I need your help to move this country into the future. This is not a campaign for one candidate. This is a campaign and a cause for this nation. I ask for your help. I ask you to to help me move this this nation forward to leave the past behind to join the Roosevelts the Trumans and the Kennedys who are willing to be experimental who are willing to challenge the best instincts of the American people who are willing to create as we must create in the 1980s a truly

new democracy. Thank you very much. And mean. Senator Glenn main goal must be to get Ronald Reagan out of the White House. Change the policies so we can get this nation going again as Gary said. But to listen to the TV ad that says I am ready is not enough. Is the United States ready is the Democratic Party ready to listen to special interest leaders the kingmakers the bosses the power brokers who would annoy the nominee and say we have now spoken and so you don't need to really think for yourself from there on and huge new spending proposed that is going to drive up interest rates beyond anything now create more unemployment. Front page of The Des Moines Register has it on here about Mr. Mondale moves to counter criticism of his promises the Wall Street Journal says the least. Forty five billion dollars maybe 90. We calculated somewhere around 170

billion conservatively. I think we're going to have to leave going to break the bank or break the promises if we go for that kind of leadership. I think we need a leadership that stands before the American people and says what they're going to do in the open not another story behind closed doors which we have a number of examples of and I'm sorry we didn't bring that have a chance to bring it up this evening. We must get Reagan and his policies out of the White House. But whom we elect to replace that man has to have the trust and confidence of the American people and it has to be on matters spoken in public and in private and private promises and public statements for the American people being the same and it has to be for all our people not just the few in the powerful this is not just of and for but it's by the people of this country. And it has to care for those who are the least advantaged we have to have the sensible center not going just from Swing pendulum swings of political feeling from the far right to the far left and the future our goals must be set with the idea that this country is still fully capable of out invent out research outcompete anybody on the net on the

face of this earth. You started all here just nine days from now with your independent thinking you're not on a leash. Big organizations come in and tell you it's all over. I don't buy that at all you're independent people here you're thinking for yourselves. Iowa is not for sale. Together we can change the future. Let's start it right here. Senator Cranston if you think Ronald Reagan is bad for America Now I. Think what he'll be like. If he wins in November I think will be like if he thinks he has a new mandate I think will be like when he never has to worry about facing the voters of America again. The restraints of moderation would be loosened the reins would be off Reagan. The Reagan re-election a Reagan reelected would be a dangerous man. Reagan must be stop.

Under Ronald Reagan. America's vision of a world of peace and freedom. Is being blasted by the guns of the U.S. Navy off the coast of Lebanon. By the guns of the U.S. paratroopers in Grenada. And by the guns of U.S. helicopters. In an Douras. And El Salvador. Under Reagan. America's vision of prosperity and progress. At home. Is being blasted by government to do so. Bankruptcies foreclosures and unemployment by government sponsored ravaging of our environment. And by government indifference. Not benign. Indifference but malignant indifference toward women and minorities. The poor. The handicapped children elderly. I believe America deserves leadership that will make us respected around the world. Not feared and not hated.

Fear and hatred fear and hatred are the legacy of Ronald Reagan. Peace and jobs. The very antithesis of the Reagan legacy of unemployment and workfare. By the very essence of the Democratic Party. It is our vision of the future for America. It is my vision for America. It is the way we beat Ronald Reagan. Ah thank you Senator Hollings. Well I agree with John I don't know who's going to pay for the promises of French Mondeo but I don't know who's going to pay for the inexperience of John Glenn. You know. The Great. The great prostration of America today. How do we keep from swinging from one extreme to the other. From Noda fans to nothing but the fans from programs and revenue to

now no programs no revenue using two hundred fifty billion dollar deficit. Before long we would have an economy to defang on our children will just be a wreck they won't be able to afford a home or send their children to college and there is a wait. It's not painless. There's got to be sacrifice. But if you just take that budget we passed an amount extended for one year. Then ever want to share a sacrificial way will have to give. We can save a hundred billion dollars just for that one year and they end with 3 percent growth thereafter be able to not only save 600 billion bucks but pay for the feeding in the day care and the headstart and educational programs that we believe and you say Well in defense you've heard this before but I have led the way for the consensus over prepared for a new player on the pad for conventional. I put that in over the years of my experience. That's the point you say you've heard this before about a strong economy and strong defense. But I would have Monisha Governor

Carter Governor Reagan didn't have 18 years serving and debating every foreign policy issue and voting on it. Serving as the chairman of the Budget Committee and realizing that this country is not going to the dogs it's not. What's really occurred is we just won't leave for sacrifice from the Washington level. But if you give me the chance I'll lead for that sacrifice so we can have a government we can have a program we can have a future for America to get out. Sacrificing together working together pulling together there's no force on earth that can stop us. Thank you. Thank you Mr. McGovern. I have encountered three different kinds of voters here and I'll go over the last few months. One group are the kind of people who agree with May on the issues on which I have taken a stand.

