For Immediate Release
Office of the Vice President
October 6, 2004
Remarks of Vice President Cheney and Senator Edwards in Vice Presidential Debate
Veale Center
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland, Ohio
9:03 P.M. EDT
MODERATOR: Good evening from Case Western Reserve University's
Veale Center, here in Cleveland, Ohio. I'm Gwen Ifill of the NewsHour
and Washington Week on PBS. And I welcome you to the first and the
only vice presidential debate between Vice President Dick Cheney, the
Republican nominee, and Senate John Edwards, the Democratic nominee.
These debates are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Tonight's will last 90 minutes following detailed rules of engagement
worked out by representatives of the candidates.
I have agreed to enforce the rules they have devised for themselves
to the best of my ability. The questions tonight will be divided
between foreign and domestic policy, but the specific topics were
chosen by me. The candidates have not been told what they are.
The rules: For each question there can be only a two-minute
response; a 90-second rebuttal, and at my discretion, a discussion
extension of one minute. A green light will come on when 30 seconds
remain in any given answer, yellow at 15, red at five seconds, and then
flashing red means time is up. There is also a back-up buzzer system
if needed. Candidates may not direct questions to one another. There
will be two-minute closing statements, but no opening statements.
There is an audience here in the hall. But they have been instructed
to remain silent throughout. The order of the first question was
determined by the candidates in advance. And the first one goes to
Vice President Cheney.
Vice President Cheney, there have been new developments in Iraq,
especially having to do with the administration's handling. Paul
Bremer, the former head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, gave a
speech in which he said, we have never had enough troops on the ground
-- or "we never had enough troops on the ground." Donald Rumsfeld said
he has not seen any hard evidence of a link between al Qaeda and Saddam
Hussein. Was this the fruit of a report that you requested, that you
received a week ago that showed there was no connection between Abu
Musab al-Zarqawi and Saddam Hussein?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Gwen, I want to thank you and I want to thank
the folks here at Case Western Reserve for hosting us tonight. It's a
very important event, and they've done a superb job of putting it
together.
It's important to look at all of our developments in Iraq within
the broader context of the global war on terror. And after 9/11, it
became clear that we had to do several things to have a successful
strategy to win the global war on terror, specifically that we had to
go after the terrorists wherever we might find them, that we also had
to go after state sponsors of terror -- those who might provide
sanctuary or safe harbor for terror. And we also then, finally, had to
stand up democracies in their stead afterwards because that was the
only way to guarantee that these states would not again become safe
harbors for terror, for the development of deadly weapons.
Concern about Iraq specifically focused on the fact that Saddam
Hussein had been for years listed on the state sponsor of terror, that
he had established relationships with Abu Nidal, who operated out of
Baghdad. He paid $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers. And he
had an established relationship with al Qaeda, specifically look at
George Tenet, the CIA Director's, testimony before the Committee on
Foreign Relations two years ago when he talked about the 10-year
relationship.
The effort that we've mounted with respect to Iraq focused
specifically on the possibility that this was the most likely nexus
between the terrorists and weapons of mass destruction. The biggest
threat we face today is the possibility of terrorists smuggling a
nuclear weapon or a biological agent into one of our own cities and
threatening the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans. What we
did in Iraq was exactly the right thing to do. If I had it to
recommend all over again, I would recommend exactly the right -- same
course of action. The world is far safer today because Saddam Hussein
is in jail. His government is no longer in power. And we did exactly
the right thing.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, you have 90 seconds to respond.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Thank you, Gwen, for moderating this debate.
Thank you to the folks of Case Western, and all the people in Ohio for
having us here.
Mr. Vice President, you are still not being straight with the
American people. I mean, the reality you and George Bush continue to
tell people, first, that things are going well in Iraq. The American
people don't need us to explain this to them. They see it on their
television every single day. We lost more troops in September than we
lost in August; lost more in August than we lost in July; lost more in
July than we lost in June.
The truth is our men and women in uniform have been heroic; our
military has done everything they've been asked to do. And it's not
just me that sees the mess in Iraq. There are Republican leaders like
John McCain, like Richard Lugar, like Chuck Hagel, who've said Iraq is
a mess and it's getting worse. And when they were asked why, Richard
Lugar said, because of the incompetence of the administration.
What Paul Bremer said yesterday is they didn't have enough troops
to secure the country. They also didn't have a plan to win the peace.
They also didn't put the alliances together to make this successful.
We need a fresh start. We need a President who will speed up the
training of the Iraqis, get more staff in for doing that. We need to
speed up the reconstruction so the Iraqis see some tangible benefit.
We need a new President who has the credibility, which John Kerry has,
to bring others into this effort.
MODERATOR: Would you like 30 seconds to respond, Mr. Vice
President?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I would. We've made significant progress
in Iraq. We've stood up a new government that's been in power now only
90 days. The notion of additional troops is talked about frequently.
But the point of success in Iraq will be reached when we have turned
governance over to the Iraqi people, they've been able to establish a
democratic government. They're well on their way on their way to doing
that. They'll have free elections next January for the first time in
history.
We also are actively rapidly training Iraqis to take on the
security responsibility. Those two steps are crucial to success in
Iraq. They're well in hand, well under way, and I'm confident that, in
fact, we'll get the job done.
MODERATOR: You have 30 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Yes. Mr. Vice President, there is no connection
between the attacks of September 11th and Saddam Hussein. The 9/11
Commission has said it, your own Secretary of State has said it. And
you've gone around the country suggesting that there is some
connection. There's not. And, in fact, the CIA is now about to report
that the connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein is tenuous, at
best. And, in fact, the Secretary of Defense said yesterday that he
knows of no hard evidence of the connection. We need to be straight
with the American people.
MODERATOR: Time for a new question, but the same topic, at this
time, to you, Senator Edwards. You and Senator Kerry have said that
the war in Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time. Does that mean
that if you had been President and Vice President, that Saddam Hussein
would still be in power?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Here's what it means, it means that Saddam
Hussein needed to be confronted. John Kerry and I have consistently
said that. It's why we voted for the resolution. But it also means it
needed to be done the right way. And doing it the right way meant that
we were prepared, that we gave the weapons inspectors time to find out
what we now know, that, in fact, there were no weapons of mass
destruction. That we didn't take our eye off the ball, which are al
Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, the people who attacked us on September the
11th.
Now, remember, we went into Afghanistan -- which, by the way, was
the right thing to do; that was the right decision. And our military
preformed terrifically there. But we had Osama bin Laden cornered at
Tora Bora. We had the 10th Mountain Division up in Uzbekistan
available. We had the finest military in the world on the ground, and
what did we do? We turned -- this is the man who masterminded the
greatest mass murder and terrorist attack in American history. And
what did the administration decide to do? They gave the responsibility
of capturing and/or killing Saddam -- I mean, Osama bin Laden to Afghan
warlords who just a few weeks before had been working with Osama bin
Laden.
Our point in this is not complicated. We were attacked by al Qaeda
and Osama bin Laden. We went into Afghanistan and very quickly the
administration made a decision to divert attention from that, and
instead began to plan for the invasion of Iraq. And these connections
-- and I want the American people to hear this very clearly -- listen
carefully to what the Vice President is saying, because there is no
connection between Saddam Hussein and the attacks of September 11th,
period. The 9/11 Commission has said that's true, Colin Powell has
said it's true, but the Vice President keeps suggesting that there is.
There is not, and in fact any connection with al Qaeda is tenuous at
best.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 90 seconds to respond.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: The Senator has got his facts wrong. I
have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11. But
there's clearly an established Iraqi track record with terror. And the
point is that that's the place where you're most likely to see the
terrorists come together with weapons of mass destruction, the deadly
technologies that Saddam Hussein had developed and used over the
years.
Now, the fact of the matter is, the big difference here, Gwen, is
that they are not prepared to deal with states that sponsor terror.
They've got a very limited view about how to use U.S. military force to
defend America. We heard Senator Kerry say the other night that there
ought to be some kind of a global test before U.S. troops are deployed
preemptively to protect the United States. That's part of a track
record that goes back to the 1970s when he ran for Congress the first
time and said troops should not be deployed without U.N. approval; then
in the mid-'80s he ran on the basis of cutting most of our major
defense programs. In 1991, he voted against Desert Storm. It's a
consistent pattern over time of always being on the wrong side of
defense issues.
A little tough talk in the midst of a campaign, or as part of a
presidential debate, cannot obscure a record of 30 years of being on
the wrong side of defense issues, and they give absolutely no
indication, based on that record, of being willing to go forward and
aggressively pursue the war on terror with the kind of strategy that
will work, that will defeat our enemies, and will guarantee that the
United States doesn't again get attacked by the likes of al Qaeda.
MODERATOR: We will return to that topic, but first I want to ask
you, for two minutes, Senator -- Vice President Cheney, tonight we
mentioned Afghanistan. We believe that Osama bin Laden is hiding,
perhaps, in a cave somewhere along the Afghan-Pakistan border. If you
get a second term, what is your plan to capture him, and then to
neutralize those who have sprung up to replace him?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Gwen, we have -- we've never let up on
Osama bin Laden from day one. We've actively and aggressively pursued
him. We've captured or killed thousands of al Qaeda, various places
around the world and especially in Afghanistan. We'll continue to very
aggressively pursue him and I'm confident eventually we'll get him.
The key to success in Afghanistan has been, again, to go in and go
after the terrorists, which we've done, and also take down the Taliban
regime, which had allowed them to function there, in effect, sponsors,
if you will, of the al Qaeda organization.
