[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1992-1993, Book II)]
[October 15, 1992]
[Pages 1821-1844]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Presidential Debate in Richmond, Virginia
October 15, 1992

    Carole Simpson. Good evening, and welcome to the second of three 
Presidential debates between the major candidates for President of the 
United States. The candidates are the Republican nominee, President 
George Bush; the independent, Ross Perot; and Governor Bill Clinton, the 
Democratic nominee.
    My name is Carole Simpson, and I will be the moderator for tonight's 
90-minute debate which is coming to you from the campus of the 
University of Richmond in Richmond, Virginia.
    Now, tonight's program is unlike any other Presidential debate in 
history. We're making history now, and it's pretty exciting. An 
independent polling firm has selected an audience of 209 uncommitted 
voters from this area. The candidates will be asked questions by these 
voters on a topic of their choosing, anything they want to ask about. My 
job as moderator is to, you know, take care of the questioning, ask 
questions myself if I think there needs to be continuity and balance, 
and sometimes I might ask the candidates to respond to what another 
candidate may have said.
    Now, the format has been agreed to by representatives of both the 
Republican and Democratic campaigns, and there is no subject matter that 
is restricted. Anything goes. We can ask anything. After the debate the 
candidates will have an opportunity to make a closing statement.
    So, President Bush, I think you said it earlier, let's get it on.
    President Bush. Let's go.
    Ms. Simpson. And I think the first question is over here.

Foreign Trade and Domestic Jobs

    Q. I'd like to direct my question to Mr. Perot. What will you do as 
President to open foreign markets to fair competition from American 
business and to stop unfair competition here at home from foreign 
countries so that we can bring jobs back to the United States?
    Mr. Perot. That's right at the top of my agenda. We've shipped 
millions of jobs overseas, and we have a strange situation because we 
have a process in Washington where after you've served for a while, you 
cash in, become a foreign lobbyist, make

[[Page 1822]]

$30,000 a month, then take a leave, work on Presidential campaigns, make 
sure you got good contacts, and then go back out.
    Now, if you just want to get down to brass tacks, first thing you 
ought to do is get all these folks that have got these one-way trade 
agreements that we've negotiated over the years and say, ``Fellas, we'll 
take the same deal we gave you.'' They'll gridlock right at that point, 
because, for example, we've got international competitors who simply 
could not unload their cars off the ships if they had to comply, you 
see, if it was a two-way street, just couldn't do it.
    We have got to stop sending jobs overseas. To those of you in the 
audience who are business people, pretty simple: If you're paying $12, 
$13, $14 an hour for factory workers, and you can move your factory 
south of the border, pay $1 an hour for labor, hire young--let's assume 
you've been in business for a long time; you've got a mature work 
force--pay $1 an hour for your labor, have no health care--that's the 
most expensive single element in making a car--have no environmental 
controls, no pollution controls, and no retirement, and you don't care 
about anything but making money, there will be a giant sucking sound 
going south. So if the people send me to Washington, the first thing 
I'll do is study that 2,000-page agreement and make sure it's a two-way 
street.
    I have one last part here. I decided I was dumb and didn't 
understand it, so I called the ``Who's Who'' of the folks that have been 
around it. And I said, ``Why won't everybody go south?'' They say, ``It 
would be disruptive.'' I said, ``For how long?'' I finally got them up 
for 12 to 15 years. And I said, ``Well, how does it stop being 
disruptive?'' And that is, when their jobs come up from $1 an hour to $6 
an hour, and ours go down to $6 an hour, then it's leveled again. But in 
the meantime, you've wrecked the country with these kinds of deals. 
We've got to cut it out.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Perot. I see that the President has 
stood up, so he must have something to say about this.
    President Bush. Well, Carole, the thing that saved us in this global 
economic slowdown has been our exports, and what I'm trying to do is 
increase our exports. If, indeed, all the jobs were going to move south 
because of lower wages, there are lower wages now, and they haven't done 
that. So I have just negotiated with the President of Mexico the North 
American free trade agreement, and the Prime Minister of Canada, I might 
add. I want to have more of these free trade agreements because export 
jobs are increasing far faster than any jobs that may have moved 
overseas. That's a scare tactic, because it's not that many. But any one 
that's here, we want to have more jobs here, and the way to do that is 
to increase our exports.
    Some believe in protection. I don't. I believe in free and fair 
trade. That's the thing that saved us. And so I will keep on, as 
President, trying to get a successful conclusion to the GATT round, the 
big Uruguay round of trade which will really open up markets for our 
agriculture, particularly. I want to continue to work after we get this 
NAFTA agreement ratified this coming year. I want to get one with 
Eastern Europe. I want to get one with Chile. Free and fair trade is the 
answer, not protection.
    As I say, we've had tough economic times, and it's exports that have 
saved us, exports that have built----
    Ms. Simpson. Governor Clinton.
    Governor Clinton. I'd like to answer the question, because I've 
actually been a Governor for 12 years, so I've known a lot of people who 
have lost their jobs because of jobs moving overseas, and I know a lot 
of people whose plants have been strengthened by increasing exports.
    The trick is to expand our export base and to expand trade on terms 
that are fair to us. It is true that our exports to Mexico, for example, 
have gone up, and our trade deficit's gone down. It's also true that 
just today a record-high trade deficit was announced with Japan.
    So what is the answer? Let me just mention three things very 
quickly. Number one, make sure that other countries are as open to our 
markets as our markets are to them. If they're not, have measures on the 
books that don't take forever and a day to implement.
    Number two, change the Tax Code. There are more deductions in the 
Tax Code

[[Page 1823]]

for shutting plants down and moving overseas than there are for 
modernizing plants and equipment here. Our competitors don't do that. 
Emphasize and subsidize modernizing plants and equipment here, not 
moving plants overseas.
    Number three, stop the Federal Government's program that now gives 
low interest loans and job training funds to companies that will 
actually shut down and move to other countries, but we won't do the same 
thing for plants that stay here. So more trade, but on fair terms, and 
favor investment in America.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you. I think we have a question over here.

Federal Deficit

    Q. This is for Governor Clinton. In the real world, that is, outside 
of Washington, DC, compensation and achievement are based on goals 
defined and achieved. My question is about the deficit. Would you define 
in specific dollar goals how much you would reduce the deficit in each 
of the 4 years of a Clinton administration and then enter into a legally 
binding contract with the American people that if you did not achieve 
those goals that you would not seek a second term? Answer yes or no, and 
then comment on your answer, please.
    Governor Clinton. No, and here's why; I'll tell you exactly why, 
because the deficit now has been building up for 12 years. I'll tell you 
exactly what I think can be done. I think we can bring it down by 50 
percent in 4 years and grow the economy.
    Now, I could get rid of it in 4 years in theory on the books now, 
but to do it you'd have to raise taxes too much and cut benefits too 
much to people who need them, and it would even make the economy worse.
    Mr. Perot will tell you, for example, that the expert he hired to 
analyze his plan says that it will bring the deficit down in 5 years, 
but it will make unemployment bad for 4 more years. So my view is, sir, 
you have to increase investment, grow the economy, and reduce the 
deficit by controlling health care costs, prudent reductions in defense, 
cuts in domestic programs, and asking the wealthiest Americans and 
foreign corporations to pay their fair share of taxes, and investing in 
growing this economy.
    I ask everybody to look at my economic ideas. Nine Nobel Prize 
winners and over 500 economists and hundreds of business people, 
including a lot of Republicans, said this is the way you've got to go. 
If you don't grow the economy, you can't get it done. But I can't 
foresee all the things that will happen, and I don't think a President 
should be judged solely on the deficit.
    Let me also say we're having an election today. You'll have a shot 
at me in 4 years, and you can vote me right out if you think I've done a 
lousy job. I would welcome you to do that.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. President?
    President Bush. Well, I've got to--I'm a little confused here 
because I don't see how you can grow the deficit down by raising 
people's taxes. You see, I don't think the American people are taxed too 
little. I think they're taxed too much. I went for one tax increase, and 
when I make a mistake, I admit it, say that wasn't the right thing to 
do. Governor Clinton's program wants to tax more and spend more: $150 
billion in new taxes, spend another $220 billion. I don't believe that's 
the way to do it.
    Here's some things that will help. Give us a balanced budget 
amendment. He always talks about Arkansas having a balanced budget, and 
they do. But he has a balanced budget amendment; have to do it. I'd like 
the Government to have that. I think it would discipline not only the 
Congress, which needs it, but also the executive branch.
    I'd like to have what 43 Governors have, the line-item veto. So if 
the Congress can't cut, we've got a reckless spending Congress, let the 
President have a shot at it by wiping out things that are pork barrel or 
something of that nature.
    I've proposed another one. Some sophisticates think it may be a 
little gimmicky. I think it's good. It's a check-off. It says to you as 
a taxpayer--say, you're going to pay a tax of $1,000 or something; you 
can check 10 percent of that if you want to in one box, and that 10 
percent, $100, or if you're paying $10,000, whatever it is, $1,000, 
check it off, and make the Government, make it lower 
the deficit by that amount. If

[[Page 1824]]

the Congress won't do it, if they can't get together and negotiate how 
to do that, then you'd have a sequester across the board. You'd exempt 
Social Security. I don't want to tax or touch Social Security. I'm the 
President that said, ``Hey, don't mess with Social Security.'' And we 
haven't.
    So I believe we need to control the growth of mandatory spending, 
back to this gentleman's question, that's the main growing thing in the 
budget. The program that the President--two-thirds of the budget, I, as 
President, never get to look at, never get to touch. We've got to 
control that growth to inflation and population increase, but not raise 
taxes on the American people now. I just don't believe that would 
stimulate any kind of growth at all.
    Ms. Simpson. How about you, Mr. Perot?
    Mr. Perot. Well, we're $4 trillion in debt, and we're going into 
debt an additional $1 billion, a little more than $1 billion, every 
working day of the year. Now, the thing I love about it--I'm just a 
businessman. I was down in Texas, taking care of business, tending to my 
family. This situation got so bad that I decided I had better get into 
it. The American people asked me to get into it. But I just find it 
fascinating that while we sit here tonight, we will go into debt an 
additional $50 million in an hour and a half.
    Now, it's not the Republicans' fault, of course, and it's not the 
Democrats' fault. What I'm looking for is who did it? Now, they're the 
two folks involved; so maybe if you put them together, they did it. Now, 
the facts are we have to fix it.
    I'm here tonight for these young people up here in the balcony from 
this college. When I was a young man, when I got out of the Navy, I had 
multiple job offers. Young people with high grades can't get a job. The 
18- to 24-year-old high school graduates 10 years ago were making more 
than they are now. In other words, we were down to--18 percent of them 
were making--the 18- to 24-year-olds were making less than $12,000. Now 
that's up to 40 percent. And what's happening in the meantime? The 
dollar's gone through the floor.
    Now, whose fault is that? Not the Democrats; not the Republicans. 
Somewhere out there there's an extraterrestrial that's doing this to us, 
I guess. [Laughter] And everybody says they take responsibility. 
Somebody, somewhere has to take responsibility for this. Put it to you 
bluntly, the American people: If you want me to be your President, we're 
going to face our problems. We'll deal with the problems. We'll solve 
our problems. We'll pay down our debt. We'll pass on the American dream 
to our children. I will not leave our children a situation that they 
have today.
    When I was a boy, it took two generations to double the standard of 
living. Today it will take 12 generations. Our children will not see the 
American dream because of this debt that somebody, somewhere dropped on 
us.
    Ms. Simpson. You're all wonderful speakers, and I know you have lots 
more to add. But I have talked to this audience, and they have lots of 
questions on other topics. Can we move to another topic, please?
    We have one up here, I think.