And I would say to them simply Thanks a lot and congratulations on your superior wisdom. There's another group of voters who tell me that they disagree with me on one or more of the positions I have taken and that they can't vote for me on grounds of conscience. And to those people I'll pray that their understanding will be enlarged. But there's a third group of voters that I've encountered all over this state who tell me they agree with what I have said that they think I'm right on the issues but they're not going to vote for me because in their view I can't be nominated and they don't want to throw away their votes as they put it. Now that's the group that I want to talk to for just a moment. Let's assume that that judgment is right that somebody else has this nomination locked up we'll just say for purposes of discussion it's Fred silver here.

Nominated. If that if that's true and he wins he knows I'm going to be out campaigning for and I don't think he's got it locked out. But let me let me say this. If you really believe that I am the closest to your views on the issues before this country you owe me that vote. For this reason it's the only way you're going to be able to send a message to whoever you think is the nominee of the direction in which you want that Manda mode if you want if you want military spending cuts if you want military spending cut rather than increased and you're convinced I can't be the nominee vote for me anyway. And the bigger that McGovern vote is the more this eventual nominee is going to move in the direction that you think we ought to go. Don't throw away your conscience a.. You

aren't back yet. We've heard the crisis stated from several. Angles today. The question is. WHAT MAN Oh what man have the qualities of leadership to revive and redeem and reconcile the people. I have confronted corporations and governments and foreign leaders. Leaders must take charge and risk. And make things happen. For this Cuba Cuba and Nicaragua Lebanon the Soviet Union the Syria. Leaders cannot wait until after the fact. And follow opinion polls. Leaders must mold opinion. They

must inspire the youth. Twenty eight million young people between the ages 18 and 24 eligible 17 million unregistered. They are the difference. Leaders must motivate the party not monopolize it. We must speak to the Third World. For three fourths of the people on earth exist. Leadership must be believable. It must reconcile the rural farmer and the urban consumer. The Rainbow Coalition is a way out for the lock down. We are reaching back to those who have been forgotten and projected and the spy is. We must restore confidence. In our national leadership. We as a nation have the capacity to destroy the world. We also are so civilized and so Marlowe intimately and that we will choose another way. We will choose to feed and clothe and heal. We will choose to freeze the weapons. And not burn the people and freeze the planet. We must use them on the way. I'm standing here today as a member of this body

of distinguished leaders. I've come from further back than any of them have come from. I intend to go further. I represent for us a pardon for this nation a chance and a choice. I'm not looking for a vote that. I'm looking for a partner. Together we can make a difference. T. Thank you. Mr. ASC-P. President Reagan says America is back. America never went away. Strength in the spirit American people have been there all along. Here in Iowa and across the land we Americans are still capable of achieving our highest hopes and our fondest dreams. But we need real leadership to do it. We need a leader who sees the world

as it is and not as it used to be. We need a leader who looks to the future and not to the past. We need a leader who is willing to be candid about the challenges we face. And the sacrifices we must make. We need a leader who is fair but who doesn't make promises that can't be kept. Above all we need a leader who's willing to risk losing some votes as a candidate so that he'll be free to govern as a president unlike President Reagan and unlike my Democratic opponents I believe I'm offering real leadership to America to deal realistically with a real world. With such leadership. And with your help. We can prove to ourselves and to all the world. That America. Is Here To Stay. T

Thank you. To the candidates and to the panelists and to the audience I'd like to express my appreciation for your participation today in this I would debate a week from next Monday Iowans will begin the national process of passing judgments on these candidates and on their ideas. By being here gentlemen you have given us a much sounder basis on which to make that judgment. And on behalf of the people of Iowa I want to thank you. The Des Moines Register into NATO. The born register had been used to your. Response to this debate and now from the civic center in the morning. This is James began and wishing you could eat.