John Edwards, two-and-a-half years ago, six months after we went
into Afghanistan, announced that it was chaotic, the situation was
deteriorating, the warlords were about to take over. Here we are
two-and-a-half years later. We're four days away from the democratic
election, first one in history in Afghanistan. We've got 10 million
voters who've registered to vote, nearly half of them women. That
election will put in place a democratically elected government that
will take over next December. There's been enormous progress in
Afghanistan in exactly the right direction, in spite of what John
Edwards said two-and-a-half years ago. He just got it wrong.
Now, the fact is, as we go forward in Afghanistan, we will pursue
Osama bin Laden and the terrorists as long as necessary. We're
standing up Afghan security forces so they can take on responsibility
for their own security. We'll keep U.S. forces there -- we have about
16,000 there today -- as long as necessary to assist the Afghans in
terms of dealing with their security situation. But they're making
significant progress. We've got -- President Karzai is in power. They
have done wonders -- writing their own constitution for the first time
ever. Schools are open. Young girls are going to school. Women are
going to vote. Women are even eligible to run for office. This is
major, major progress. There will be democracy in Afghanistan. Make
no doubt about it, freedom is the best antidote to terror.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, you have 90 seconds to respond.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Someone did get it wrong, but it wasn't John
Kerry and John Edwards. They got it wrong. When we had Osama bin
Laden cornered, they left the job to the Afghan warlords. They then
diverted their attention from the very people who attacked us, who were
at the center of the war on terror, and so Osama bin Laden is still at
large.
Now, I want to go back to something the Vice President said just a
minute ago, because these distortions are continuing. He said that --
made mention of this global test. What John Kerry said is just as
clear as day to anybody who was listening. He said, we will -- we will
find terrorists where they are and kill them before they ever do harm
to the American people, first. We will keep this country safe. He
defended this country as a young man. He will defend this country as
President of the United States.
He also said, very clearly, that he will never give any country
veto power over the security of the United States of America. Now, I
know the Vice President would like to pretend that wasn't said, and the
President would, too. But the reality is -- reality is, it was said.
Here's what's actually happened in Afghanistan, regardless of this
rosy scenario that they paint on Afghanistan, just like they do Iraq.
What's actually happened is, they're -- they're now providing 75
percent of the world's opium. Not only are they providing 75 percent
of the world's opium, large parts of the country are under the control
of drug lords and war lords. Big parts of the country are still
insecure. And the reality is, the part of Afghanistan, Eastern
Afghanistan where Osama bin Laden is, is one of the hardest places to
control, and the most insecure.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, 30 seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: All right, Gwen. Twenty years ago we had a
similar situation in El Salvador. We had -- a guerrilla insurgency
controlled roughly a third of the country, 75,000 people dead, and we
held free elections. I was there as an observer, on behalf of the
Congress. The human drive for freedom, the determination of these
people to vote was unbelievable. And as the terrorists would come in
and shoot up polling places, as soon as they left, the voters would
come back and get in line and would not be denied their right to vote.
And today El Salvador is a whale of a lot better because we held free
elections. The power of that concept is enormous, and it will apply in
Afghanistan and it will apply, as well, in Iraq.
SENATOR EDWARDS: The Vice President just said that we should focus
on state sponsors of terrorism. Iran has moved forward with its
nuclear weapons program. They are more dangerous today than they were
four years ago. North Korea has moved forward with their nuclear
weapons program, gone from one to two nuclear weapons to six to eight
nuclear weapons. This Vice President has been an advocate for over a
decade for lifting sanctions against Iran, the largest state sponsor of
terrorism on the planet. It's a mistake. We should not only not lift
them, we should strengthen those sanctions.
MODERATOR: New question to you, Senator Edwards, but I don't want
to let go of the "global test" question first, because I want people to
understand exactly what it is, as you said, that Senator Kerry did
say.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Yes, ma'am.
MODERATOR: He said, "You've got to do -- he was asked about
preemptive action at the last debate. He said, "You've got to do it in
a way that passes the test, that passes the global test, where your
countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're
doing, and can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate
reasons." What is a global test if it's not a global veto?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, let me say first, he said, in the same
segment -- I don't remember precisely where it was connected with what
you just read, but he said, point blank, we will never give anyone a
veto over the security of the United States of America. What he's
saying is we're going to go back to the proud tradition of the United
States of America and Presidents of the United States of America for
the last 50 to 75 years.
First, we're going to actually tell the American people the truth.
We're going to tell them the truth about what's happening. We're not
going to suggest to them that things are going well in Iraq or anyplace
else when, in fact, they're not. We're going to make sure that the
American people know the truth about why we're using force and what the
explanation for it is. And it's not just the American people -- we're
also going to make sure that we tell the world the truth, because the
reality is, for America to lead, for America to do what it's done for
50 years -- before this President and Vice President came into office
-- it is critical that we be credible, it is critical that they believe
that when America takes action they can trust what we're doing, what we
say, what we say at the United Nations, what we say in direct
conversations with leaders of other world -- other countries -- they
need to know that the credibility of the United States is always good
-- because they will not follow us without that.
And, unfortunately, we're seeing the consequences of that right
now. It's one of the reasons that we're having so much difficulty
getting others involved in the effort in Iraq. You know, we've taken
90 percent of the coalition casualties. American taxpayers have borne
90 percent of the costs of the effort in Iraq. And we see the result
of there not being a coalition -- the first Gulf War cost America $5
billion. We're at $200 billion and counting. John Kerry will never
give control over the security of the United States of America to any
other country. We will not out-source our responsibility to keep this
country safe.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 90 seconds to respond.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen, the 90-percent figure is just
dead wrong. When you include the Iraqi security forces that have
suffered casualties, as well as the allies, they've taken almost 50
percent of the casualties in operations in Iraq, which leaves the U.S.
with 50 percent, not 90 percent. With respect to the cost, it wasn't
$200 billion. You probably weren't there to vote for that, but the
$120 billion is, in fact, what has been allocated to Iraq. The rest of
it is for Afghanistan and the global war on terror.
The allies have stepped forward and agreed to reduce and forgive
Iraqi debt to the tune of nearly $80 billion, by one estimate, and
that, plus $14 billion they promised in terms of direct aid, puts the
overall allied contribution financially at about $95 billion -- not to
the $120 billion we've got, but better than 40 percent. So your facts
are just wrong, Senator.
You also have a situation where you talk about credibility. It's
awfully hard to convey a sense of credibility to allies when you voted
for the war and then you declared, wrong war, wrong place, wrong time.
You voted for the war, and then you voted against supporting the troops
when they needed the equipment, the fuel, the spare parts and the
ammunition and the body armor. You're not credible on Iraq because of
the enormous inconsistencies that John Kerry and you have cited time
after time after time during the course of the campaign. Whatever the
political pressures of the moment requires, that's where you're at.
But you've not been consistent, and there's no indication at all that
John Kerry has a conviction to successfully carry through on the war on
terror.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, you have 30 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: What the Vice President has just said is just a
complete distortion. The American people saw John Kerry on Thursday
night. They don't need the Vice President or the President to tell
them what they saw. They saw a man who was strong, who had conviction,
who is resolute, who made it very clear that he will do everything that
has to be done to find terrorists, to keep the American people safe.
He laid out his plan for success in Iraq, made it clear that we were
committed to success in Iraq. We have to be, because we have troops on
the ground there, and because they've created a haven for terrorists.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 30 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Your rhetoric, Senator, would be a lot more
credible, if there was a record to back it up. There isn't, and you
cannot use talk tough during the course of a 90 minute debate in a
presidential campaign to obscure a 30-year record in the United States
Senate and prior to that by John Kerry, who has consistently come down
on the wrong side of all the major defense issues that he's faced as a
public official.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, a new question for you. You have
two minutes to respond. When the President says that Senator Kerry is
emboldening enemies, and you say that we could get hit again if voters
make the wrong choice in November, are you saying that it would be a
dangerous thing to have John Kerry as President?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I'm saying specifically that I don't
believe he has the qualities we need in a Commander-in-Chief, because I
don't think, based on his record, that he would pursue the kind of
aggressive policies that need to be pursued if we're going to defeat
these terrorists. We need to battle them overseas so we don't have to
battle them here at home.
I'm not challenging John Kerry's patriotism. I said in my
acceptance speech in New York City at the Republican convention that we
respected his service in Vietnam, and I got applause that. We've never
criticized his patriotism. What we question is his judgment. And his
judgment is flawed, and the record is there for anybody who wants to
look at it.
In 1984, when he ran for the Senate, he opposed, or called for the
elimination of a great many major weapons systems that were crucial to
winning the Cold War and are important today to our overall forces.
When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and occupied it in 1990 and '91, he
stood up on the floor of the Senate and voted against going in to
liberate Kuwait and push Saddam Hussein back to Iraq.
The problem we have is that if you look at his record, he doesn't
display the qualities of somebody who has conviction. And with respect
to this particular operation, we've seen a situation in which first
they voted to commit the troops, to send them to war, John Edwards and
John Kerry. Then they came back, and when the question was whether or
not you provide them with the resources they needed, body armor, spare
parts, ammunition, they voted against it.
I couldn't figure out why that happened, initially, and then I
looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was
making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with
the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided
they would cast an anti-war vote, and they voted against the troops.
Now, if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean
represented, how can we expect them to stand up to al Qaeda?
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, you have 90 seconds to respond.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Thank you. One thing that's very clear is that a
long resume does not equal good judgment. I mean, we've seen over and
over and over the misjudgments made by this administration. I want to
go back to what this -- what the Vice President just said, because it's
a continuation of the things he's been doing, unfortunately, on the
campaign trail; it's a continuation of what he began his first answer
with tonight.
John Kerry has voted for the biggest military appropriations bill
in the country's history. John Kerry has voted for the biggest
intelligence appropriations in the country's history. This Vice
President, when he was Secretary of Defense, cut over 80 weapons
systems, including the very ones he's criticizing John Kerry for voting
against. These are weapons systems, a big chunk of which the Vice
President, himself, suggested we get rid of after the Cold War.