Presidential Campaign

    Q. Yes, I'd like to address all the candidates with this question. 
The amount of time the candidates have spent in this campaign trashing 
their opponents' character and their programs is depressingly large. Why 
can't your discussions and proposals reflect the genuine complexity and 
the difficulty of the issues to try to build a consensus around the best 
aspects of all proposals?
    Ms. Simpson. Who wants to take that one? Mr. Perot, you have an 
answer for everything, don't you? Go right ahead, sir. [Laughter]
    Mr. Perot. No, I don't have an answer for everything. As you all 
know, I've been buying 30-minute segments to talk about issues. Tomorrow 
night on NBC from 10:30 to 11, eastern, we're going to talk about how 
you pay the debt down. So we're going to come right down to that one, 
see. We'll be on again Saturday night 8 to 9 o'clock on ABC. [Laughter]
    Ms. Simpson. Okay, okay.
    Mr. Perot. So the point is, finally, I couldn't agree with you more, 
couldn't agree with you more. And I have said again and again and again, 
let's get off mud wrestling. Let's get off personalities, and let's talk 
about jobs, health care, crime, the

[[Page 1825]]

things that concern the American people. I'm spending my money, not PAC 
money, not foreign money, my money to take this message to the people.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Perot. So that seems directed. He would 
say it's you gentlemen that have been doing that. Mr. Clinton, Governor 
Clinton, how do you--President Bush, how would you like to respond?
    President Bush. Well, first place, I believe that character is a 
part of being President. I think you have to look at it. I think that 
has to be a part of candidate for President or being President. In terms 
of programs, I've submitted, what, four different budgets to the United 
States Congress in great detail. They're so heavy they'd give you a 
broken back. Everything in there says what I am for. Now, I've come out 
with a new agenda for America's renewal, a plan that I believe really 
will help stimulate the growth of this economy.
    My record on world affairs is pretty well-known because I've been 
President for 4 years. So I feel I've been talking issues. Nobody likes 
``who shot John,'' but I think the first negative campaign run in this 
election was by Governor Clinton. And I'm not going to sit there and be 
a punching bag. I'm going to stand up and say, ``Hey, listen, here's my 
side of it.'' But character is an important part of the equation.
    The other night, Governor Clinton raised--I don't know if you saw 
the debate the other night, suffered through that. [Laughter] Well, he 
raised a question of my father. It was a good line, well-rehearsed and 
well-delivered. But he raised a question of my father and said, ``Well, 
your father, Prescott Bush, was against McCarthy. You should be ashamed 
of yourself--McCarthyism.''
    I remember something my dad told me. I was 18 years old, going to 
Penn Station to go into the Navy. He said, ``Write your mother,'' which 
I faithfully did. He said, ``Serve your country.'' My father was an 
honor, duty, and country man. And he said, ``Tell the truth.'' And I've 
tried to do that in public life, all through it. That has said something 
about character.
    My argument with Governor Clinton--you can call it mud wrestling, 
but I think it's fair to put it in focus--is I am deeply troubled by 
someone who demonstrates and organizes demonstration in a foreign land 
when his country's at war. Probably a lot of kids here disagree with me, 
but that's what I feel. That's what I feel passionately about. I'm 
thinking of Ross Perot's running mate sitting in the jail; how would he 
feel about it? But maybe that's generational. I don't know.
    But the big argument I have with the Governor on this is this taking 
different positions on different issues, trying to be one thing to one 
person here that's opposing the NAFTA agreement and then for it; what we 
call waffling. And I do think that you can't turn the White House into 
the waffle house. You've got to say what you're for. And you have got 
to----
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. President, I am getting time cues, and with all due 
respect, I'm sorry.
    President Bush. Excuse me, I don't want to--no, go ahead, Carole.
    Ms. Simpson. Governor Clinton.
    President Bush. I get wound up because I feel strongly.
    Ms. Simpson. Yes, you do. [Laughter]
    Governor Clinton. Let me say first of all to you that I believe so 
strongly in the question you asked that I suggested this format tonight. 
I started doing these formats a year ago in New Hampshire, and I found 
that we had huge crowds because all I did was let people ask questions, 
and I tried to give very specific answers. I also had a program starting 
last year.
    I've been disturbed by the tone and the tenor of this campaign. 
Thank goodness the networks have a fact check so I don't have to just go 
blue in the face anymore. Mr. Bush said once again tonight I was going 
to have a $150 billion tax increase. When Mr. Quayle said that, all the 
networks said: that's not true; he's got over $100 billion in tax cuts 
and incentives.
    So I'm not going to take up your time tonight, but let me just say 
this. We'll have a debate in 4 days, and we can talk about this 
character thing again, but the Washington Post ran a long editorial 
today saying they couldn't believe Mr. Bush was making character an 
issue, and they said he was the

[[Page 1826]]

greatest political chameleon, for changing his positions, of all time.
    Now, I don't want to get into that----
    President Bush. Please don't say anything by the Washington Post.
    Governor Clinton. Wait a minute. Let's don't--you don't have to 
believe that. Here's my point. I'm not interested in his character. I 
want to change the character of the Presidency. And I'm interested in 
what we can trust him to do and what you can trust me to do and what you 
can trust Mr. Perot to do for the next 4 years. So I think you're right, 
and I hope the rest of the night belongs to you.
    Ms. Simpson. May I--I talked to this audience before you gentlemen 
came, and I asked them about how they felt about the tenor of the 
campaign. Would you like to let them know what you thought about that, 
when I said, ``Are you pleased with how the campaign's been going?''
    Audience members. No!
    Ms. Simpson. Who wants to say why you don't like the way the 
campaign is going? We have a gentleman back here?

Focusing on Issues

    Q. If I may, and forgive the notes here, but I'm shy on camera. The 
focus of my work as a domestic mediator is meeting the needs of the 
children that I work with by way of their parents, and not the wants of 
their parents. I ask the three of you, how can we as, symbolically, the 
children of the future President, expect the two of you, the three of 
you, to meet our needs, the needs in housing and in crime and you name 
it, as opposed to the wants of your political spin doctors and your 
political parties?
    Ms. Simpson. So your question is----
    Q. Can we focus on the issues and not the personalities and the mud? 
I think there is a need--if we could take a poll here with the folks 
from Gallup, perhaps--I think there is a real need here to focus at this 
point on the needs.
    Ms. Simpson. How do you respond? How do you gentlemen respond to----
    Governor Clinton. I agree with him.
    Ms. Simpson. President Bush?
    President Bush. Let's do it. Let's talk about programs for children.
    Q. Could we cross our hearts, and it sounds silly here, but could we 
make a commitment? You know, we're not under oath at this point, but 
could you make a commitment to the citizens of the United States to meet 
our needs, and we have many, and not yours again? You know, I repeat 
that; that's a real need I think that we all have.
    President Bush. I think it depends on how you define it. I mean, I 
think, in general, let's talk about these issues, let's talk about the 
programs. But in the Presidency, a lot goes into it. Caring goes into 
it; that's not particularly specific. Strength goes into it; that's not 
specific. Standing up against aggression; that's not specific in terms 
of a program. This is what a President has to do.
    So, in principle, though, I'll take your point. I think we ought to 
discuss child care or whatever else it is.
    Ms. Simpson. And you two?
    Governor Clinton. Ross had his hand up.
    Mr. Perot. No hedges, no ifs, ands, and buts, I'll take the pledge, 
because I know the American people want to talk about issues and not 
tabloid journalism. So I'll take the pledge, and we'll stay on the 
issues.
    Now, just for the record, I don't have any spin doctors. I don't 
have any speechwriters. Probably shows. [Laughter] I make those charts 
you see on television even. [Laughter] But you don't have to wonder if 
it's me talking. Hey, what you see is what you get. If you don't like 
it, you've got two other choices, right?
    Governor Clinton. Wait a minute. I want to say just one thing now, 
Ross, in fairness. The ideas I express are mine. I've worked on these 
things for 12 years, and I'm the only person up here who hasn't been 
part of Washington in any way for the last 20 years. So I don't want the 
implication to be that somehow everything we say is just cooked up and 
put in our head by somebody else. I worked 12 years very hard as a 
Governor on the real problems of real people. I'm just as sick as you 
are by having to wake up and figure out how to defend myself every day. 
I never thought I'd ever be involved in anything like this.
    Mr. Perot. May I finish?
    Ms. Simpson. Yes, you may finish.
    Mr. Perot. Very briefly?
    Ms. Simpson. Yes, very briefly.

