Economy and Health Care  |  Foreign Affairs  |  Education and Social Issues
 

Final Transcript
Copyright Democracy in Action/Eric M. Appleman

COKIE ROBERTS:  Good evening.  We're here tonight in the studios of New Hampshire Public Television.  Joining us are five Republican candidates--and one who is not.  They are Gary Bauer, Senator Orrin Hatch, Steve Forbes, John McCain and Alan Keyes.  Tonight's forum will be divided into the following three categories: first the economy and health care, then foreign affairs, finally social issues and education.  And the candidates have chosen their seating order and each question that begins by a draw--who begins each section by a draw.  So we'll start with the guy who drew the short stick, Gary Bauer, on the economy.  You gentlemen are here in New Hampshire at a time that's not only beautiful physically, but it's quite happy economically.  Eight years ago that was not the case here.  It was in terrible shape, banks were closed, people were losing high tech jobs.  Now things are very good here.  Why would voters want to change? GARY BAUER:  Well, Cokie there are economic cycles obviously, and you know things go up and down.  I think what people need to look at is what we're going to do for the long term.  What are our tax policies going to be and what are we going to do about issues like Social Security--it of course has a big effect on the economy.  Cokie as you know I grew up in a blue collar town where my father's paycheck lasted 'til Thursday but the bills lasted 'til Friday.  And I think the way you grew up sort of forms your economic views.  I've got a flat tax proposal that I think people in New Hampshire are going to like.  It's 16 percent across the board.  It's the lowest rate.  It doesn't allow big corporations to get away with paying zero as Steve Forbes' plan does in some cases.  I've also got a Social Security plan, Cokie, that is based on the idea that Social Security is a good program.  Where I grew up the elderly would have been living in poverty if it weren't for Social Security; I want to preserve it.  And so my plan pays those IOUs to our parents and grandparents, but it also allows younger workers to have a 20 percent tax cut that they can invest anywhere--not just in Wall Street as some would mandate that they do, but I would also let them use it for tutoring lessons or whatever.  I think what Americans are looking at is not what's happened economically in the past eight years; what are we going to do in the next eight or ten years.  My flat tax that's family friendly, my Social Security reform is exactly I think what people are looking for in this state. COKIE ROBERTS:  Senator Hatch, why change? SEN. ORRIN HATCH:  Well I believe that we've got to have a commonsense conservative as president, one with experience, one who's been able to bring together diverse groups of people and get things done.  Frankly if you look at it we've had unprecedented economic expansion over the last number of years; it's been primarily because Reagan cut marginal tax rates from 70 percent down to 28 percent by 1986.  I was one of the handful who convinced him that that should be done.  In addition we of course are in relative peace, but the fact of the matter is we're paying wartime tax rates.  They're too high.  Our IRS is unfriendly.  We ought to get rid of the Internal Revenue Code, and if I had my way I'd get rid of the Internal Revenue Service, and we'd come up with a new system that would be fair, decent and workable for the American people.  On health care, let me just say that I don't think anybody running for president this year has had the experience in health care that I've had.  Just working on the Finance Committee this last week, we've been able to do an awful lot to solve and resolve health care problems.  But to give you an illustration, in 1984 we passed a bill that basically created the modern generic drug industry and of course knocked the cost of drugs down by 50 percent so that senior citizens would not have to give up food in order to have their pharmaceuticals.  That's the kind of thing we should do with commonsense conservatism and I can do that throughout the process. COKIE ROBERTS:  Mr. Forbes? STEVE FORBES:  Thank you very much Cokie.  As a businessman and CEO I know that just because conditions are good today, does not mean they're going to be that way tomorrow, and you have to start planning for the future right now.  And just yesterday in New Hampshire with the Frink family in Manchester, I unveiled one of the most exciting, comprehensive economic policy proposals I think of modern times.  Under my plan, not only will there be substantial tax cuts, but in the next 10 years of this century wages will go up 60 percent.  Also too I have a health care proposal that will put patients in charge of health care, not HMOs and certainly not government bureaucrats.  On education I want to give parents a real choice so their children will have true economic opportunity as well.  Under my proposal--and I'm delighted that others are seeing the virtue in my flat tax proposal--not only will families keep more of what they earn, we'll have simplicity, we will have more investment.  We encourage investment, which is how you create the better paying jobs of tomorrow.  So it all ties together.  