The reality is that John Kerry has consistently supported the very
men that he served with in Vietnam and led. On the $87 billion, it was
clear at the time of that vote that they had no plan to win the peace.
We're seeing the consequences of that every day on the ground right
now. We stood up and said, for our troops we must have a plan to win
the peace. We also thought it was wrong to have a $20 billion fund,
out of which $7.5 billion was going to go toward a no-bid contract for
Halliburton, the Vice President's former company. It was wrong then;
it's wrong now.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 30 seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen, I think the record speaks for
itself. These are two individuals who have been for the war when the
headlines were good, and against it when their poll ratings were bad.
We have not seen the kind of consistency that the Commander-in-Chief
has to have in order to be a leader in wartime, and in order to be able
to see the strategy through to victory. If we want to win the war on
terror, it seems to me it's pretty clear, the choice is George Bush,
not John Kerry.
MODERATOR: And 30 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: John Kerry has been absolutely clear and
consistent from the beginning that we must stay focused on the people
who attacked us, that Saddam Hussein was a threat that needed to be
addressed directly, that the weapons inspectors needed to have time to
do their job. Had they had time to do their job, they would have
discovered what we now know, that, in fact, Saddam Hussein had no
weapons, that, in fact, Saddam Hussein has no connection with 9/11,
that, in fact, Saddam Hussein has little or no connection with al
Qaeda.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, new question to you, and you have two
minutes to respond. Part of what you have said, and Senator Kerry has
said, that you're going to do in order to get us out of the problems in
Iraq is to internationalize the effort. Yet, French and German
officials have both said they have no intention, even if John Kerry is
elected of sending any troops into Iraq for any peacekeeping effort.
Does that make your effort, or you plan to internationalize this effort
seem kind of naive?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, let's start with what we know. What we
know is that the President and the Vice President have not done the
work to build the coalition that we need -- so dramatically different
than the first Gulf War. We know that they haven't done it, and we
know they can't do it. They didn't, by the way, just reject the allies
going to lead up to the war; they also rejected them in the effort to
do the reconstruction in Iraq. And that has consequences.
What we believe is, as part of our entire plan for Iraq -- and we
have a plan for Iraq. They have a plan for Iraq, too, more of the
same. We have a plan for success, and that plan includes speeding up
the training of a military. We have less than half of the staff that
we need there to complete that training. Second, make sure that the
reconstruction is sped up in a way that the Iraqis see some tangible
benefit for what's happening.
And by the way, if we need to, we can take Iraqis out of Iraq to
train them. It is not secure enough. It's so dangerous on the ground
that they can't be trained there, we can take them out of Iraq for
purposes of training. We should do whatever has to be done to train
the Iraqis and to speed up that process.
That works in conjunction with making sure the elections take place
on time. Right now the United Nations, which is responsible for the
elections in January, has about 35 people there. Now, that's compared
with a much smaller country, like East Timor, where they had over 200
people on the ground. You need more than 35 people to hold an election
in Cleveland, much less in Iraq. And we -- and they keep saying the
election is on schedule, this is going to happen. The reality is we
need a new President with credibility with the rest of the world, and
who has a real plan for success.
Success breeds contribution, breeds joining the coalition. Not
only that, I want to go back to what the Vice President said. He
attacks us about the troops? They sent 40,000 American troops into
Iraq without the body armor they needed. They sent them without the
armored vehicles they needed. While they were on the ground fighting,
they lobbied the Congress to cut their combat pay. This is the height
of hypocrisy.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 90 seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen, it's hard to know where to
start, there's so many inaccuracies there.
The fact of the matter is the troops wouldn't have what they have
today if you guys had had your way. When you talk about
internationalizing the effort, they don't have a plan, basically --
it's an echo. You made the comment that the Gulf War coalition in '91
was far stronger than this. No, we had 34 countries then, we've got 30
today. We've got troops beside us.
It's hard, after John Kerry referred to our allies as a "coalition
of the coerced and the bribed" to go out and persuade people to send
troops and to participate in this process. You end up with a situation
in which -- talk about demeaning, in effect, you demean the sacrifice
of our allies when you say it's wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, oh,
by the way, send troops. It makes no sense at all. It's totally
inconsistent. There isn't a plan there.
Our most important ally in the war on terror in Iraq, specifically,
is Prime Minister Allawi. He came recently and addressed a joint
session of Congress that I presided over, with the Speaker of the
House, and John Kerry rushed out immediately after his speech was over
with -- where he came and he thanked America for our contributions and
our sacrifice and pledged to hold his election in January -- went out
and demeaned him, criticized him, challenged his credibility. That is
not the way to win friends and allies. You're never going to add to
the coalition with that kind of attitude.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, 30 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Thank you. The Vice President suggests that we
have the same number of countries involved now that we had in the first
Gulf War. The first Gulf War cost the American people $5 billion. And
regardless of what the Vice President says, we're at $200 billion and
counting. Not only that, 90 percent of the coalition casualties, Mr.
Vice President -- the coalition casualties -- are American casualties.
Ninety percent of the cost of this effort are being borne by American
taxpayers. It is the direct result of the failures of this
administration.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Classic example, he won't count the
sacrifice and the contribution of our Iraqi allies. It's their
country, they're in the fight, they're increasingly the ones out there
putting their necks on the line to take back their country from the
terrorists and the old regime elements that are still left. They're
doing a superb job, and for you to demean their sacrifice, that strikes
me as --
SENATOR EDWARDS: Oh, I'm not --
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: -- beyond the pale. It is, indeed. You
suggested that somehow --
SENATOR EDWARDS: No, sir --
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: -- they shouldn't count, because you want
to be able to say that the Americans are taking 90 percent of the
sacrifice. You cannot succeed in this effort if you're not willing to
recognize the enormous contribution the Iraqis are increasingly making
to their own future. We'll win when they take on responsibility for
governance, which they're doing; and when they take on responsibility
for their own security, which they increasingly are doing.
MODERATOR: New question, similar topic, because I want to circle
back to a question which I'm not quite certain we got an answer to, but
I will direct it to you first, Senator Edwards, which is the question
of American intelligence. If the FSC report that we read about today
is true, and if Vice President Cheney ordered it and asked about this,
do you think that in the future that your administration, or the Bush
administration, would have sufficient and accurate enough intelligence
to be able to make decisions about where to go next?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, let me speak first to what the Vice
President just said, and then I'll answer that question.
This, unfortunately, what the Vice President is telling people is
inconsistent with everything they see every, single day. It's a
continuation of where there's a strong connection between al Qaeda and
Saddam Hussein. It's not true. It's a continuation of at least
insinuating that there's some connection between 9/11 and Saddam
Hussein. It's not true. It's saying to the American people, as the
President said last Thursday, an the Vice President continues to say
tonight, that things are going well in Iraq, contrary to what people
who have been there have seen, including Republican leaders, contrary
to what everyone in America sees on their television every day.
Americans are being kidnapped, people are being beheaded, parts of the
country under the control of insurgents, even today under the control
of the insurgents. The Vice President has still made -- not said
anything about what Mr. Bremer said about the failure to have adequate
troops, the failure to be able to secure the country in the
short-term. You know -- remember, shock and awe? Look at where we are
now. And it's a direct result of the failure to plan, the failure to
have others involved in this effort. This is not an accident.
Now, let me go back to your question. If we want to do the things
that need to be done to keep this country safe, we can't be dragged
kicking and screaming to it. One thing that everybody does agree on is
that 9/11 did change things. But what's happened is, this
administration opposed the creation of a 9/11 Commission to find out
why it happened and what we needed to do. They opposed the creation of
a department of homeland security, and then they were for it. We can't
react that way. We must be more aggressive. When John Kerry is
President of the United States, we are committed to immediately
implementing all of the reforms suggested by the 9/11 Commission, so
that we have the information we need to find terrorists and crush them
before they hurt us.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Gwen, the story that appeared today about
this report is one I asked for. I ask an awful lot of questions.
That's part of my job as Vice President. A CIA spokesman was quoted in
that story as saying they'd not yet reached the bottom line and there's
still debate over this question of the relationship between Zarqawi and
Saddam Hussein. The report also points out that at one point some of
Zarqawi's people were arrested, Saddam personally intervened to have
them released, supposedly at the request of Zarqawi.
But let's look at what we know about Mr. Zarqawi. We know he was
running a terrorist camp, training terrorists in Afghanistan prior to
9/11. We know that when we went into Afghanistan that he then migrated
to Baghdad. He set up shop in Baghdad, where he oversaw the poisons
facility up at Kurmal, where the terrorists were developing ricin and
other deadly substances to use. We know he's still in Baghdad today.
He is responsible for most of the major car bombings that have killed
or maimed thousands of people. He's the one you will see on the
evening news beheading hostages. He is, without question, a bad guy.
He is, without question, a terrorist. He was, in fact, in Baghdad
before the war, and he's in Baghdad now after the war. The fact of the
matter is that this is exactly the kind of track record we've seen over
the years. We have to deal with Zarqawi by taking him out, and that's
exactly what we'll do.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, in June of 2000, when you were
still CEO of Halliburton, you said that U.S. businesses should be
allowed to do business with Iran, because, "Unilateral sanctions almost
never work." After four years as Vice President now, and with Iran
having been declared by your administration as part of the "axis of
evil," do you think -- do you still believe that we should lift
sanctions on Iran?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: No, I do not. And, Gwen, at the time, I
was talking specifically about this question of unilateral sanctions.
What happens when we impose unilateral sanctions is, unless there's a
collective effort, then other people move in and take advantage of the
situation and you don't have any impact, except to penalize American
companies.