[[Page 1827]]

    Mr. Perot. I don't have any foreign money in my campaign. I don't 
have any foreign lobbyists on leave in my campaign. I don't have any PAC 
money in my campaign. I've got 5\1/2\ million hard-working people who 
have put me on the ballot, and I belong to them.
    Ms. Simpson. Okay.
    Mr. Perot. And they are interested in what you're interested in. 
I'll take the pledge. I've already taken the pledge on cutting the 
deficit in half. I never got to say that. There's a great young group, 
Lead or Leave, college students, young people who don't want us to spend 
their money. I took the pledge we'd cut it out.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you. We have a question here.

Domestic Infrastructure

    Q. Yes. I would like to get a response from all three gentlemen. And 
the question is, what are your plans to improve the physical 
infrastructure of this Nation, which includes the water system, the 
sewer system, our transportation systems, et cetera? Thank you.
    Ms. Simpson. The cities. Who is going to fix the cities, and how?
    President Bush. I'd be glad to take a shot at it.
    Ms. Simpson. Please.
    President Bush. I'm not sure that--and I can understand if you 
haven't seen this because there's been a lot of hue and cry. We passed 
this year the most farthest looking transportation bill in the history 
of this country since Eisenhower started the interstate highways, $150 
billion for improving the infrastructure. That happened when I was 
President. So I am very proud of the way that came about, and I think 
it's a very, very good beginning.
    Like Mr. Perot, I am concerned about the deficits. And $150 billion 
is a lot of money, but it's awful hard to say we're going to go out and 
spend more money when we're trying to get the deficit down. But I would 
cite that as a major accomplishment.
    We hear all the negatives. When you're President, you expect this. 
Everybody's running against the incumbent. They can do better; everyone 
knows that. But here's something that we can take great pride in because 
it really does get to what you're talking about. Our home initiative, 
our homeownership initiative, HOPE, that passed the Congress is a good 
start for having people own their own homes instead of living in these 
deadly tenements.
    Our enterprise zones that we hear a lot of lip service about in 
Congress would bring jobs into the inner city. There's a good program. I 
need the help of everybody across this country to get it passed in 
substantial way by the Congress.
    When we went out to South Central in Los Angeles--some of you may 
remember the riots there. I went out there. I went to a boys club, and 
every one of them, the boys club leaders, the ministers, all of them 
were saying, pass enterprise zones. We go back to Washington, and very 
difficult to get it through the Congress.
    But there's going to be a new Congress. No one likes gridlock. 
There's going to be a new Congress because the old one, I don't want to 
get this man mad at me, but there was a post office scandal and a bank 
scandal. You're going to have a lot of new Members of Congress. And then 
you can sit down and say, ``Help me do what we should for the cities. 
Help me pass these programs.''
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. President, aren't you threatening to veto the bill, 
the urban aid bill, that included enterprise zones?
    President Bush. Sure, but the problem is you get so many things 
included in a great big bill that you have to look at the overall good. 
That's the problem with our system. If you had a line-item veto, you 
could knock out the pork. You could knock out the tax increases, and you 
could do what the people want, and that is create enterprise zones.
    Ms. Simpson. Governor Clinton, you're chomping at the bit.
    Governor Clinton. That bill pays for these urban enterprise zones by 
asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more, and that's why he 
wants to veto it, just like he vetoed an earlier bill this year. This is 
not mud slinging. This is fact slinging.
    President Bush. There you go.
    Governor Clinton. A bill earlier this year--this is fact--that would 
have given

[[Page 1828]]

investment tax credits and other incentives to reinvest in our cities 
and our country. But it asked the wealthiest Americans to pay a little 
more. Mr. Perot wants to do the same thing. I agree with him. I mean, we 
agree with that.
    Let me tell you specifically what my plan does: My plan would 
dedicate $20 billion a year in each of the next 4 years for investments 
in new transportation, communications, environmental cleanup, and new 
technologies for the 21st century. We would target it especially in 
areas that have been either depressed or which have lost a lot of 
defense-related jobs.
    There are 200,000 people in California, for example, who have lost 
their defense-related jobs. They ought to be engaged in making high-
speed rail. They ought to be engaged in breaking ground in other 
technologies, doing waste recycling, clean water technology, and things 
of that kind. We can create millions of jobs in these new technologies, 
more than we're going to lose in defense if we target it. But we're 
investing a much smaller percentage of our income in the things you just 
asked about than all of our major competitors. Our wealth growth is 
going down as a result of it. It's making the country poorer, which is 
why I answered the gentleman the way I did before.
    We have to both bring down the deficit and get our economy going 
through these kinds of investments in order to get the kind of wealth 
and jobs and incomes we need in America.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, what about your plans for the cities? You 
want to tackle the economy and the deficit first.
    Mr. Perot. First, you've got to have money to pay for these things. 
So you've got to create jobs, and there are all kinds of ways to create 
jobs in the inner city. Now, I am not a politician, but I think I could 
go to Washington in a week and get everybody holding hands and get this 
bill signed, because I talked to the Democratic leaders, and they want 
it. I talked to the Republican leaders, and they want it. But since they 
are bred from childhood to fight with one another rather than get 
results, I would be glad to drop out and spend a little time and see if 
we couldn't build some bridges.
    Now, results is what counts. The President can't order Congress 
around. Congress can't order the President around. That's not bad for a 
guy that's never been there, right? But you have to work together. Now, 
I have talked to the chairmen of the committees that want this; they're 
Democrats. The President wants it. But we can't get it because we sit 
here in gridlock because it's a campaign year. We didn't fund a lot of 
other things this year, like the savings and loan mess. That's another 
story that we're going to pay a big price for right after the election.
    The facts are, though, the facts are the American people are 
hurting. These people are hurting in the inner cities. We're shipping 
the low-paying, quote, ``low-paying'' jobs overseas. What are low-paying 
jobs? Textiles, shoes, things like that that we say are yesterday's 
industries. They're tomorrow's industries in the inner city.
    Let me say in my case, if I'm out of work, I'll cut grass tomorrow 
to take care of my family. I'll be happy to make shoes. I'll be happy to 
make clothing. I'll make sausage. You just give me a job. Put those jobs 
in the inner cities, instead of doing diplomatic deals and shipping them 
to China, where prison labor does the work.

Washington Gridlock

    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, everybody thought you won the first debate 
because you were plain-speaking, and you make it sound, oh, so simple. 
``We'll just do it.'' What makes you think that you're going to be able 
to get the Democrats and Republicans together any better than these 
guys?
    Mr. Perot. If you asked me if I could fly a fighter plane or be an 
astronaut, I can't. I've spent my life creating jobs. It's something I 
know how to do, and very simply in the inner city, they're starved. You 
see, small businesses is the way to jump-start the inner city.
    Ms. Simpson. Are you answering my question? [Laughter]
    Mr. Perot. You want jobs in the inner city? Do you want jobs in the 
inner city? Is that your question?
    Ms. Simpson. No, I want you to tell me how you're going to be able 
to get the Republicans and Democrats in Congress----

[[Page 1829]]

    Mr. Perot. Oh, I'm sorry.
    Ms. Simpson. ----to work together better than these two gentlemen.
    Mr. Perot. I've listened to both sides. If they would talk to one 
another instead of throwing rocks, I think we could get a lot done. And 
among other things, I would say, okay, over here in this Senate 
committee, to the chairman who is anxious to get this bill passed, to 
the President who's anxious, I'd say, ``Rather than just yelling at one 
another, why don't we find out where we're apart; try to get together. 
Get the bill passed, and give the people the benefits, and not play 
party politics right now.''
    I think the press would follow that so closely that probably they 
would get it done. That's the way I would do it. I doubt if they'll give 
me the chance, but I will drop everything and go work on it.
    Ms. Simpson. Okay. I have a question here.

Gun Control and Crime

    Q. My question was originally for Governor Clinton, but I think I 
would welcome a response from all three candidates. As you are aware, 
crime is rampant in our cities. In the Richmond area, and I'm sure it's 
happened elsewhere, 12-year-olds are carrying guns to school. And I'm 
sure when our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, they did not mean 
for the right to bear arms to apply to 12-year-olds. So I'm asking, 
where do you stand on gun control, and what do you plan to do about it?
    Ms. Simpson. Governor Clinton?
    Governor Clinton. I support the right to keep and bear arms. I live 
in a State where over half the adults have hunting or fishing licenses 
or both. But I believe we have to have some way of checking handguns 
before they're sold, to check the criminal history, the mental health 
history, and the age of people who are buying them. Therefore, I support 
the Brady bill, which would impose a national waiting period, unless and 
until a State did what only Virginia has done now, which is to automate 
its records. Once you automate your records, then you don't have to have 
a waiting period, but at least you can check.
    I also think we should have, frankly, restrictions on assault 
weapons, whose only purpose is to kill. We need to give the police a 
fighting chance in our urban areas where the gangs are building up.
    The third thing I would say doesn't bear directly on gun control, 
but it's very important. We need more police on the street. There is a 
crime bill which would put more police on the street, which was killed 
for this session by a filibuster in the Senate, mostly by Republican 
Senators. I think it's a shame it didn't pass. I think it should be made 
the law, but it had the Brady bill in it, the waiting period.
    I also believe that we should offer college scholarships to people 
who will agree to work them off as police officers. I think as we reduce 
our military forces, we should let people earn military retirement by 
coming out and working as police officers.
    Thirty years ago there were three police officers on the street for 
every crime. Today, there are three crimes for every police officer. In 
the communities which have had real success putting police officers near 
schools where kids carry weapons, to get the weapons out of the schools, 
or on the same blocks, you've seen crime go down. In Houston there's 
been a 15-percent drop in the crime rate in the last year because of the 
work the Mayor did there in increasing the police force. So I know it 
can work. I've seen it happen.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you.
    President Bush?
    President Bush. I think you put your finger on a major problem. I 
talk about strengthening the American family. It's very hard to 
strengthen the family if people are scared to walk down to the corner 
store and send their kid down to get a loaf of bread. It's very hard. I 
have been fighting for very strong anticrime legislation: habeas corpus 
reform, so you don't have these endless appeals; so when somebody gets 
sentenced, hey, this is for real. I've been fighting for changes in the 
exclusionary rule, so if an honest cop stops somebody and makes a 
technical mistake, the criminal doesn't go away. I'll probably get into 
a fight in this room with some, but I happen to think that we need 
stronger death penalties for those that kill police officers.
    Virginia's in lead in this, as Governor