Putting caps on government spending, slashing the national debt, allowing wages to go up, lowering taxes--that's the way to get America on the true path of prosperity and not let the train get off the track, which this administration, by not allowing tax cuts, is going to have happen. COKIE ROBERTS:  Senator McCain? SENATOR JOHN McCAIN:  There's a number of reasons why we are experiencing this almost unprecedented prosperity--among them are lack of regulation, free trade, and most importantly we are going through a revolution the likes of which the world has seldom seen.  You could compare it to either the invention of the printing press or the Industrial Revolution.  This information technology period that we're going through is incredible, it's exciting and it's wonderful to be an American and it's wonderful that America leads.  That all is not necessarily permanent.  We have an opportunity now; we're wiring every school and library in America to the Internet.  The kids on the Navajo reservation in [Chemehuevi?] and Window Rock are going to have the same access to information and knowledge as the kids in Phoenix and Paradise Valley.  This is a wonderful opportunity; we must make the most of it.  It requires and education that's worthwhile; it requires good teachers; it requires choice and competition in education, and it also requires the equipment necessary for these young people to have this opportunity.  The bad news is we are experiencing a growing gap between rich and poor in America--those who've taken part in this and those who can't.  Here in New Hampshire the highest percentage in all of New England of high tech workers is here in New Hampshire.  The people and the leaders of New Hampshire should be very proud of that fact, and I intend to make sure that this information technology reaches its fullest capability. COKIE ROBERTS:  Mr. Keyes? ALAN KEYES:  Well I happen to think that the premise of the question is correct.  On the basis of pure economic issues we are not going to persuade the American people to hand the White House from the Democrats to the Republicans.  They never have done so without a good reason, and right now in the economic sphere we don't face a huge crisis; in the international sphere we don't face one.  I think we do face an enormous crisis.  It's a moral crisis.  We have been through the most shameless and humiliating period in our country's history and it has threatened the integrity of our most important institutions.  On those grounds we absolutely need to change the hands that are now upon the White House and give them to folks who will have the kind of integrity that Democrats have not shown during this moral crisis.  But I also believe that based renewed moral self confidence we reclaim control of our money.  Not by piddling tax cuts, not by plans that come from on high claiming that they're going to improve our economy.  We need to get back control of our own money.  And we'll get back control of our own money only when we get rid of the socialist structures that gave that control to government, beginning with the income tax itself.  So I think that the key, the key to making sure we're able to take advantage of the enormous opportunities our technology is handing us is to get back control of our money by abolishing the income tax and returning to the original Constitution of our country, which funded the federal government with tariffs, duties and excise taxes, not a privacy-invading income tax and that's where I think we need to start. COKIE ROBERTS:  Well New Hampshire certainly seems to believe that way up until now; we'll see what today's vote in the Senate in New Hampshire means for that.  You brought up the question of moral issues and we're talking about economics here, but the Conference of Catholic Bishops sent out this week a list of questions for all voters to ask their candidates.  And since I'm a good Catholic girl and I have candidates in front of me, I'll ask at least a few of the bishops' questions as they go through these categories.  And one of them, when it comes to economics, is how will we overcome the scandal of a quarter of our pre-schoolers living in poverty in the richest nation on earth?  Who wants to take it?  Go ahead, and from here on out I expect you all to jump in and answer these questions. GARY BAUER:  Well you know Cokie I think one of the things we need to focus on is exactly why that many of our children are living in poverty.  And quite frankly the reason for that in large measure is the breakdown of the American family.  If you have an incredible number of out-of-wedlock births, which is what we've had now for a long, long time, I think you're going to inevitably condemn those women and children to poverty.  So we can do things: we can have a safety net for the poor; we certainly need to figure out everything we can to help people enter the economic mainstream, but I think the suggestion that government can solve the problem in many cases is due to the personal decisions that people are making in their own lives is to go down the wrong road. ALAN KEYES:  I think it's a little unfair though to ascribe this just to personal decisions.  Government helped to create this problem. GARY BAUER:  Sure. ALAN KEYES:  We had a welfare system that actually destroyed the family structure, drove the father out of the home, took away the incentives for work.  