We've got sanctions on Iran now, we may well want to go to the
U.N. Security Council and ask for even tougher sanctions if they don't
live up to their obligations under the initial -- the International
Atomic Energy Agency, a non-proliferation treaty.
We've dealt with Iran differently than we have Iraq, partly because
Iran has not yet, as Iraq did, violated 12 years of resolutions by the
U.N. Security Council. We're working with the Brits and the Germans
and the French, who have been negotiating with the Iranians. We
recently were actively involved in meeting with the Board of Governors
of the International Atomic Energy Agency. And as I say, there will be
a follow-up meeting in November, to determine whether or not Iran's
living up to their commitments and obligations, and if they aren't, my
guess is then the Board of Governors will recommend sending the whole
matter to the United Nations Security Council for the application of
international sanctions, which I think would be exactly the right way
to go.
We're addressing North Korea on a similar basis, working with the
Chinese, the South Koreans, the Japanese and others to try to bring
them around. One of the great byproducts, for example, of what we did
in Iraq and Afghanistan is that five days after we captured Saddam
Hussein, Moammar Ghadafi, in Libya, came forward and announced that he
was going to surrender all of his nuclear materials to the United
States, which he has done. This was one of the biggest sources of
proliferation in the world today, in terms of the threat that was
represented by that. The suppliers network that provided that, headed
by Mr. A.Q. Khan, has been shut down. We've made major progress in
dealing here with a major issue with respect to nuclear proliferation
and we'll continue to press very hard on the North Koreans and the
Iranians as well.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, the Vice President talks about there being
a member -- or someone associated with al Qaeda in Iraq. There are 60
countries who have members of al Qaeda in them. How many of those
countries are we going to invade? Not only that, he talks about Iran.
The reality about Iran is Iran has moved forward with their nuclear
weapons program on their watch. They ceded responsibility to dealing
with it to the Europeans. Now, the Vice President, as you pointed out,
spoke out loudly for lifting the sanctions on Iraq. John Kerry and I
believe we need to strengthen the sanctions on Iraq, including closing
the loophole that allows companies to use subsidiaries, offshore
subsidiaries, to do business with Iran.
I mentioned Halliburton a few minutes ago in connection with the
$87 billion and you raised it in this question. This is relevant,
because he was pushing for sanctions -- lifting sanctions when he was
CEO of Halliburton. Here's why we didn't think Halliburton should have
a no-bid contract. While he was CEO of Halliburton, they paid millions
of dollars in fines for providing false information on their company,
just like Enron and Ken Lay. They did business with Libya and Iran,
two sworn enemies of the United States. They're now under
investigation for having bribed foreign officials during that period of
time. Not only that, they've gotten a $7.5 billion no-bid contract in
Iraq, and instead of part of their money being withheld, which is the
way it's normally done because they're under investigation, they've
continued to get their money.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I can respond, Gwen, but it's going to take
more than 30 seconds.
MODERATOR: Well, that's all you've got. (Laughter.)
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, the reason they keep mentioning
Halliburton is because they're trying to throw up a smoke screen. They
know the charges are false. They know if you go, for example, to
factcheck.com** ( ** factcheck.org is the correct web address ), an independent website sponsored by the University of
Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details, with respect to
Halliburton.
It's an effort that they've made repeatedly to try to confuse the
voters and to raise questions, but there's no substance to the
charges.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: These are the facts. The facts are, the Vice
President's company that he was CEO of, that did business with sworn
enemies of the United States, paid millions of dollars in fines for
providing false financial information, is under investigation for
bribing foreign officials, the same company that got a $7.5 billion
no-bid contract. The rule is that part of their money is supposed to
be withheld when they're under investigation, as they are now, for
having overcharged the American taxpayer. But they're getting every
dime of their money. I'm happy to let voters make their own decision
about this.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, as we wrap up the foreign policy part
of this, I do want to talk to you about the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. Today, a senior member of Islamic Jihad was killed in Gaza.
There have been suicide bombings, targeted assassinations, mortar
attacks, all of this continuing at a time when the United States seems
absent in the peace-making process. What would your administration
do? First of all, do you agree that the United States is absent, maybe
you don't? But what would your administration do to try to resolve
that conflict?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, first of all, I do agree that we've been
largely absent, not entirely absent, but largely absent from the
peace-making process over the last four years. And let me just -- let
me just say a couple preliminary things, and then I'll talk about where
we are now.
First, the Israeli people not only have the right to defend
themselves, they should defend themselves. They have an obligation to
defend themselves. Now, if I can just, for a moment, tell you a
personal story. I was in Jerusalem a couple years ago -- actually,
three years ago, in August of 2001, staying at the King David Hotel.
We left in the morning, headed to the airport to leave, and later in
the day, I found out that that same day, not far from where we were --
we were staying, the Sbarro Pizzeria was hit by a suicide bomber in
Jerusalem. Fifteen people were killed; six children were killed. What
are the Israeli people supposed to do? How can they continue to watch
Israeli children killed by suicide bombers, killed by terrorists? They
have not only the right, but the obligation to defend themselves.
Now, we know that the Prime Minister has made a decision, an
historic decision, to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza. It's important
for America to participate in helping with that process. Now, if Gaza
is being used as a platform for attacking the Israeli people, that has
to be stopped, and Israel has a right to defend itself. They don't
have a partner for peace right now. They certainly don't have a
partner in Arafat, and they need a legitimate partner for peace.
And I might add, it is very important for America to -- America to
crack down on the Saudis who have not had a public prosecution for
financing terrorism since 9/11, and it's important for America to
confront the situation in Iran, because Iran is an enormous threat to
Israel and the Israeli people.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, 90 seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I want to go back to the last comment, and
then I'll come back to Israel-Palestine. The reason they keep trying
to attack Halliburton is because they want to obscure their own
record. And Senator, frankly, you have a record in the Senate that's
not very distinguished. You've missed 33 out of 36 meetings of the
Judiciary Committee, almost 70 percent of the meetings of the
Intelligence Committee. You've missed a lot of key votes on tax
policy, on energy, on Medicare reform. You're hometown newspaper has
taken to calling you "Senator Gone." You've got one of the worst
attendance records in the United States Senate.
Now, in my capacity as Vice President, I am the President of the
Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when
they're in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked
on the stage tonight.
With respect to Israel and Palestine, Gwen, the suicide bombers, in
part, were generated by Saddam Hussein, who paid $25,000 to the
families of suicide bombers. I personally think one of the reasons
that we don't have as many suicide attacks today in Israel as we have
in the past is because Saddam's no longer in business. We've been
strong supporters of Israel. The President stepped forward and put in
place a policy, basically, that said we will support the establishment
of two states, the first President ever to say we'll establish and
support a Palestinian state next door to Israelis.
But first, there has to be an interlocutor you can trust and deal
with and we won't have that -- we don't have it now under Yasser
Arafat. There has to be reform in the Palestinian system.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, it's your turn to use 30 seconds for a
complicated response.
SENATOR EDWARDS: That was a complete distortion of my record; I
know that will come as a shock.
The Vice President, I'm surprised to hear him talk about records,
when he was one of 435 members of the United States House, he was one
of 10 to vote against Head Start, one of four to vote against banning
plastic weapons that can pass through metal detectors. He voted
against the Department of Education. He voted against funding for
Meals on Wheels for seniors. He voted against a holiday for Martin
Luther King. He voted against a resolution calling for the release of
Nelson Mandela in South Africa. It's amazing to hear him criticize
either my record or John Kerry's.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Oh, I think his record speaks for itself,
and frankly, it's not very distinguished.
MODERATOR: In that case, we'll move on to domestic matters, and
this question, I believe, goes to Senator -- to Vice President Cheney.
The Census Bureau --
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Goes to Senator Edwards.
MODERATOR: It goes to Senator -- it's to you, I just asked him
about Israel, even though we didn't actually talk about it much.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I concede the point. (Laughter.)
SENATOR EDWARDS: No, I did talk about it, Israel. He's the one
who didn't talk about it.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, the Census Bureau ranks Cleveland
as the biggest poor city in the country, 31 percent jobless rate. You
two gentlemen are pretty well off; you did well for yourselves in the
private sector. What can you tell the people of Cleveland, or people
of cities like Cleveland, that your administration will do to better
their lives?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen, there are several things that I
think need to be done, and are being done. We've, of course, been
through a difficult recession and then the aftermath of 9/11 where we
lost over a million jobs after that attack. We think the key is to
address some basic fundamental issues that the President is already
working on. I think probably the most successful thing we can do with
respect to ending poverty is to get people jobs. There is no better
antidote to poverty than a good, well-paying job that allows somebody
to take care of their own family.
To do that, we have to make America the best place in the world to
do business. And that means we've got to deal effectively with tax
policy; we've got to reduce the litigation costs that are built into
our society; we've got to provide adequate medical care and make
certain that we can, in fact, create the opportunities that are vital
to that process.
I zero in, in particular, on education. I think the most important
thing we can do is have a first-class public school system. I'm a
product of public schools, and the President -- his first legislative
priority was the No Child Left Behind Act, was the first piece of
legislation we introduced. We got it passed that first summer on a
bipartisan basis. We even had Ted Kennedy on board for the effort.
And it does several things. It establishes high standards. It, at the
same time, sets up a system of testing with respect to our school
system so we can establish accountability for parents and make certain
that they understand how well their students are doing. And they have
the opportunity to move students out of poorly performing schools to
good schools.
It strikes me that that is absolutely the heart of what needs to be
done from the standpoint of education. It's also important, as we go
forward in the next term, we want to be able to take what we've done
for elementary education and move it into the secondary education.