[[Page 1830]]

Clinton properly said, on this identification system for firearms. I am 
not for national registration of firearms. Some of the States that have 
the toughest antigun laws have the highest levels of crime. I am for the 
right--as the Governor says, I'm a sportsman, and I don't think you 
ought to eliminate all kinds of weapons.
    But I was not for the bill that he was talking about because it was 
not tough enough on the criminal. I'm very pleased that the Fraternal 
Order of Police in Little Rock, Arkansas, endorsed me, because I think 
they see I'm trying to strengthen the anticrime legislation. We've got 
more money going out for local police than any previous administration.
    So we've got to get it under control. And as one last point I'd 
make: drugs. We have got to win our national strategy against drugs, the 
fight against drugs. We're making some progress, doing a little better 
on interdiction. We're not doing as well amongst the people that get to 
be habitual drug users. The good news is, and I think it's true in 
Richmond, teenage use is down of cocaine substantially, 60 percent in 
the last couple of years. So we're making progress. But until we get 
that one done, we're not going to solve the neighborhood crime problem.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, there are young black males in America dying 
at unprecedented----
    Mr. Perot. I would just make a comment on this.
    Ms. Simpson. Yes, I'm getting----
    Mr. Perot. Oh, you're going to elaborate. Okay, excuse me.
    Ms. Simpson. ----to the fact that homicide is the leading cause of 
death among young black males, 15 to 24 years old. What are you going to 
do to get the guns off the street?
    Mr. Perot. On any program, and this includes crime, you'll find we 
have all kinds of great plans lying around that never get enacted into 
law and implemented. I don't care what it is, competitiveness, health 
care, crime, you name it. The Brady bill, I agree that it's a timid step 
in the right direction, but it won't fix it. So why pass a law that 
won't fix it?
    Now, what it really boils down to is can you live--we have become so 
preoccupied with the rights of the criminal that we have forgotten the 
rights of the innocent. In our country, we have evolved to a point where 
we've put millions of innocent people in jail, because you go to the 
poor neighborhoods and they've put bars on their windows and bars on 
their doors and put themselves in jail to protect the things that they 
acquired legitimately. Now, that's where we are.
    We have got to become more concerned about people who play by the 
rules and get the balance we require. This is going to take, first, 
building a consensus in grassroots America. Right from the bottom up, 
the American people have got to say they want it. And at that point, we 
can pick from a variety of plans and develop new plans. And the way you 
get things done is bury yourselves in the room with one another, put 
together the best program, take it to the American people, use the 
electronic town hall, the kind of thing you're doing here tonight, build 
a consensus, and then do it and then go on to the next one. But don't 
just sit here slow dancing for 4 years doing nothing.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Perot.
    We have a question up here.

Term Limits

    Q. Please state your position on term limits. And if you are in 
favor of them, how will you get them enacted?
    President Bush. Any order? I'll be glad to respond. I strongly 
support term limits for Members of the United States Congress. I believe 
it would return the Government closer to the people, the way that Ross 
Perot is talking about. The President's terms are limited to two, a 
total of 8 years. What's wrong with limiting the terms of Members of 
Congress to 12? Congress has gotten kind of institutionalized. For 38 
years, one party has controlled the House of Representatives. And the 
result? A sorry little post office that can't do anything right and a 
bank that has more overdrafts than all of Chase Bank and Citibank put 
together.
    We've got to do something about it. I

[[Page 1831]]

think you get a certain arrogance, bureaucratic arrogance if people stay 
there too long. So I favor, strongly favor term limits. And how to get 
them passed? Send us some people that will pass the idea, and I think 
you will. I think the American people want it now. Everyplace I go, I 
talk about it, and I think they want it done.
    Actually, you'd have to have some amendments to the Constitution 
because of the way the Constitution reads.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you.
    Governor Clinton?
    Governor Clinton. I know they're popular, but I'm against them. I'll 
tell you why. I believe, number one, it would pose a real problem for a 
lot of smaller States in the Congress who would have enough trouble now 
making sure their interests are heard. Number two, I think it would 
increase the influence of unelected staff members in the Congress who 
have too much influence already. I want to cut the size of the 
congressional staffs, but I think you're going to have too much 
influence there with people who were never elected who have lots of 
expertise.
    Number three, if the people really have a mind to change, they can. 
You're going to have 120 to 150 new Members of Congress. Now, let me 
tell you what I favor instead. I favor strict controls on how much you 
can spend running for Congress, strict limits on political action 
committees, requirements that people running for Congress appear in open 
public debates like we're doing now. If you did that, you could take 
away the incumbent's advantage, because challengers like me would have a 
chance to run against incumbents like him for the House races and Senate 
races, and then the voters could make up their own mind without being 
subject to an unfair fight. So that's how I feel about it, and I think 
if we had the right kind of campaign reform, we'd get the changes you 
want.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, would you like to address term limitations?
    Mr. Perot. Yes. Let me do it first on a personal level. If the 
American people send me up to do this job, I intend to be there one 
term. I do not intend to spend one minute of one day thinking about 
reelection. It is a matter of principle. My situation is unique, and I 
understand it. I will take absolutely no compensation. I go as their 
servant.
    Now, I have set as strong an example as I can. And at that point, 
when we sit down over at Capitol Hill--tomorrow night I'm going to be 
talking about Government reform. It is a long subject; you wouldn't let 
me finish tonight. If you want to hear it, you can get it tomorrow 
night. [Laughter] But the point is, you'll hear it tomorrow night. But 
we have got to reform Government.
    If you put term limits in and don't reform Government, you won't get 
the benefit you thought. It takes both. So we need to do the reforms and 
the term limits. And after we reform it, it won't be a lifetime career 
opportunity. Good people will go serve and then go back to their homes, 
and not become foreign lobbyists and cash in at 30,000 bucks a month, 
and then take time off to run some President's campaign.
    They're all nice people. They're just in a bad system. I don't think 
there are any villains, but boy, is the system rotten.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you very much.
    We have a question over here.

Health Care Reform

    Q. I'd like to ask Governor Clinton, do you attribute the rising 
costs of health care to the medical profession itself, or do you think 
the problem lies elsewhere? And what specific proposals do you have to 
tackle this problem?
    Governor Clinton. I've had more people talk to me about their health 
care problems, I guess, than anything else. All across America, people 
who have lost their jobs, lost their businesses, had to give up their 
jobs because of sick children--so let me try to answer you in this way.
    Let's start with the premise. We spend 30 percent more of our income 
than any nation on Earth on health care. And yet, we insure fewer 
people. We have 35 million people without any insurance at all, and I 
see them all the time. One hundred thousand Americans a month have lost 
their health insurance just in the last 4 years.
    So if you analyze where we're out of line with other countries you 
come up with the

[[Page 1832]]

following conclusions: Number one, we spend at least $60 billion a year 
on insurance, administrative costs, bureaucracy, and Government 
regulation that wouldn't be spent in any other nation. So we have to 
have, in my judgment, a drastic simplification of the basic health 
insurance policies of this country, be very comprehensive for everybody. 
Employers would cover their employees. Government would cover the 
unemployed.
    Number two, I think you have to take on specifically the insurance 
companies and require them to make some significant change in the way 
they rate people in the big community pools. I think you have to tell 
the pharmaceutical companies they can't keep raising drug prices at 3 
times the rate of inflation. I think you have to take on medical fraud. 
I think you have to help doctors stop practicing defensive medicine. 
I've recommended that our doctors be given a set of national practice 
guidelines and that if they follow those guidelines, that raises the 
presumption that they didn't do anything wrong. I think you have to have 
a system of primary preventive clinics in our inner cities and our rural 
areas so people can have access to health care.
    But the key is to control the costs and maintain the quality. To do 
that, you need a system of managed competition where all of us are 
covered in big groups, and we can choose our doctors and our hospitals 
from a wide range, but there is an incentive to control costs. And I 
think there has to be--I think Mr. Perot and I agree on this--there has 
to be a national commission of health care providers and health care 
consumers that set ceilings to keep health costs in line with inflation 
plus population growth.
    Now, let me say, some people say we can't do this, but Hawaii does 
it. They cover 98 percent of their people, and their insurance premiums 
are much cheaper than the rest of America. So does Rochester, New York. 
They now have a plan to cover everybody, and their premiums are two-
thirds the rest of the country. This is very important. It's a big human 
problem and a devastating economic problem for America. I'm going to 
send a plan to do this within the first 100 days of my Presidency. It's 
terribly important.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you. Sorry to cut you short, but, President Bush, 
health care reform.
    President Bush. I just have to say something. I don't want to 
stampede--Ross was very articulate. Across the country, I don't want 
anybody to stampede to cut the President's salary off altogether. 
Barbara is sitting over here, and I--[laughter]--but what I have 
proposed, 10 percent cut, downsize the Government, and we can get that 
done.
    She asked the question, I think, is whether the health care 
profession was to blame. No. One thing to blame is these malpractice 
lawsuits. They are breaking the system. It costs $20 to $25 billion a 
year, and I want to see those outrageous claims capped. Doctors don't 
dare to deliver babies sometimes because they're afraid that somebody's 
going to sue them. People don't dare, medical practitioners, to help 
somebody along the highway that are hurt because they're afraid that 
some lawyer's going to come along and get a big lawsuit.
    So you can't blame the practitioners or the health--and my program 
is this: Keep the Government as far out of it as possible, make 
insurance available to the poorest of the poor through vouchers, next 
range in the income bracket through tax credits, and get on about the 
business of pooling insurance. A great, big company can buy--Ross has 
got a good size company, been very successful. He can buy insurance 
cheaper than mom-and-pop stores on the corner. But if those mom-and-pop 
stores all get together and pool, they, too, can bring the cost of 
insurance down.
    So I want to keep the quality of health care. That means keep 
Government out of it. I don't like this idea of these boards. It all 
sounds to me like you're going to have some Government setting price. I 
want competition, and I want to pool the insurance and take care of it 
that way.
    Here's the other point. I think medical care should go with the 
person. If you leave a business, I think your insurance should go with 
you to some other business. You shouldn't be worrying if you get a new 
job as to whether that's going to--and part of our plan is to make it 
what they call portable, big word, but that means if you're