And I think we need consciously to revamp that system so that it will put incentives behind marriage, behind the maintenance of a strong family structure, behind the presence of fathers in the home.  We also need to understand, though, that at the end of the day helping people ought to be the business of the charity sector and the faith sector and the private sector.  And that's why I think it's so critical.  We need to get up off the money.  Government doesn't need to be spending this money.  Give it back to people themselves.  Let them decide what to do with it so they can put it into channels that will actually strengthen their families, strengthen their church and faith institutions to meet the challenge of doing for one another what needs to be done. STEVE FORBES:  Well, absolutely right. And also too that's why--I know we're going to get to it--we do need genuine choice in education.  With these kids, they need the best education possible.  They're hurt the most by the schools that we have today.  So it all ties together.  If the kids don't get an education, they're going to be hurt as they try to climb out of poverty.  That's why too we need to revamp the whole tax code.  We start with the federal income tax, but there's a lot of other tax reform that has to be done as well.  Under my tax proposal a family will pay no federal income tax--say a family of three or four--unless they make over $30-35,000 a year.  I also have a Social Security proposal on the table where those taxes that are taken--if you have a single mother working she's paying a huge tax in Social Security.  I think that money should go, instead of to the grasping hands of Washington, the bulk of that money, Cokie, should go to her own individual retirement account. COKIE ROBERTS:  I'll come to you, both of you Senators.  It's remarkable, the Senators have not spoken.  The families where both parents are working and the family's still poor and the kids are poor.  Is minimum wage, raising the minimum wage the answer; what's the answer there? SEN. ORRIN HATCH:  Raising the minimum wage isn't the answer because what that does is that freezes out the people at the bottom level who are undereducated, undertrained, underskilled.  They don't have an opportunity, and it happens all the time; we lose 300- to 500,000 jobs every time.  But you know what it comes down to.  It comes down to example in many respects.  That's why I've been talking about having a commonsense president who literally will set an example morally, from an integrity standpoint, doing the things that are right in our society, who really exalts family over a lot of these things in the world that are wrecking our families...  COKIE ROBERTS:  Can you eat example, can you eat example, can you take example to the hospital and pay for it? SEN. ORRIN HATCH:  I thing you start with example; somebody who's hardworking, someone who has had to make their own way.  I had to work as a janitor to get through college once, and to be honest with you I think that's--I think we set an example and then we have to provide some means whereby people can get help. COKIE ROBERTS:  Senator McCain? SEN. JOHN McCAIN:  There are 11 million of these children also who are without health care and that's a disgrace in America and we ought to change that and we ought to change it very quickly.  But I also get back to education.  Education in America has become a civil rights issue.  The very wealthy in our society get the best education in the world; the very poor in our society obviously are getting the worst.  The conditions in our schools are still deplorable.  We need choice and competition in education.  We need a national test voucher program in the poorest school districts in America.  We can get the money for that by eliminating the sugar subsidies and the gas and oil subsidies and the ethanol subsidies--which are--ethanol subsidies are $700 million a year which goes to Archer Daniels Midland, and we also need to reward good teachers, we need merit pay for teachers-- COKIE ROBERTS:  We're going to have a whole education section later-- ALAN KEYES:  Before we get off on that, the whole premise of the question has to be questioned though.  One, I think it is a mistake we have been making for thirty, forty years, that plays right into the hands of the socialist mentality that, unfortunately, dominates everybody in our politics.  [Cokie Roberts attempted to reply by mentioning the bishops again.]  Wait, wait.  The Catholic bishops have gone down that left-wing road, Cokie, and don't tell me otherwise because I am a Catholic and I know it.  And I get to criticize them when they are socialist, because socialism is not a requirement of our theology.  As a matter of fact it goes against what the Pope has laid out as the best approach to economics. But the point I want to make is this.  The fundamental question we face is two-fold.  Whether it is education or anything else, we know first of all that throwing money at the problem doesn't solve it, that the key to success in all these areas turns out to be the sort of thing, in fact, that Senator Hatch was pointing to.  If by "example" you mean creating a moral environment in which there is going to be the decency and the discipline necessary for people to work together to pass on elements of their heritage. My parents were poor, Cokie, and other parents in the black community were poor, for the longest time.  