It's working. We've seen reports now of a reduction in the achievement
gap between the majority students and minority students. We're making
significant progress.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, you have 90 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Your question was about jobs?
MODERATOR: It was about jobs and it was about poverty.
SENATOR EDWARDS: I thought it was about jobs and poverty. I hope
we get a chance to talk about education, but that's what the Vice
President talked about. Here's what's happened: In the time that they
have been in office, in the last four years, 1.6 million private sector
jobs have been lost; 2.7 million manufacturing jobs have been lost.
And it's had real consequences in places like Cleveland. Cleveland is
a wonderful, distinguished city that's done a lot of great things, but
it has the highest poverty rate in the country. One out of almost two
children in Cleveland are now living in poverty.
During the time that the Vice President and the President has been
in office, 4 million more Americans have fallen into poverty. And one
of the most striking and startling things, is they are the first
presidency in 70 years -- and I'm talking Democrats, Republicans,
Presidents who led us through world war, through the Korean War, the
Vietnam War, Cold War, every one of them created jobs until this
President. We have to do better. We have a plan. We're going to get
rid of tax -- by the way, they're for outsourcing jobs. I want to make
sure people hear that. It's a fundamental difference with us. The
administration says over and over that the outsourcing of millions of
American jobs is good. We're against it. We want to get rid of tax
cuts for companies sending jobs overseas. We want to balance this
budget, get back to fiscal responsibility, and we want to invest in the
creative, innovative jobs of the future.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Gwen, we've got 111 million American
taxpayers that have benefited from our income tax cuts. We've got 33
million students who benefited from No Child Left Behind. We've got 40
million seniors who benefited from the reform of the Medicare system.
The Democrats promised prescription drug benefits. For years they've
run on that platform. They never got it done. The President got it
done. We also dropped 5 million people totally off the federal income
tax rolls, so they no longer have to pay any federal income tax at
all.
So the story, I think, is a good one. And the data he's using is
old data. That's from 2003. It doesn't include any of the gains that
we've made in the last year, as we've added 1.7 million jobs to the
economy.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: The Vice President and President alike talk about
their experience on the campaign trail. Millions of people have lost
their jobs. Millions have fallen into poverty. Family incomes are
down, where the cost of everything is going up. Medical costs up the
highest they've ever been over the last four years. We have this mess
in Iraq. Mr. Vice President, I don't think the country can take four
more years of this kind of experience.
MODERATOR: This next question goes to you, Senator Edwards.
Senator Kerry said in a recent interview that he absolutely will not
raise taxes on anyone under -- who earns under $200,000 a year. How
can he guarantee that and also cut the deficit in half, as he's
promised?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Because we will do what they've not done. If you
look at over the last four years, we have gone from a $5 trillion
projected surplus, when George Bush took office, to a $3 trillion
projected deficit. They promised they were going to put $2 trillion of
the surplus aside from Social Security -- not done. Not only that,
it's the biggest fiscal turnaround in American history. And there's no
end in sight. The Washington Post just reported they have several
trillion dollars of additional tax cuts in spending -- no suggestion of
what they're going to do about it. John Kerry and I believe we have a
moral responsibility not to leave trillions of dollars of debt to our
children and our grandchildren.
So here's what we're going to do, to answer your question. To pay
for the things that we believe need to be done -- and I hope to get the
chance to talk about health care and also about education, because we
have plans on both those subjects -- what we're going to do is roll
back tax cuts -- and I want everyone to hear this, because there have
been exaggerations made on the campaign trail -- roll back tax cuts for
people who make over $200,000 a year. We will do that. We want to
keep the tax cuts that are in place for people who make less than
$200,000, and give additional tax cuts to those middle class families
-- tax cuts for health care, tax cuts to help families pay for their
college tuition, tax cuts for child care. These families are
struggling and hurting and they need more tax relief, not less tax
relief.
But to help get us back on the path to a balanced budget, we also
want to get rid of some of the bureaucratic spending in Washington.
One of the amazing things that's happened is they've actually layered
on more supervisory people, people at the supervisory level, in this
government.
We also want to close some corporate loopholes. Now, I want to be
honest with people. We can't eliminate this deficit. People have
heard that over and over and over in four years. We cannot do it. We
are in too deep of a hole. But we can cut the deficit in half, and we
can move this country back on a path to fiscal responsibility.
MODERATOR: You have 90 seconds, Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Gwen, the Kerry record on taxes is one
basically of voting for a large number of tax increases, 98 times in
the United States Senate. There's a fundamental philosophical
difference here between the President and myself, who believe that we
ought to let the American people keep more of what they earn, and we
ought to empower them to have more control over their own lives. I
think the Kerry-Edwards approach basically is to raise taxes and to
give government more control over the lives of individual citizens. We
think that's the wrong way to go. There's a fundamental difference of
opinion here.
They talk about the top bracket and going after only those people
in the top bracket. Well, the fact of the matter is, a great many of
our small businesses pay taxes under the personal income taxes rather
than the corporate rate, and about 900,000 small businesses will be hit
if you do, in fact, do what they want to do with the top bracket.
That's not smart because seven out of ten new jobs in America are
created by small businesses. You do not want to tax them, bad idea to
increase the burden on those folks.
The Senator himself said, during the course of the primaries, that
the Kerry plan would drive us deeper into deficit. Those were the
Senator's words about his running mate. The fact of the matter is, the
President and I will go forward to make the tax cuts permanent. That's
good policy. That's what we ought to do, but with fiscal restraint,
we'll also drive the deficit down 50 percent in the course of the next
five years.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds, Senator Edwards.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Thank you. We have committed to cutting back
anything in our programs that need to be cut back to get us back on a
path to fiscal responsibility. John Kerry, Mr. Vice President, has
voted, voted or cosponsored, over 600 times, tax cuts for the American
people, over 600 times. And there is a philosophical difference
between us and them. We are for more tax cuts for the middle class
than they're for, have been for the last four years, but we are not for
more tax cuts for multimillionaires. They are. And it is a
fundamental difference in what we think needs to be done in this
country.
MODERATOR: You have 30 seconds, Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Yesterday, the President signed an
extension of the middle-class tax cuts -- the 10-percent bracket, the
marriage penalty relief, and the increase in the child tax credit.
Senators Kerry and Edwards weren't even there to vote for it when it
came to final passage.
MODERATOR: Next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President. I want
to read something you said four years ago at this very setting:
Freedom means freedom for everybody. You said it again recently when
you were asked about legalizing same-sex unions and you used your
family as an experience, your family experience as a context for your
remarks. Can you describe, then, your administration's support for a
constitutional ban on same-sex unions?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Gwen, you're right. Four years ago in this
debate, the subject came up, and I said then, and believe today, that
freedom does mean freedom for everybody. People ought to be free to
choose any arrangement they want. It's really no one else's business.
That's a separate question from the issue of whether not government
should sanction or approve or give some sort of authorization, if you
will, to these relationships. Traditionally, that's been an issue for
the states. States have regulated marriage, if you will. That would
be my preference.
In effect, what's happened is that in recent months, especially in
Massachusetts, but also in California, but in Massachusetts we had the
Massachusetts Supreme Court direct the state of -- the legislature in
Massachusetts to modify their constitution to allow gay marriage. And
the fact is that the President felt that it was important to make it
clear that that's the wrong way to go, as far as he's concerned. Now,
he sets policy for this administration, and I support the President.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, 90 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Yes. Let me say first, on an issue that the Vice
President said in his last answer, before we got to this question,
talking about tax policy, the country needs to know that under what
they have put in place, and want to put in place, they -- millionaires
sitting by their swimming pool, collecting their statement to see how
much money their making, make their money from dividends, pays a lower
tax rate than the men and women who are receiving paychecks for serving
on the ground in Iraq.
Now, they may think that's right. John Kerry and I do not. We
don't just value wealth, which they do. We value work in this
country. And it is a fundamental value difference between them and
us.
Now, as to this question. Let me say first that I think the Vice
President and his wife love their daughter. I think they love her very
much. And you can't have anything but respect for the fact that
they're willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter,
the fact that they embrace her. It's a wonderful thing. And there are
millions of parents like that who love their children, who want their
children to be happy. And I believe that marriage is between a man and
a woman, and so does John Kerry.
I also believe there should be partnership benefits for gay and
lesbian couples in long-term, committed relationships. But we should
not use the Constitution to divide this country. No state for the last
200 years has ever had to recognize another state's marriage. This is
using the Constitution as a political tool, and it's wrong.
MODERATOR: New question, but same subject. As the Vice President
mentioned, John Kerry comes from the state of Massachusetts which has
taken as big a step as any state in the union to legalize gay
marriage. Yet both you and Senator Kerry say you oppose it. Are you
trying to have it both ways?
SENATOR EDWARDS: No, I think we've both said the same thing all
along. We both believe that -- this goes onto the end of what I
just talked about -- we both believe that marriage is between a man and
a woman. But we also believe that gay and lesbians, and gay and
lesbian couples, those who have been in long-term relationships,
deserve to be treated respectfully, they deserve to have benefits --
for example, a gay couple now has a very difficult time, one, visiting
the other when they're in the hospital; or, for example, if, heaven
forbid, one of them were to pass away, they have trouble even arranging
the funeral. Those are not the kind of things that John Kerry and I
believe in and I suspect the Vice President, himself, does not believe
in that.
But we don't -- we do believe that marriage should be between a man
and a woman. And I want to go back, if I can, go back to the question
you just asked, which is this constitutional amendment. I want to make
sure people understand that the President is proposing a constitutional
amendment to ban gay marriage -- that is completely unnecessary. Under
the law of this country for the last 200 years, no state has been
required to recognize another state's marriage. Let me just be simple
about this. My state of North Carolina would not be required to
recognize a marriage from Massachusetts, which you just asked about.