[[Page 1833]]

working for the Jones Company and you go to the Smith Company, your 
insurance goes with you. I think it's a good program. I'm really excited 
about getting it done, too.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot?
    Mr. Perot. We have the most expensive health care system in the 
world. Twelve percent of our gross national product goes to health care. 
Our industrial competitors, who are beating us in competition, spend 
less and have better health care. Japan spends a little over 6 percent 
of its gross national product; Germany spends 8 percent.
    It's fascinating. You bought a front-row box seat, and you're not 
happy with your health care. You're saying tonight we've got bad health 
care but very expensive health care. Folks, here's why. Go home and look 
in the mirror. You own this country, but you have no voice in it the way 
it's organized now. If you want to have a high-risk experience 
comparable to bungee jumping--[laughter]--go into Congress sometime when 
they're working on this kind of legislation, when the lobbyists are 
running up and down the halls. Wear your safety-toe shoes when you go. 
[Laughter] And as a private citizen, believe me, you are looked on as a 
major nuisance. The facts are, you now have a Government that comes at 
you. You're supposed to have a Government that comes from you.
    Now, there are all kinds of good ideas, brilliant ideas, terrific 
ideas on health care. None of them ever get implemented because--let me 
give you an example. A Senator runs every 6 years. He's got to raise 
20,000 bucks a week to have enough money to run. Who's he going to 
listen to, us or the folks running up and down the aisle with money, the 
lobbyists, the PAC money? He listens to them. Who do they represent? 
Health care industry. Not us.
    Now, you've got to have a Government that comes from you again. 
You've got to reassert your ownership in this country, and you've got to 
completely reform our Government. And at that point, they'll just be 
like apples falling out of a tree. The programs will be good because the 
elected officials will be listening, too. I said the other night I was 
all ears and I would listen to any good idea. I think we ought to do 
plastic surgery on a lot of these guys so that they're all ears, too, 
and listen to you. Then you get what you want, and shouldn't you? You 
paid for it. Why shouldn't you get what you want as opposed to what some 
lobbyist cuts a deal, writes the little piece in the law, and it goes 
through. That's the way the game's played now. Until you change it, 
you're going to be unhappy.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you.
    Governor Clinton, you wanted one brief point.
    Governor Clinton. One brief point. We have elections so people can 
make decisions about this. The point I want to make to you is, a 
bipartisan commission reviewed my plan and the Bush plan and concluded--
there were as many Republicans as Democratic health care experts on it--
they concluded that my plan would cover everybody, and his would leave 
27 million behind by the year 2000, and that my plan in the next 12 
years would save $2.2 trillion in public and private money to reinvest 
in this economy. The average family would save $1,200 a year under the 
plan that I offered, without any erosion in the quality of health care. 
So I ask you to look at that.
    You have to vote for somebody with a plan. That's what you have 
elections for. If people say, ``Well, he got elected to do this,'' and 
then the Congress says, ``Okay, I'm going to do it.'' That's what the 
election was about.
    Ms. Simpson. Brief, Governor Clinton. Thank you.
    We have a question right here.

Personal Impact of the Economy

    Q. Yes, how has the national debt personally affected each of your 
lives? And if it hasn't, how can you honestly find a cure for the 
economic problems of the common people if you have no experience in 
what's ailing them?
    Mr. Perot. May I answer it?
    Ms. Simpson. Well, Mr. Perot, yes, of course.
    Mr. Perot. Who do you want to start with?
    Q. My question is for each of you, so----
    Mr. Perot. Yes, it caused me to disrupt my private life and my 
business to get involved in this activity. That's how much I care

[[Page 1834]]

about it. Believe me, if you knew my family and if you knew the private 
life I have, you would agree in a minute that that's a whole lot more 
fun than getting involved in politics.
    I have lived the American dream. I came from a very modest 
background. Nobody's been luckier than I've been, all the way across the 
spectrum, and the greatest riches of all are my wife and children. It's 
true of any family. But I want all the children, I want these young 
people up here to be able to start with nothing but an idea like I did 
and build a business. But they've got to have a strong basic economy. 
And if you're in debt, it's like having a ball and chain around you.
    I just figure as lucky as I've been, I owe it to them, and I owe it 
to the future generations. And on a very personal basis, I owe it to my 
children and grandchildren.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Perot.
    Mr. President.
    President Bush. Well, I think the national debt affects everybody. 
Obviously, it has a lot to do with interest rates----
    Ms. Simpson. She's saying you personally.
    Q. You, on a personal basis, how has it affected you?
    Ms. Simpson. Has it affected you personally?
    President Bush. Well, I'm sure it has. I love my grandchildren. I 
want to think that----
    Q. How?
    President Bush. I want to think that they're going to be able to 
afford an education. I think that that's an important part of being a 
parent. If the question--maybe I get it wrong. Are you suggesting that 
if somebody has means that the national debt doesn't affect them?
    Q. What I'm saying----
    President Bush. I'm not sure I get it. Help me with the question, 
and I'll try to answer it.
    Q. Well, I've had friends that have been laid off in jobs----
    President Bush. Yes.
    Q. I know people who cannot afford to pay the mortgage on their 
homes, their car payment. I have personal problems with the national 
debt. But how has it affected you? And if you have no experience in it, 
how can you help us if you don't know what we're feeling?
    Ms. Simpson. I think she means more the recession, the economic 
problems today the country faces rather than----
    President Bush. Well, listen, you ought to be in the White House for 
a day and hear what I hear and see what I see and read the mail I read 
and touch the people that I touch from time to time.
    I was in the Lomax AME Church. It's a black church just outside of 
Washington, DC, and I read in the bulletin about teenage pregnancies, 
about the difficulty that families are having to make ends meet. I 
talked to parents. I mean, you've got to care. Everybody cares if people 
aren't doing well. But I don't think it's fair to say you haven't had 
cancer, therefore you don't know what it's like. I don't think it's fair 
to say, whatever it is, if you haven't been hit by it personally. But 
everybody's affected by the debt, because of the tremendous interest 
that goes into paying on that debt, everything's more expensive. 
Everything comes out of your pocket and my pocket. So it's that. But I 
think in terms of the recession, of course, you feel it when you're 
President of the United States. That's why I'm trying to do something 
about it by stimulating the export, investing more, better education 
system.
    Thank you. I'm glad you clarified it.
    Governor Clinton. Tell me how it's affected you again? You know 
people who have lost their jobs and lost their homes?
    Q. Yes.
    Governor Clinton. Well, I've been Governor of a small State for 12 
years. I'll tell you how it's affected me. Every year, Congress and the 
President sign laws that make us do more things; it gives us less money 
to do it with. I see people in my State, middle class people, their 
taxes have gone up from Washington and their services have gone down, 
while the wealthy have gotten tax cuts.
    I have seen what's happened in this last 4 years when, in my State, 
when people lose their jobs there's a good chance I'll know them by 
their names. When a factory closes, I know the people who ran it. When 
the businesses go bankrupt, I know them.

[[Page 1835]]

And I've been out here for 13 months, meeting in meetings just like this 
ever since October with people like you all over America, people that 
have lost their jobs, lost their livelihood, lost their health 
insurance.
    What I want you to understand is, the national debt is not the only 
cause of that. It is because America has not invested in its people. It 
is because we have not grown. It is because we've had 12 years of 
trickle-down economics. We've gone from 1st to 12th in the world in 
wages. We've had 4 years where we've produced no private sector jobs. 
Most people are working harder for less money than they were making 10 
years ago. It is because we are in the grip of a failed economic theory. 
And this decision you're about to make better be about what kind of 
economic theory you want, not just people saying, ``I want to go fix 
it,'' but what are we going to do.
    What I think we have to do is invest in American jobs, in American 
education, control American health care costs, and bring the American 
people together again.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Governor Clinton. We are a little more than 
halfway through this program, and I'm glad that we're getting the 
diversity of questions that we are.
    And I don't want to forget these folks on the wings over here, so 
let's go over here. Do you have a question?

Entitlement Programs

    Q. Yes, I do. My name is Ben Smith. I work in the financial field, 
counseling retirees. And I'm personally concerned about three major 
areas. One is the Social Security Administration or trust fund is 
projected to be insolvent by the year 2036. We've funded the trust fund 
with IOU's in the form of Treasury bonds. The pension guaranty fund 
which backs up our private retirement plans for retirees is projected to 
be bankrupt by the year 2026, not to mention the cutbacks by private 
companies. And Medicare is projected to be bankrupt maybe as soon as 
1997.
    I would like from each of you a specific response as to what you 
intend to do for retirees relative to these issues, not generalities but 
specifics, because I think they're very disturbing issues.
    Ms. Simpson. President Bush, may we start with you?
    President Bush. Well, the Social Security--you're an expert and I 
could, I'm sure, learn from you the details of the pension guaranty fund 
and the Social Security fund. The Social Security system was fixed, 
about 5 years, and I think it's projected out to be sound beyond that. 
So at least we have time to work with it.
    But on all of these things, a sound economy is the only way to get 
it going. Growth in the economy is going to add to the overall 
prosperity and wealth. I can't give you a specific answer on pension 
guaranty fund. All I know is that we have firm Government credit to 
guarantee the pensions, and that is very important.
    But the full faith in credit of the United States, in spite of our 
difficulties, is still pretty good. It's still the most respected 
credit. So I would simply say, as these dates get close you're going to 
have to reorganize and refix as we did with the Social Security fund. I 
think that's the only answer. But the more immediate answer is to do 
what this lady was suggesting we do, and that is to get this deficit 
down and get on without adding to the woes, and then restructure.
    One thing I've called for that has been stymied, and I'll keep on 
working for it, is a whole financial reform legislation. It is 
absolutely essential in terms of bringing our banking system and credit 
system into the new age instead of having it living back in the dark 
ages, and it's a big fight. I don't want to give my friend Ross another 
shot at me here, but I am fighting with the Congress to get this 
through.
    You can't just go up and say, ``I'm going to fix it.'' You've got 
some pretty strong-willed guys up there that argue with you. But that's 
what the election's about; I agree with the Governor. That's what the 
election is about. Sound fiscal policy is the best answer, I think, to 
all the three problems you mentioned.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you.
    Mr. Perot?
    Mr. Perot. Just on a broad issue here. When you're trying to solve a 
problem, you get the best plans. You have a raging