That didn't make them depraved, and it didn't mean that they couldn't raise decent children who knew how to work hard and get out of that poverty.  I think we have to be careful not to make money the criterion. COKIE ROBERTS:  We only have a few minutes left in this segment so let's do health care, and you can add what you want to add when you're talking about health care.  I'm sure you will.  And that is that we now do--you brought up the number of people who are not receiving health care--there is now some sense, in the same way that old people do get health care in this country, that maybe children should have the same kind of health care that old people are getting.  Do you think that's right? SEN. ORRIN HATCH:  Well I think children do.  The poor children have health care.  Last year we passed the Hatch Child Health Insurance Program, which is the CHIP program.  Didn't have one governor, except the governor of Vermont support me on it until it passed.  Now every governor today claims its his or her bill.  'Cause that will take care of between 7 and 10 million children who are from the poorest of the poor working families.  And that's what we have to do.  We really have to come up with programs that really do work.  On the other hand, they're not going to be any good unless we help our families to have incentives to be good families. STEVE FORBES:  And also too on health are, we're going down a path today, Cokie, that is putting health care decisions in the hands of HMOs, in the hands of bureaucraies.  We've got to get it back in the hands of patients-- COKIE ROBERTS:  That-- STEVE FORBES: --And there are various ways to do it.  Because we're going to get a system today that is hostile to innovation, that prevents you from choosing the doctor you want and trust, and this is a country that's supposed to be free and that's wrong.  The Washington top down approach won't work.  Giving people control of those resources will. COKIE ROBERTS:  How--this is a frustration of people.  The insurance companies are making their decisions... GARY BAUER: ...It comes up every time I travel around--New Hampshire, Iowa--doesn't matter.  Doesn't matter if the voter is a conservative or a liberal; everybody's worried about it.  Steve that sounded real good, but you've got to go beyond the generalities of this.  Look, let's get very specific.  We just had a big debate in Congress about whether average Americans ought to have the right to sue their HMO if that HMO denies them medical treatment that was appropriate.  And I can't believe that there were some in my party that thought it was a wise move to come out against my 76-year old mother being able to deal with that HMO bureaucrat.  I don't want Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton running health care, but I don't want bureaucrats and HMOs and insurance companies running health care either.  I think we do need to have more choice; we need to have HMOs, we need to have reforms in Medicare, etcetera-- COKIE ROBERTS [others talking as well]:  Let me.  No.  Senator McCain's turn.  SEN. JOHN McCAIN:  Washington is gridlocked by special interests.  Gary, why do you think it is that we couldn't give patients some fundamental rights?  There was a movie a long time ago I saw called "As Good As It Gets."  One of the characters said, "I think I ought to have the right to choose my own doctor."  Everybody in the audience applauded.  The Democrats are in the grip of the trial lawyers who want everybody to sue everybody for anything.  The Republicans are in the grip of the HMOs and the insurance companies and their huge-- SEN. ORRIN HATCH:  I don't agree. SEN. JOHN McCAIN: --six- and seven-figure donations, which have kept us from coming together; which have kept us from coming up with a reasonable bill of rights which most doctors in America agree with and that we could come together.  Instead we are gridlocked and we will not deal with it as long as the special interests rule in Washington over the public interest. ALAN KEYES: I think that it is quite clear that the reason the Democrats favor this is that they want to unleash the trial lawyers on the existing health system in order to destroy it, so that they can step in and tell us that the government has to be the savior. If we can't see that coming, then we are awfully dumb. I think that the premise that we need in our health care system is to make the individuals who are receiving that health care once again into empowered consumers, who will actually be able to police the relationship between price and value instead of turning that chore over to bureaucracies in the government or the insurance companies. And that is why we need voucherization. We need medical savings accounts. We need the things that will once again make those individuals empowered parties, who will be able to determine who their doctors are, whether they are getting the kind of service that they need, but who will be able to enforce that, then, by taking their dollars where they want to take those dollars. COKIE ROBERTS:  All right, you've had the last word on that subject, 'cause now we're moving on to the second category. [end of First Segment transcript] >> Foreign Affairs

Copyright 1999  Eric M. Appleman/Democracy in Action.