There is absolutely no purpose in the law and in reality for this
amendment. It's nothing but a political tool, and it's being used in
an effort to divide this country on an issue that we should not be
dividing America on.
We ought to be talking about issues like health care and jobs and
what's happening in Iraq, not using an issue that divides this country
in a way that's solely for political purpose. It's wrong.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 90 seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen, let me simply thank the Senator
for the kind words he said about my family and our daughter. I
appreciate that, very much.
MODERATOR: That's it?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: That's it.
MODERATOR: Okay, then we'll move on to the next question. This
one is for you, Mr. Vice President. President Bush has derided John
Kerry for putting a trial lawyer on the ticket. You, yourself, have
said that lawsuits are partly to blame for higher medical costs. Are
you willing to say that John Edwards, sitting here, has been part of
the problem? (Laughter.)
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen --
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President. (Laughter.)
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I -- first of all, I'm not familiar with
his cases. My concern is specifically with what's happened to our
medical care system because of rising malpractice insurance rates,
because we've failed to adequately reform our medical liability
structure.
I was in New Mexico the other day. I met with a group of OB/GYN
docs. And they were deeply concerned because they were fearful that
there would be another increase in malpractice insurance rates as a
result of what they believe are frivolous lawsuits, and that that would
put them out of business.
One doctor indicated that her rates have gone up so much that she's
now to the point where she is screening patients. She won't take
high-risk patients anymore because of the danger that that will
generate a lawsuit, and a lawsuit will put her out of business. This
has had a devastating impact on a lot of communities. My home state of
Wyoming, we've lost the top insurer, malpractice insurance in the
state. The rates for a general practitioner have gone from $40,000 a
year to $100,000 a year for an insurance policy. We think this has a
devastating impact on the quality of health care. As I say, high-risk
patients don't get covered anymore. We've lost one out of 11 OB/GYN
practitioners in the country. We think it can be fixed, needs to be
fixed.
Now, specifically, what we need to do is cap non-economic damages,
and we also think you need to limit the awards that the trial attorneys
take out of all of this. Over 50 percent of the settlements go to
attorneys and for administrative overhead.
We passed medical liability reform through the House of
Representatives. It has been blocked in the Senate. Senator Kerry has
voted 10 times against medical liability reform, and I don't believe
Senator Edwards supports it either -- not the kind that would be
meaningful.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Yes. Well, let me say, first of all, I'm proud
of the work I did on behalf of kids and families against big insurance
companies, big drug companies, and big HMOs. We do have too many
lawsuits, and the reality is there's something that we can do about
it. John Kerry and I have a plan to do something about it. We want to
put more responsibility on the lawyers to require before a case of
malpractice, which the Vice President just spoke about, have the case
reviewed by independent experts who determine the case is serious and
meritorious before it can be filed; hold the lawyers responsible for
that, to certify that, and hold the lawyer financially responsible if
they don't do it; have a three strikes and you're out rule so that a
lawyer who files three of these cases without meeting this requirement
loses their right to file these cases.
That way we keep the cases out of the system that don't belong in
the system. They talk about frivolous cases -- we believe cases that
don't belong in the system should never be in the system. But we don't
believe that we should take away the rights of people like Valerie
Lakey, who is a young girl who I represented, five years old, severely
injured for life on a defective swimming pool drain cover. It turns
out the company knew of 12 other children who had either been killed or
severely injured by the same problem. They hid it. They didn't tell
anybody. They could fixed it with a two-cent screw. That's wrong.
John Kerry and I are always going to stand with the Valerie Lakeys of
the world, and not with the insurance companies.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, new question to you, same topic. Do
you feel personally attacked when Vice President Cheney talks about
liability reform and tort reform, and the President talks about having
a trial lawyer on the ticket?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Am I personally attacked? (Laughter.) I think
-- I think the truth is that what they're doing is talking about an
issue that really doesn't have a great deal with what's happening with
medical costs in this country, which I think is a very serious issue.
And I will be the first to say what the Vice President described a few
minutes ago -- problems with malpractice claims -- that's true, it's
real, it's very real. I mean, what doctors talk about is very serious
and they're getting squeezed from both sides, because they have trouble
getting reimbursed, first of all, for the care that they provide --from
the government or from health care provider -- I mean health care
companies. And on the flip side, their malpractice costs are going
up. That's very real, which is why we have proposed a plan to keep
cases out of the system that don't belong there.
But it's very important to put this in context. Because in
context, everything they're proposing -- according to the bipartisan
Congressional Budget Office -- amounts to about half of one percent of
health care costs in this country -- half of one percent.
We have double digit inflation in health care costs. We've seen
the largest rise in medical costs in the last four years in the
country's history: $3,500 nationally. And nobody who's watching this
debate needs me to explain this to them, they know it. Medicare
premium is up 17 percent on their watch. Again, largest increase in
Medicare premiums in the history of Medicare. We think -- we have a
plan to keep cases that don't belong in the system out. But we also do
what they haven't done. Five million Americans have lost their health
care coverage; medical costs skyrocketing. We have a serious health
care plan to bring down costs for everybody, to cover millions more
Americans, and to actually stand up to drug companies and insurance
companies, which this administration has been unwilling to do.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Yes, Gwen, we think lawsuit abuse is a
serious problem in this country; we think we badly need tort reform. I
was in Minnesota the other day, where I visited an aircraft
manufacturing plant. It's a great success story. This is a company
that started 20 years ago with nothing; today, they're the second
leading producer of piston-driven aircraft in the country. He told me
that if it weren't for the increased cost of his liability insurance --
in this case, product liability -- he could hire 200 more people in his
factory.
We've built into the system enormous costs as a result of our
practice with respect to litigation. We have to find ways to get a
handle on it.
You mentioned Medicare up 17 percent, somehow that that was
something we caused. No. The 17 percent increase in Medicare premiums
was the direct result of the statute adopted in 1997. John Kerry voted
for it. It establishes a formula for Part B of Medicare that says, in
effect, it has to cover 25 percent of the cost of the program. And the
reason the money had to go in to the trust fund was to make certain
that we could cover those eligible for benefits.
While you were in private practice in law, and as a senator, you
had a advantage of a special tax loophole, subchapter-S corporation,
which you set up so you could avoid paying $600,000 in Medicare taxes
that would have gone into the fund. And it's those kinds of loopholes
that necessitate a premium increase under the law that was enacted in
1997, supported by John Kerry.
MODERATOR: You have 30 seconds to respond.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, first of all, I've paid all the taxes that
I owe. When the Vice President was CEO of Halliburton, they took care
of -- took advantage of every off-shore loophole available. They had
multiple offshore companies that were avoiding taxes.
Those are the kind of things we ought to be closed -- that ought to
be closed. They ought to be closed for anybody. They ought to be
closed whether they're personal and they ought to be closed whether
they apply to a corporation. But the reality is, health care costs are
going up every day for the American people, and I hope we're going to
get a chance to talk more about health care.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds, Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: We've done a lot to reduce the costs of
health care. The Medicare and drug benefit that we'll be providing to
seniors beginning in '06 will provide upwards of $1,300 a year to help
them buy prescription drugs. The drugs savings, drug discount card
that's now available saves an estimated 15 to 30 percent off the cost
of prescription drugs for senior citizens.
So we're moving in as many areas as we can to make certain we hold
down or reduce health care costs.
MODERATOR: And we'll talk to you about health care, Mr. Vice
President. You have two minutes. But in particular, I wanted to talk
to you about AIDS, and not about AIDS in China or Africa, but AIDs
right here in this country, where black women between the ages of 25
and 44 are 13 times more likely to die of the disease than their
counterparts. What should the government's role be in helping to end
the growth of this epidemic?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, this is a great tragedy, Gwen, when
you think about the enormous cost here in the United States and around
the world of the AIDS epidemic -- pandemic, really. Millions of lives
lost, millions more infected and facing a very bleak future. In some
parts of the world, we've got the sort of entire sort of productive
generation has been eliminated as a result of AIDS. All that's left
are old folks and kids, nobody to do the basic work that runs an
economy.
The President has been deeply concerned about it. He has moved and
proposed and gotten through the Congress authorization for $15 billion
to help in the international effort, to be targeted in those places
where we need to do everything we can through a combination of
education, as well as providing the kinds of medicines that will help
people control the infection.
Here in the United States, we've made significant progress. I had
not heard those numbers, with respect to African American women. I was
not aware that it was that severe an epidemic there, because we have
made progress in terms of the overall rate of AIDS infection. And I
think, primarily, through a combination of education and public
awareness, as well as the development as a result of research of drugs
that allow people to live longer lives, even though they are infected.
Obviously, we need to do more of that.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, you have 90 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Yes, well, first, with respect to what's
happening in Africa and Russia and other places around the world, the
Vice President spoke about the $15 billion for aid. John Kerry and I
believe that needs to be doubled. And I might add, on the first year
of their commitment, they came up significantly short of what they had
promised.
And I -- we probably won't get a chance to talk about Africa. Let
me just say a couple of things. The AIDS epidemic in Africa, which is
killing millions and millions of people, and is a frightening thing,
not just for the people of Africa, but also for the rest of the world.
That, combined with the genocide that we're now seeing in Sudan, are
two huge, moral issues for the United States of America, which John
Kerry spoke about eloquently last Thursday night.
Here, at home, we need to do much more. And the Vice President
spoke about doing research, making sure we have the drugs available,
making sure that we do everything possible to have prevention. But
it's a bigger question than that. You know, we have 5 million
Americans who have lost their health care coverage in the last four
years -- 45 million Americans without health care coverage. We have
children who don't have health care coverage. If kids, and adults,
don't have access to preventative care, if they're not getting the
health care that they need day after day after day, the possibility of
not only developing AIDS and having a problem -- having a problem, a
life-threatening problem, but the problem of developing other
life-threatening diseases is there every day of their lives.