[[Page 1836]]

debate about those plans. Then out of that debate, with leadership, 
comes consensus. And if the plans are huge and complex, like health 
care, I would urge you to implement pilot programs. Like the older 
carpenter says, measure twice, cut once. Let's make sure this thing's as 
good as we all think it is at the end of the meeting.
    Then, finally, our Government passes laws and freezes the plan in 
concrete. Anybody that's ever built a successful business will tell you, 
you optimize, optimize, optimize after you put something into effect. 
The reason Medicare and Medicaid are a mess is we froze them. Everybody 
knows how to fix them. There are people all over the Federal Government 
if they could just touch it with a screwdriver could fix it.
    Now, back over here. See, we've got a $4 trillion debt, and only in 
America would you have $2.8 trillion of it, or 70 percent of it, 
financed 5 years or less. Now, that's another thing for you to think 
about when you go home tonight. You don't finance long-term debt with 
short-term money. Why did our Government do it? To get the interest 
rates down. A one-percent increase in interest rates in that $2.8 
trillion is $28 billion a year.
    Now, when you look at what Germany pays for money and what we don't 
pay for money, you realize there's quite a spread, right? You realize 
this is a temporary thing and there's going to be another sucking sound 
that runs our deficit through the roof.
    You know, and everybody's ducking it so I'm going to say it, that we 
are not letting that surplus stay in the bank. We are not investing that 
surplus like a pension fund. We are spending that surplus to make the 
deficit look smaller to you than it really is. Now, that puts you in 
jail in corporate America if you kept books that way, but in Government 
it's just kind of the way things are. That's because it comes at you, 
not from you.
    Now then, that money needs to be--they don't even pay interest on 
it, they just write a note for the interest.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, can you wrap it up?
    Mr. Perot. Sure. But the point, see, do you want to fix the problem 
or sound-bite it? I understand the importance of time, but see, here's 
how we get to this mess we're in. This is just 1 of 1,000.
    Ms. Simpson. But we've got to be fair.
    Mr. Perot. Now then, to nail it, there's one way out, a growing, 
expanding job base, a growing, expanding job base to generate the funds 
and the tax revenues to pay off the mess and rebuild America. We've got 
to double hit. If we're $4 trillion down, we should have everything 
perfect, but we don't. We've got to pay it off and build money to renew 
it, spend money to renew it, and that's going to take a growing, 
expanding job base. That is priority one in this country. Put everybody 
that's breathing to work. I'd love to be out of workers and have to 
import them, like some of our international competitors.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, I'm sorry, I'm going to----
    Mr. Perot. Sorry.
    Ms. Simpson. And I don't want to sound-bite you, but we are trying 
to be fair to everyone.
    Mr. Perot. No, absolutely. I apologize.
    Ms. Simpson. All right, Governor Clinton.
    Governor Clinton. I think I remember the question. [Laughter] Let me 
say first of all, I want to answer your specific question, but first of 
all, we all agree that there should be a growing economy. What you have 
to decide is who's got the best economic plan. We all have ideas out 
there, and Mr. Bush has a record. I don't want you to read my lips, and 
I sure don't want you to read his. [Laughter] I do hope you will read 
our plans.
    Now, specifically----
    President Bush. [Inaudible]--first rule?
    Governor Clinton. ----one, on Medicare, it is not true that everyone 
knows how to fix it; there are different ideas. The Bush plan, the Perot 
plan, the Clinton--we have different ideas. I am convinced, having 
studied health care for a year, hard, and talking to hundreds and 
hundreds of people all across America, that you cannot control the costs 
of Medicare until you control the cost of private health care and public 
health care with managed competition, ceiling on cost, and radical 
reorganization of the insurance markets. You've got to do that. We've

[[Page 1837]]

got to get those costs down.
    Number two, with regard to Social Security, that program, a lot of 
you may not know this: It produces a $70 billion surplus a year. Social 
Security is in surplus $70 billion. Six increases in the payroll tax--
that means people with incomes of $51,000 a year or less pay a 
disproportionately high share of the Federal tax burden, which is why I 
want some middle class tax relief.
    What do we have to do? By the time the century turns, we have got to 
have our deficit under control, we have to work out of so that surplus 
is building up, so when the baby boomers like me retire, we're okay.
    Number three, on the pension funds, I don't know as much about it, 
but I will say this: What I will do is to bring in the pension experts 
of the country, take a look at it, and strengthen the pension 
requirements further, because it's not just enough to have the 
guarantee. We had a guarantee on the S&L's, right? We had a guarantee, 
and what happened? You picked up a $500 billion bill because of the dumb 
way the Federal Government deregulated it. So I think we are going to 
have to change and strengthen the pension requirements on private 
retirement plans.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you. I think we have a question here on 
international affairs, hopefully.

Foreign Affairs

    Q. We've come to a position where we're in the new world order. And 
I'd like to know what the candidates feel our position is in this new 
world order and what our responsibilities are as a superpower.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. President?
    President Bush. We have come to that position. Since I became 
President, 43, 44 countries have gone democratic. No longer 
totalitarian, no longer living under dictatorship or communist rule. 
This is exciting. This new world order to me means freedom and 
democracy.
    I think we will have a continuing responsibility, as the only 
remaining superpower, to stay involved. If we pull back in some 
isolation and say we don't have to do our share, or more than our share, 
anymore, I believe you're going to just ask for conflagration that we'll 
get involved in in the future. NATO, for example, has kept the peace for 
many, many years. I want to see us keep fully staffed in NATO so we'll 
continue to guarantee the peace in Europe.
    But the exciting thing is the fear of nuclear war is down. You hear 
all the bad stuff that's happened on my watch. I hope people will 
recognize that this is something pretty good for mankind. I hope they'll 
think it's good that democracy and freedom is on the move. And we're 
going to stay engaged, as long as I am President, working to improve 
things.
    You know, it's so easy now to say, hey, cut out foreign aid, we've 
got a problem at home. I think the United States has to still have the 
Statue of Liberty as a symbol of caring for others. We're right this 
very minute, we're sending supplies in to help these little starving 
kids in Somalia. It's the United States that's taken the lead in 
humanitarian aid into Bosnia. We're doing this all around the world.
    And yes, we've got problems at home. I think I've got a good plan to 
help fix those problems at home. But because of our leadership, because 
we didn't listen to the freeze, the nuclear freeze group--do you 
remember: ``Freeze it,'' back in about in the late seventies. ``Freeze, 
don't touch it. We're going to lock it in now, or else we'll have war.'' 
President Reagan said, ``No. Peace through strength.'' It worked. The 
Soviet Union is no more. Now we're working to help them become totally 
democratic through the FREEDOM Support Act that I led on. A great 
Democratic Ambassador, Bob Strauss over there, Jim Baker, all of us got 
this thing passed, through cooperation, Ross. It worked with 
cooperation. And you're for that, I'm sure, helping Russia become 
democratic.
    So the new world order to me means freedom and democracy, keep 
engaged, do not pull back into isolation. We are the United States, and 
we have a responsibility to lead and to guarantee the security. If it 
hadn't been for us, Saddam Hussein would be sitting on top of three-
fifths of the oil supply of the world, and he'd have nuclear weapons. 
Only the United States could do this.
    Excuse me, Carole.

[[Page 1838]]

    Ms. Simpson. Thank you.
    Mr. Perot.
    Mr. Perot. Well, it's cost-effective to help Russia succeed in its 
revolution. It's pennies on the dollar compared to going back to the 
cold war. Russia's still very unstable. They could go back to square one 
and worse. All the nuclear weapons are not dismantled. I'm particularly 
concerned about the intercontinental weapons, the ones that can hit us. 
We've got agreements, but they're still there. With all this instability 
and breaking into Republics and all the Middle Eastern countries going 
over there and shopping for weapons, we've got our work cut out for us. 
So we need to stay right on top of that and constructively help them 
move toward democracy and capitalism.
    We have to have money to do that. We have to have our people at 
work. See, for 45 years, we were preoccupied with the Red Army. I 
suggest now that our number one preoccupation is red ink in our country. 
And we've got to put our people back to work so that we can afford to do 
these things we want to do in Russia.
    We cannot be the policeman for the world any longer. We spend $300 
billion a year defending the world. Germany and Japan spend around $30 
billion apiece. It's neat. If I can get you to defend me and I can spend 
all my money building industry, that's a home run for me. Coming out of 
World War II, it made sense. Now the other superpowers need to do their 
part.
    I'll close on this point: You can't be a superpower unless you're an 
economic superpower. If we're not an economic superpower, we are a used-
to-be, and we will no longer be a force for good throughout the world. 
If nothing else gets you excited about rebuilding our industrial base, 
maybe that will, because job one is to put our people back to work.
    Ms. Simpson. Governor Clinton, the President mentioned Saddam 
Hussein. Your vice president and you have had some words about the 
President and Saddam Hussein. Would you care to comment?
    Governor Clinton. I'd rather answer her question first, and then 
I'll be glad to, because the question you ask is important. The end of 
the cold war brings an incredible opportunity for change, the winds of 
freedom blowing around the world, Russia demilitarizing. It also 
requires us to maintain some continuity, some bipartisan American 
commitment to certain principles.
    I would just say there are three things that I would like to say. 
Number one, we do have to maintain the world's strongest defense. We may 
differ about what the elements of that are. I think the defense needs to 
be with fewer people and permanent armed services, but with greater 
mobility on the land, in the air, and on the sea, with a real dedication 
to continuing development of high-technology weaponry and well-trained 
people. I think we're going to have to work to stop the proliferation of 
weapons of mass destruction. We've got to keep going until all those 
nuclear weapons in Russia are gone and the other Republics.
    Number two, if you don't rebuild the economic strength of this 
country at home, we won't be a superpower. We can't have any more 
instances like what happened when Mr. Bush went to Japan and the 
Japanese Prime Minister said he felt sympathy for our country. We have 
to be the strongest economic power in the world. That's what got me into 
this race, so we could rebuild the American economy.
    Number three, we need to be a force for freedom and democracy. We 
need to use our unique position to support freedom, whether it's in 
Haiti or in China or in any other place, wherever the seeds of freedom 
are sprouting. We can't impose it, but we need to nourish it. That's the 
kind of thing that I would do as President, follow those three 
commitments into the future.
    Ms. Simpson. Okay, we have a question up there.