MODERATOR: Okay, we'll move on. This goes to you, Senator
Edwards, and you have two minutes. Ten men and women have been
nominees of their parties since 1976 to be Vice President. Out of
those 10, you have the least governmental experience of any of them.
What qualifies you to be a heartbeat away?
SENATOR EDWARDS: The American people want in their President and
in their Vice President basically three things. They want to know that
their President and their Vice President will keep them safe. They
want to know that they have good judgment. And they want to know that
you're telling the truth. John Kerry and I will tell the American
people the truth. During the time that I have served in the -- on the
Intelligence Committee in the Senate, traveling to some of the places
we've talked about tonight -- Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Middle East,
Turkey, meeting with leaders of NATO -- I have a very clear idea of
what has to be done to keep this country safe.
The threats we face, terrorism, killing terrorists and stopping
them before they can do damage to us, making sure that we stop the
spread of nuclear weapons, I agree with John Kerry from Thursday night,
is -- the danger of a nuclear weapon getting into the hands of
terrorists is one of the greatest threats that America faces.
But the one thing that we know from this administration is -- and,
first of all, I don't claim to have the long political resume that Vice
President Cheney has. That's just the truth, and the American people
know that and deserve to know it. But what we know from this
administration is that a long resume does not equal good judgment.
Here are the judgments I would make. My first priority would be to
keep this country safe. I would find terrorists were they are, and
stop them, and kill them, before they do harm to us. We would stop the
spread of nuclear weapons. And we would also strengthen this military,
which means providing the equipment and training that they need. We
want to raise the active duty forces by 40,000, double the Special
Forces, so we can find terrorists where they are, and provide the kind
of support for families -- health care, housing -- that they deserve
while their loved ones are serving and protecting us.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 90 seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: You want me to answer a question about his
qualifications?
MODERATOR: That was the question.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I see. Well, I think the important thing
in picking a Vice President probably varies from President to
President. Different Presidents have approached it in different ways.
When George Bush asked me to sign on, it obviously wasn't because he
was worried about carrying Wyoming. We had 70 percent of the vote in
Wyoming, although those three electoral votes turned out to be pretty
important last time around. (Laughter.)
What he said he wanted me to do was to sign on because of my
experience, to be a member of the team, to help him govern. And that's
exactly the way he's used me. And I think from the perspective of the
nation, it's worked in our relationship, in this administration. I
think it's worked, in part, because I've made it clear that I don't
have any further political aspirations myself, and I think that's been
an advantage. I think that allows the President to know that my only
agenda is his agenda. I'm not worried about what some precinct
committeemen in Iowa is thinking of me with respect to the next round
of caucuses in 2008.
It's a very significant responsibility, when you consider that, at
a moment's notice, you may have to take over as President of the United
States and make all those decisions. It's happened several times in
our history, and I think that probably is the most important
consideration in picking a Vice President, somebody who could take
over.
MODERATOR: You have 30 seconds if you'd like to --
SENATOR EDWARDS: Actually, the most important thing I've learned
from this process is what I now know about John Kerry. I knew him
before; I know him better now. He's the one candidate who's led troops
in battle; he was a prosecutor, putting people behind crime -- behind
bars to protect neighborhoods from crime; called for 100,000 cops on
the street; went with John McCain to Vietnam to find out what happened
to our POWs. And the American people saw for themselves on Thursday
night the strength, resolve and backbone that I myself have seen in
John Kerry. He is ready to be Commander-in-Chief.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, you have 30 seconds to respond.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, I clearly believe that George W. Bush
would be a better Commander-in-Chief. He's already done it for four
years, and he's demonstrated, without question, the conviction, the
vision, the determination to win this war against terror. He
understands it's a global conflict that reaches from the United States
all the way around the globe to Jakarta. And those very special
qualities are vital in a Commander-in-Chief and I think the President
has them and I'm not at all convinced his opponent does.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, picking up on that, you both just
sang the praises of the tops of your ticket. Without mentioning them
by name at all, explain to us why you are different from your opponent,
starting with you, Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Why I am different from John Edwards?
Well, in some respects, I think probably there are more similarities
than there are differences in our personal story. I don't talk about
myself very much, but I've heard Senator Edwards, and as I listen to
him, I find some similarities.
I come from relatively modest circumstances. My grandfather never
even went to high school. I'm the first in my family to graduate from
college. I carried a ticket in the International Brotherhood of
Electric Workers for six years. I've been laid-off, been hospitalized
without health insurance. So I have some idea of the problems that
people encounter. So I think the personal stories are, in some
respects, surprisingly similar.
With respect to our -- how we've spent our careers, I, obviously,
made a choice for public service. And I've been at it for a good long
time now, except for those periods when we lost elections. That goes
with the turf, as well, too.
I -- I'm absolutely convinced that that the threat we face now, the
idea of the terrorists in the middle of one of our cities with a
nuclear weapon, is very real, and that we have to use extraordinary
measures to deal with them. I feel very strongly that the significance
of 9/11 cannot be underestimated. It forces us to think in new ways
about strategy, about national security, about how we structure our
forces, and about we use U.S. military power. Some people say we
should wait until we are attacked before we use force. I would argue
we've already been attacked. We lost more people on 9/11 than we lost
at Pearl Harbor. And I'm a very strong advocate of a very aggressive
policy of going after the terrorists and those who support terror.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, you have 90 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Mr. Vice President, we were attacked, but weren't
attacked by Saddam Hussein. And one thing that John Kerry and I would
agree with you about is that it is --
MODERATOR: You just used John Kerry's name.
SENATOR EDWARDS: I'm sorry, I broke the rule. (Laughter.) One
thing that we agree about is -- is the need to be offensive in going
after terrorists. The reality is that the best defense is a good
offense, which means -- and leading -- America returning to its proud
tradition of the last 75 years of once again leading strong coalitions
so we can get at these terrorist cells where they are before they can
do damage to us and to the American people.
John Kerry made clear on Thursday night -- I'm sorry, I broke the
rules. (Laughter.) We made clear -- we made clear on Thursday night
that we will do that, and we will do it aggressively. But there are
things that need to be done to keep this country safe that have not yet
been done. For example, three years after 9/11, we find out this
administration still does not have a unified terrorist watch list.
It's amazing. Three years. What are we waiting for? We still don't
have one list that everyone can work off of to see if terrorists are
entering this country. We're screening passengers going on to
airplanes, but we don't screen the cargo.
There are so many things that could be done to keep this country
safe. You have to be strong, and you have to be aggressive, but we
also have to be smart. And there are things that have not been done
that need to be done to keep the American people safe.
MODERATOR: Would you like to respond, 30 seconds?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: No.
MODERATOR: Okay, we'll move on. This goes to Senator Edwards.
Flip-flopping has become a recurring theme in this campaign, you may
have noticed. Senator Kerry changed his mind about whether to vote to
authorize the President to go to war, President Bush changed his mind
about whether a Homeland Security Department was a good idea or whether
9/11 Commission was a good idea. What's wrong with a little flip-flop
every now and then?
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, first of all, let me say that John Kerry
has -- I can use his name now? (Laughter.)
MODERATOR: Yes, you can.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Okay. John Kerry has been, as have I, been
completely consistent about Iraq. We've made very clear from the
beginning -- and not afterthought, we said it at the time -- that we
had to confront Saddam Hussein and that we had to have a coalition and
a plan to be successful. And the Vice President didn't say much about
it in your earlier question, but Paul Bremer has now made clear that
they didn't have enough troops and they didn't have a plan. And the
American people are seeing the results of that every single day, in
spite of the proud and courageous service of our men and women in
uniform.
Now, flip-flop. Yes, they should know something about flip-flops.
They've seen a lot of them during their administration. They were
first against the 9/11 Commission, then they were for it. They were
for a Department of Homeland Security, and they were against a
Department of Homeland Security, then they were for it. They said they
were going to put $2 trillion of the surplus, when they came into
office, aside to protect Social Security. Then they changed their
minds. They said that they supported the troops, and then, while our
troops were on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, they went to the
Congress and lobbied to have their combat pay cut. They said that they
were going to do something about health care in this country, and
they've done something -- they've made it worse. They said that they
were going to fund their No Child Left Behind -- $27 billion short
today.
Over and over, this administration has said one thing and done
another. This President said, I listened to him the other night at his
2000 debate, saying, I'm for a national patients bill of rights. I
know something about this. John McCain and Senator Kennedy and I wrote
it, got it passed in the Senate. We don't have a patients bill of
rights because of one man today, the President of the United States.
They've gone back and forth.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, 90 seconds.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen, I can think of a lot of words
to describe Senator Kerry's position on Iraq -- "consistent" is not one
of them. I think if you look at their record for voting for sending
the troops, then voting against the resources they needed when they got
there; then saying, I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted
against it; saying in response to a question, knowing everything I know
now, yes, I would have cast exactly the same vote; and then shortly
after that, saying, wrong war, wrong place, wrong time. Consistency
doesn't come to mind, as I consider that record.
The question of troops is an interesting and important one. We
look to our commanders on the ground in Iraq for guidance on what they
think they need. If they need more troops, they'll ask us. But the
key here is not to try to solve the problems in Iraq by putting in more
American troops. The key is to get the Iraqis to take on the
responsibility for their own security. That's exactly what we're
doing. If you put American troops in there in larger numbers and don't
get the Iraqis into the fight, you'll postpone the day when you could,
in fact, bring our boys home. It's vital that we deal with any need
for additional troops by putting Iraqis into the effort.
Forty-nine percent increase in funding for elementary and secondary
education under No Child Left Behind. That's a lot of money, even by
Massachusetts standards.
MODERATOR: You have 30 seconds, if you choose.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Yes, but they didn't fund the mandates that they
put on the schools all over this country. That's the reason 800
teachers -- one of the reasons 800 teachers have been laid off right
here in Cleveland. One-third of our public schools are failing under
this administration. Half of African Americans are dropping out of
high school. Half of Hispanic Americans are dropping out of high
school. John and I have -- and I don't have the time now -- but we
have a clear plan to improve our public schools. It starts with
getting our best teachers into the schools where we need them the most
by creating incentives for them to go there.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Gwen, No Child Left Behind, they were for
it, now they're against it. They voted for it, now they're opposed to
it. We are making significant progress there. We are closing the
achievement gap. The results coming in from a number of studies show,
without question, that on math and science -- math and reading, that in
fact, our minority students our Hispanic and African American students
are doing better and that gap between them and the majority population
is, in fact, closing.
So we are doing exactly the right thing. They're the ones who have
been for the Patriot Act, then against it, for No Child Left Behind and
then against it.
MODERATOR: Mr. Vice President, our final -- I'm sorry, you have 30
seconds, Senator Edwards.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Are you -- yes -- yes, 30 seconds, yes. We are
for accountability, and we are for high standards. John and I voted
for No Child Left Behind because we thought that accountability and
standards were the right thing to do. But they -- did you figure out
you were wrong?
MODERATOR: I did figure out I was wrong. (Laughter.)
SENATOR EDWARDS: Well, in fairness, if you feel like you need to
go to him --
MODERATOR: Well, I do, because we're actually on the final
question. I apologize for giving you an extra 15 seconds. There I go
now, to Vice President Cheney. Whichever one of you is elected in
November -- you mentioned those three electoral votes in Wyoming and
how critical they turned out to be. But what they're a sign of, also,
is that you're going to inherit a very deeply divided electorate
economically, politically, you name it. How will you set out, Mr. Vice
President, in a way that you weren't able to in these past four years,
to bridge that divide?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, I must say, it's one of the
disappointments of the last four years, is that we've not been able to
do what the President did in Texas, for example, when he was able to
reach across the aisle and bring Democrats along on major issues of the
day. We had some success early on. I think the No Child Left Behind,
when we, in fact, had broad bipartisan support, we had a lot of support
for the Patriot Act when we passed that on a bipartisan basis. Now
we're seeing objection to that by the other side.
All I know is to continue to try to work it. It's a
disappointment, in the sense that I remember, from my earlier service,
when things worked much differently, when in fact some of my best
friends in the Congress were people I worked with, like Tom Foley, who
was a Majority Leader, and later Speaker of the House. One of my
strongest allies in Congress when I was Secretary of Defense was Jack
Murtha, a Democrat who was Chairman of the Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee.
We used to be able to do more together on a bipartisan basis than
seems possible these days. I'm not sure exactly why. I think in part
it may be the change in the majority-minority status in the House and
Senate has been difficult for both sides to adjust to. And the Senate,
of course, has been very evenly divided, 50-50 and 51-49, then 49-51
the other way.
We'll keep working at it. I think it's important for us to try. I
believe that it is essential for us to do everything we can to garner
as much support from the other side of the aisle as possible. We've
had support -- we even had -- our keynote address at our convention was
delivered by Zell Miller. So there are some Democrats who agree with
our approach. And, hopefully, in a second term, we'll see an
improvement along those lines.
MODERATOR: Senator Edwards, 90 seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Thank you. The President said that he would
unite this country, that he was a uniter, not a divider. Have you ever
seen America more divided? Have you ever seen Washington more
divided? The reality is, this is not an accident; it's a direct result
of the choices they've made, and their efforts that have created
division in America. We can do better than that in this country.
Now I want to go back to the whole issue of health care, because we
touched it, but I think the American people deserve to know what we do
different. I mean, 5 million people losing their health care, everyone
who is watching this knows health insurance premiums are through the
roof. We need to talk about what we will do that they haven't done.
First, we're going to make the same health care that's available to
members of Congress available to all Americans. We're going to cover
all kids. Not only that, we're going to bring down costs by pooling
the catastrophic costs, so we bring down premiums, and we're going to
give tax breaks directly to families, save them up to $1,000 a year,
and to businesses -- the Vice President talked about that a few minutes
ago -- so that they can provide health care to their employees.
And we're also going to finally do something about the cost of
prescription drugs. They blocked allowing prescription drugs into this
country from Canada, we're going to allow it. They would not allow the
government to use its negotiating power to get discounts for seniors;
we're going to allow it. We're also going to stand up to the drug
companies and do something about these drug company ads on television,
which are out of control.
MODERATOR: You have 30 seconds to respond to that, Mr. Vice
President.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Well, Gwen, it's hard to know where to
start. (Laughter.) The fact of the matter is, the most important and
significant change in health care in the last several years was the
Medicare Reform Bill this year. It's the most sweeping change in 40
years. Medicare used to pay for heart bypass surgery, but didn't pay
for the prescription drugs that might allow you to avoid it. The fact
is that when that came up, Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards voted
against it. It will provide prescription drug benefits to 40 million
senior citizens. It's a very, very significant piece of legislation.
MODERATOR: Thirty seconds.
SENATOR EDWARDS: They had a choice on allowing prescription drugs
into this country from Canada of being with the American people or with
the drug companies. They were with the drug companies. They had
choice on negotiating discounts in the Medicare prescription drug bill
of being with the American people or with the drug companies. They
were with the drug companies. They had a choice on the patients bill
of rights, allowing people to make their own health care decisions and
not having insurance companies make them, to be with the American
people or be with the big insurance companies. They're with the
insurance companies. John Kerry and I will always fight for the
American people.
MODERATOR: As previously agreed, we'll go to closing statements
now, two minutes each; coin toss, Senator Edwards, you begin.
SENATOR EDWARDS: Thank you. Thank you, Gwen. Thank you, Mr. Vice
President, for being here. You know, when I was young and growing up,
I remember coming down the steps into the kitchen, early in the
morning, and I would see the glow of the television. And I'd see my
father sitting at the table -- he wasn't paying bills and he wasn't
doing paperwork from work. What he was doing was learning math on the
television. Now, he didn't have a college education, but he was doing
what he could do to get a better job in the mill where he worked. I
was proud of him; I'm still proud of him.
And I was also hopeful, because I knew that I lived in a country
where I could get a college education. Here's the truth. I have grown
up in the bright light of America. But that light is flickering
today. Now, I know that the Vice President and the President don't see
it, but you do. You see it when your incomes are going down, and the
cost of everything -- college tuition, health care -- is going through
the roof. You see it when you sit at your table each night, and
there's an empty chair, because a loved one is serving in Iraq or
Afghanistan. What they're going to give you is four more years of the
same.
John Kerry and I believe that we can do better. We believe in a
strong middle class in this country. That's why we have a plan to
create jobs, getting rid of tax cuts for companies outsourcing your
jobs, give tax cuts to companies that will keep jobs here in America.
It's why we have a health care plan. It's why we have a plan to keep
you safe, and to fix -- fix this mess in Iraq.
The truth is that every four years, you get to decide, you have the
ability to decide where America is going to go. John Kerry and I are
asking you to give us the power to fight for you, to fight to keep that
-- that dream in America, that I saw as a young man, alive for every
parent sitting at that kitchen table.
MODERATOR: Vice President Cheney.
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Gwen, I want to thank you. It's been a
privilege to serve as your Vice President these last four years and to
work alongside President Bush and put our economy on an upward path.
We've cut taxes, added 1.7 million new jobs in the last year, and we'll
continue to provide opportunities for business and for workers. We
won't be happy until every American who wants to work can find a job.
We believe that all Americans ought to have access to available -- to
medical care, and that they ought to have access to the finest schools
in the world. We'll do everything we can to preserve Social Security
and to make certain that it's there for future generations.
I've worked for four Presidents, and watched two others up close,
and I know that there's no such thing as a routine day in the Oval
Office. We saw on 9/11 that the next -- next decision a President has
to make can affect the lives of all of us. Now we find ourselves in
the midst of a conflict unlike any we've ever known, faced with a
possibility that terrorists could smuggle a deadly biological agent or
nuclear weapon into the middle of one of our own cities. That threat,
and the Presidential leadership needed to deal with it, is placing a
special responsibility on all of you who will decide on November 2nd
who will be our Commander-in-Chief. The only viable option for winning
the war on terror is the one the President's chosen: to use the power
of the United States to aggressively go after the terrorists wherever
we find them, and also to hold to account states that sponsor terror.
Now that we've captured or killed thousands of al Qaeda and taken
down the regimes of Saddam Hussein and the Taliban, it's important that
we stand up democratically elected governments as the only guarantee
that they'll never again revert to terrorism or the production of
deadly weapons.
This is the task of our generation and I know firsthand the
strength the President brings to it. The overall outcome will depend
upon the ability of the American people and the strong leadership of
the President to meet all the challenges that we'll face in the days
and years ahead. I'm confident we can do it.
MODERATOR: And with that, we come to the end of tonight's debate.
On behalf of the commission and the candidates, I'd like to extend a
special thank you to the students and administration here at Case
Western Reserve University.
A reminder, the second Presidential debate takes place this coming
Friday at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. Charles Gibson
of ABC News will serve as moderator of that encounter, where the
candidates will field questions from an audience. Then, on October
13th, from Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona, Bob Schieffer of
CBS News will moderate a debate on domestic issues.
For now, thank you, Vice President Cheney, Senator Edwards. From
Cleveland, Ohio, I'm Gwen Ifill. Thank you and good night.
(Applause.)
END 10:40 P.M. EDT
|