Education

    Q. We've talked a lot tonight about creating jobs. But we have an 
awful lot of high school graduates who don't know how to read a ruler, 
who cannot fill out an application for a job. How can we create high-
paying jobs with the education system we have? And what would you do to 
change it?
    Ms. Simpson. Who would like to begin? The education President?
    President Bush. I'd be delighted to, because you can't do it the old 
way. You can't

[[Page 1839]]

do it with the school bureaucracy controlling everything. And that's why 
we have a new program that I hope people have heard about. It's being 
worked now in 1,700 communities--I bypassed Congress on this one, Ross--
1,700 communities across the country. It's called America 2000. It 
literally says to the communities: Reinvent the schools, not just the 
bricks and mortar but the curriculum and everything else. Think anew. We 
have a concept called the New American School Corporation, where we're 
doing exactly that.
    So I believe that we've got to get the power in the hands of the 
teachers, not the teachers union--what's happening up there? [Laughter] 
So our America 2000 program also says this: It says let's give parents 
the choice of a public, private, or religious school. And it works. It 
works in Milwaukee. A Democratic woman up there taking the lead in this, 
the Mayor up there on the program, and the schools that are not chosen 
are improved. Competition does that.
    So we've got to innovate through school choice. We've got to 
innovate through this America 2000 program. But she is absolutely right. 
The programs that we've been trying where you control everything and 
mandate it from Washington don't work.
    The Governors--and I believe Governor Clinton was in on this, but I 
don't want to invoke him here--but they come to me, and they say, please 
get the Congress to stop passing so many mandates telling us how to 
control things. We know better how to do it in California or Texas or 
wherever it is. So this is what our program is all about. I believe--
you're right onto something--that if we don't change the education, 
we're not going to be able to compete.
    Federal funding for education is up substantially. Pell Grants are 
up. But it isn't going to get the job done if we don't change K through 
12.
    Ms. Simpson. Governor Clinton?
    Governor Clinton. First of all, let me say that I've spent more of 
my time in life on this in the last 12 years than any other issue. 
Seventy percent of my State's money goes to public schools. I was really 
honored when Time magazine said that our schools have shown more 
improvement than any other State in the country except one other. They 
named two States showing real strides forward in the eighties. So I care 
a lot about this, and I've spent countless hours in schools.
    But let me start with what you've said. I agree with some of what 
Mr. Bush said, but it's nowhere near enough. We live in a world where 
what you earn depends on what you can learn, where the average 18-year-
old will change jobs eight times in a lifetime, and where none of us can 
promise any of you that what you now do for a living is absolutely safe 
from now on. Nobody running can promise that. There's too much change in 
the world.
    So what should we do? Let me reel some things off real quick, 
because you said you wanted specifics. Number one, under my program we 
would provide matching funds to States to teach everybody with a job to 
read in the next 5 years and give everybody with a job a chance to get a 
high school diploma, in big places, on the job.
    Number two, we would provide 2-year apprenticeship programs to high 
school graduates who don't go to college, in community colleges or on 
the job.
    Number three, we'd open the doors to college education to high 
school graduates without regard to income. They could borrow the money 
and pay it back as a percentage of their income over the couple of years 
of service to our Nation here home.
    Number four, we would fully fund the Head Start program to get 
little kids off to a good start.
    Five, I would have an aggressive program of school reform. More 
choices in the--I favor public schools or these new charter schools. We 
can talk about that if you want. I don't think we should spend tax money 
on private schools, but I favor public school choice. I favor radical 
decentralization in giving more power to better trained principals and 
teachers with parent councils to control their schools. Those things 
would revolutionize American education and take us to the top 
economically.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Governor Clinton. What the question is--what 
is it going to cost?
    Q. What is it going to cost?

[[Page 1840]]

    Ms. Simpson. What is it going to cost?
    Governor Clinton. In 6 years--I budget all this in my budget. In 6 
years, the college program would cost $8 billion over and above what--
the present student loan program costs 4. You pay $3 billion for busted 
loans, because we don't have an automatic recovery system, and a billion 
dollars in bank fees. So the net cost will be $8 billion 6 years from 
now, in a trillion-plus budget: not very much.
    The other stuff, all the other stuff I mentioned costs much less 
than that. The Head Start program, full funding, would cost about $5 
billion more. It's all covered in my budget from the plans that I've 
laid out, from raising taxes on families with incomes above $200,000, 
and asking foreign corporations to pay the same tax that American 
corporations do on the same income; from $140 billion in budget cuts, 
including what I think are very prudent cuts in the defense budget. It's 
all covered in the plan.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, you on education, please.
    Mr. Perot. Yes. I've got scars to show from being around education 
reform. The first words you need to say in every city and State and just 
draw a line in the sand--public schools exist for the benefit of the 
children--you're going to see a lot of people fall over it, because any 
time you're spending $199 billion a year, somebody's getting it, and the 
children get lost in the process. So that's step one.
    Keep in mind in 1960 when our schools were the envy of the world, we 
were spending $16 billion on them. Now we spend more than any other 
nation in the world, $199 billion a year, and rank at the bottom of the 
industrialized world in terms of educational achievement. One more time, 
you've bought a front-row box seat and got a third-rate performance. 
This is a Government that's not serving you.
    By and large, it should be local. The more local, the better. 
Interesting phenomenon, small towns have good schools, big cities have 
terrible schools. The best people in a small town will serve on the 
school board. You get into big cities, it's political patronage, 
stepping stones. You get the job, give your relatives the janitor's job 
at $57,000 a year, more than the teachers make. And with luck, they 
clean the cafeteria once a week. [Laughter]
    Now, you're paying for that. Those schools belong to you, and we put 
up with that. As long as you put up with that, that's what you're going 
to get. These folks are just dividing up 199 billion bucks, and the 
children get lost.
    If I could wish for one thing for great public schools, it would be 
a strong family unit in every home. Nothing will ever replace that. You 
say, ``Well, gee, what are you going to do about that?'' Well, the White 
House is a bully pulpit, and I think we ought to be pounding on the 
table every day. There's nothing--the most efficient unit of Government 
we'll ever know is a strong, loving family unit.
    Next thing. You need small schools, not big schools. A little 
school, everybody's somebody. Individualism is very important. These big 
factories, everybody told me they were cost-effective. I did a study on 
it. They're cost-ineffective. Five thousand students: why is a high 
school that big? One reason. Sooner or later, you get 11 more boys that 
can run like the devil, that weigh 250 pounds, and they might win 
district. Now, that has nothing to do with learning.
    Secondly, across Texas, typically half the school day was 
nonacademic pursuits. In one place, it was 35 percent. In Texas, you 
could have unlimited absences to go to livestock shows. Found a boy--
excuse me, but this gives the flavor--a boy in Houston kept a chicken in 
the bathtub in downtown Houston. Missed 65 days going to livestock 
shows. Finally had to come back to school, the chicken lost his 
feathers. That's the only way we got him back. [Laughter] Now, that's 
your tax money being wasted.
    Now, neighborhood schools. It is terrible to bus tiny little 
children across town. It is particularly terrible to take poor, tiny 
little children and wait until the first grade and bus them across town 
to Mars where the children know their numbers, know their letters, have 
had every advantage; the end of the first day, that little child wants 
out.
    I close on this: You've got to have world-class teachers, world-
class books. If you ever got close to how textbooks were selected, you 
wouldn't want to go back the second

[[Page 1841]]

day. I don't have time to tell you the stories. [Laughter]
     Ms. Simpson. No, you don't. [Laughter]
    Mr. Perot. Finally. If we don't fix this, you're right, we can't 
have the industries of tomorrow unless we have the best educated work 
force. And here, for the disadvantaged children, you've got to have 
early childhood development, the cheapest money you'll ever spend. The 
first contact should be with the mother when she's pregnant. That little 
child needs to be loved and hugged and nurtured and made to feel 
special, like you children were. They learn to think well or poorly of 
themselves in the first 18 months.
     Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Perot.
    Mr. Perot. Within the first few years, they either learn how to 
learn or don't learn how to learn. If they don't, they wind up in 
prison, and it costs more to keep them in prison than it does to send 
them to Harvard. I rest my case.
     Ms. Simpson. Thank you. President Bush, you wanted to add 
something.
    President Bush. I just had a word of clarification because of 
something Governor Clinton said. My school choice program, ``GI bill'' 
for kids, does not take public money and give it to private schools. It 
does what the GI bill itself did when I came out of World War II. It 
takes public money and gives it to families or individuals to choose the 
school they want. Where it's been done, those schools, like in 
Rochester, those schools that weren't chosen find that they then compete 
and do better. So I think it's worth a shot.
    We've got a pilot program. It ought to be tried: school choice, 
public, private, or religious, not to the schools, but to--46 percent of 
the teachers in Chicago, public schoolteachers, send their kids to 
private school. Now, I think we ought to try to help families and see if 
it will do what I think, make all schools better.
    Governor Clinton. I just want to mention if I could----
    Ms. Simpson. Very briefly.
    Governor Clinton. Very briefly. Involving the parents in the 
preschool education of their kids, even if they're poor and uneducated, 
can make a huge difference. We have a big program in my State that 
teaches mothers or fathers to teach their kids to get ready for school. 
It's the most successful thing we've ever done.
    Just a fact clarification real quickly. We do not spend a higher 
percentage of our income on public education than every other country. 
There are nine countries that spend more than we do on public education. 
We spend more on education because we spend so much more on colleges. 
But if you look at public education alone, and you take into account 
that we have more racial diversity and more poverty, it makes a big 
difference. There are great public schools where there are public school 
choice, accountability, and brilliant principals. I'll just mention one, 
the Beasley Academic Center in Chicago. I commend it to anybody. It's as 
good as any private school in the country.
    Ms. Simpson. We have very little time left, and it occurs to me that 
we have talked all this time and there has not been one question about 
some of the racial tensions and ethnic tensions in America. Is there 
anyone in this audience that would like to pose a question to the 
candidates on this? Yes?

Women or Minority Presidential Candidates

    Q. What I'd like to know, and this is to any of the three of you, is 
aside from the recent accomplishments of your party, aside from those 
accomplishments in racial representation and without citing any of your 
current appointments or successful elections, when do you estimate your 
party will both nominate and elect an Afro-American and female ticket to 
the Presidency of the United States?
    Ms. Simpson. Governor Clinton, why don't you answer that first.
    Governor Clinton. Well, I don't have any idea, but I hope it will 
happen sometime in my lifetime.
    Q. I do, too.
    Governor Clinton. I believe that this country is electing more and 
more African-Americans and Latinos and Asian-Americans who are 
representing districts that are themselves not necessarily of a majority 
of their race. The American people are beginning to vote across racial 
lines, and I hope it will happen more and more.

[[Page 1842]]

    More and more women are being elected. Look at all these women 
Senate candidates we have here. You know, according to my mother and my 
wife and my daughter, this world would be a lot better place if women 
were running it most of the time.
    I do think there are special experiences and judgments and 
backgrounds and understandings that women bring to this process, by the 
way. This lady said here, how have you been affected by the economy? I 
mean, women know what it's like to be paid an unequal amount for equal 
work; they know what's it like not to have flexible working hours; they 
know what it's like not to have family leave or child care. So I think 
it would be a good thing for America if it happened, and I think it will 
happen in my lifetime.
    Ms. Simpson. Okay. I'm sorry we have just a little bit of time left. 
Let's try to get responses from each of them.
    President Bush or Mr. Perot?
    President Bush. I think if Barbara Bush were running this year she'd 
be elected. [Laughter] But it's too late.
    You don't want us to mention appointees but when you see the quality 
of people in our administration, see how Colin Powell performed--I say 
administration, he's in the military.
    Q. I said when's your guess?
    President Bush. You weren't impressed with the fact that he 
performed----
    Q. Excuse me, I'm extremely impressed with that.
    President Bush. Yes, but wouldn't that suggest to the American 
people then here's a quality person, if he decided that he could 
automatically----
    Q. Sure. I just wanted to know----
    President Bush. ----get the nomination of either party? Huh?
    Q. I'm totally impressed with that. I just wanted to know is when is 
your guess of when.
    President Bush. Oh, I see. You mean time?
    Q. Yeah.
    President Bush. I don't know. Starting after 4 years. [Laughter] No, 
I think you'll see----
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot?
    President Bush. I think you'll see more minority candidates and 
women candidates coming forward.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you.
    President Bush. This is supposed to be the year of the women in the 
Senate. Let's see how they do. I hope a lot of them lose.
    Ms. Simpson. Mr. Perot, I don't want to cut you up any more, but we 
only have a minute left.
    Mr. Perot. I have a fearless forecast. Unless he just won't do it, 
Colin Powell will be on somebody's ticket 4 years from now. Right? 
Right? You wanted--that's it. Four years.
    Ms. Simpson. How about a woman?
    Mr. Perot. Now, if he won't be, General Waller would be a--you say, 
why do you keep picking military people? These are people that I just 
happened to know and have a high regard for. I'm sure there are hundreds 
of others.
    President Bush. How about Dr. Lou Sullivan?
    Mr. Perot. Absolutely.
    President Bush. Yeah, good man.
    Mr. Perot. Absolutely.
    Ms. Simpson. What about a woman?
    Mr. Perot. Oh, oh.
    President Bush. My candidate's right back there.
    Mr. Perot. I can think of many.
    Ms. Simpson. Many?
    Mr. Perot. Absolutely.
    Ms. Simpson. When?
    Mr. Perot. How about Sandra Day O'Connor as an example? Dr. 
Bernadine Healy.
    Ms. Simpson. Good.
    Mr. Perot. National Institutes of Health. All right, I'll yield the 
floor. Name some more.
    President Bush. Good Republicans. [Laughter]
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you. I want to apologize to our audience because 
there were 209 people here, and there were 209 questions. We only got to 
a fraction of them, and I'm sorry to those of you that didn't get to ask 
your questions, but we must move to the conclusion of the program.
    It is time now for the 2-minute closing statements. By prior 
agreement, President Bush will go first.

[[Page 1843]]

Closing Statements

    President Bush. May I ask for an exception because I think we owe 
Carole Simpson a--anybody who can stand in between these three 
characters here and get the job done--we owe her a round of applause. 
[Applause] Just don't take it out of my time.
    Ms. Simpson. That's right.
    President Bush. I feel strongly about it, but I don't want it to 
come out of my time.
    Ms. Simpson. That's right. [Laughter]
    President Bush. No, but let me just say to the American people: In 
2\1/2\ weeks, we're going to choose who should sit in this Oval Office, 
who to lead the economic recovery, who to be the leader of the free 
world, who to get the deficit down. Three ways to do that: one is to 
raise taxes; one is to reduce spending, controlling that mandatory 
spending; another one is to invest and save and to stimulate growth.
    I do not want to raise taxes. I differ with the two here on that. 
I'm just not going to do that. I do believe that we need to control 
mandatory spending. I think we need to invest and save more. I believe 
that we need to educate better and retrain better. I believe that we 
need to export more, so I'll keep working for export agreements where we 
can sell more abroad. And I believe that we must strengthen the family. 
We've got to strengthen the family.
    Now, let me pose this question to America: If in the next 5 minutes 
a television announcer came on and said, there is a major international 
crisis, there is a major threat to the world, or in this country a major 
threat, my question is, if you were appointed to name one of the three 
of us, who would you choose? Who has the perseverance, the character, 
the integrity, the maturity to get the job done? I hope I'm that person.
    Thank you very, very much.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Mr. President. And now a closing statement 
from Mr. Perot.
    Mr. Perot. If the American people want to do it and not talk about 
it, then I'm one person they ought to consider. If they just want to 
keep slow dancing and talk about it and not do it, I'm not your man. I 
am results oriented. I am action oriented. I've built my businesses 
getting things done in 3 months that my competitors took 18 months to 
do.
    Everybody says, you can't do that with Congress. Sure you can do 
that with Congress. Congress, they're all good people. They're all 
patriots. But you've got to link arms and work with them. Sure, you'll 
have arguments. Sure, you'll have fights. We have them all day, every 
day. But we get the job done.
    Now, I have to come back in my close to one thing, because I am 
passionate about education. I was talking about early childhood 
education for disadvantaged little children. Let me tell you one 
specific pilot program where children who don't have a chance go to this 
program when they're 3. Now, we're going back to when the mother is 
pregnant, and they'll start right after they're born, starting when 
they're 3 and going to this school until they're 9, and then going into 
the public school in the fourth grade--90 percent are on the honor roll. 
Now, that will change America. Those children will all go to college. 
They will live the American dream.
    I beg the American people, anytime they think about reforming 
education, to take this piece of society that doesn't have a chance, and 
take these little pieces of clay that can be shaped and molded and give 
them the same love and nurture and affection and support you give your 
children. Teach them that they're unique and that they're precious and 
there's only one person in the world like them, and you will see this 
Nation bloom. We will have so many people who are qualified for the top 
job that it will be terrific.
    Now, finally, if you can't pay the bills, you're dead in the water. 
We have got to put our Nation back to work. Now, if you don't want to 
really do that, I'm not your man. I'd go crazy sitting up there slow 
dancing that one. In other words, unless we're going to do it, then pick 
somebody who likes to talk about it.
    Now, just remember, when you think about me, I didn't create this 
mess. I've been paying taxes just like you. And Lord knows, I've paid my 
share, over $1 billion in taxes. And for a guy that started out with

[[Page 1844]]

everything he owned in the trunk of his car, that ain't bad.
    Ms. Simpson. I'm sorry, Mr. Perot. Once again----
    Mr. Perot. But it's in your hands. I wish you well. I'll see you 
tomorrow night on NBC, 10:30 p.m., 11 p.m., eastern. [Laughter]
    Ms. Simpson. And finally, last but not least, Governor Clinton.
    Governor Clinton. Thank you, Carole, and thank you, ladies and 
gentleman. Since I suggested this format, I hope it's been good for all 
of you. I've really tried to be faithful to your request that we answer 
the questions specifically and pointedly. I thought I owed that to you. 
And I respect you for being here, and for the impact you've had on 
making this a more positive experience.
    These problems are not easy. They're not going to be solved 
overnight. But I want you to think about just two or three things. First 
of all, the people of my State have let me be their Governor for 12 
years because I made commitments to two things, more jobs and better 
schools.
    Our schools are now better. Our children get off to a better start, 
from preschool programs and smaller classes in the early grades. We have 
one of the most aggressive adult education programs in the country. We 
talked about that.
    This year, my State ranks first in the country in job growth, fourth 
in manufacturing job growth, fourth in income growth, fourth in the 
decline of poverty. I'm proud of that. It happened because I could work 
with people, Republicans and Democrats. That's why we've had 24 retired 
generals and admirals, hundreds of business people, many of them 
Republican, support this campaign.
    You have to decide whether you want to change or not. We do not need 
4 more years of an economic theory that doesn't work. We've had 12 years 
of trickle-down economics. It's time to put the American people first, 
to invest and grow this economy. I'm the only person here who's ever 
balanced a government budget, and I've presented 12 of them and cut 
spending repeatedly. But you cannot just get there by balancing the 
budget. We've got to grow the economy by putting people first, real 
people like you.
    I got into this race because I did not want my child to grow up to 
be part of the first generation of Americans to do worse than their 
parents. We're better than that. We can do better than that. I want to 
make America as great as it can be, and I ask for your help in doing it.
    Thank you very much.
    Ms. Simpson. Thank you, Governor Clinton.
    Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the debate, sponsored by the 
Bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates. I'd like to thank our 
audience of 209 uncommitted voters who may leave this evening maybe 
being committed. And hopefully, they'll go to the polls like everyone 
else on November 3d and vote.
    We invite you to join us on the third and final Presidential debate 
next Monday, October 19th, from the campus of Michigan State University 
in East Lansing, Michigan.
    I'm Carole Simpson. Good night.

                    Note: The debate began at 9 p.m. in Robins Center at 
                        the University of Richmond.