Placeholder Image

字幕表 動画を再生する

  • JIM LEHRER: Good evening from the Magness Arena at the University of Denver in Denver,

  • Colorado. I'm Jim Lehrer of the PBS NewsHour, and I welcome you to the first of the 2012

  • presidential debates between President Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, and former

  • Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the Republican nominee.

  • This debate and the next threetwo presidential, one vice- presidentialare sponsored by

  • the Commission on Presidential Debates.

  • Tonight's 90 minutes will be about domestic issues, and will follow a format designed

  • by the commission. There will be six roughly 15-minute segments, with two-minute answers

  • for the first question, then open discussion for the remainder of each segment.

  • Thousands of people offered suggestions on segment subjects of questions via the Internet

  • and other means, but I made the final selections, and for the record, they were not submitted

  • for approval to the commission or the candidates.

  • The segments, as I announced in advance, will be three on the economy and one each on health

  • care, the role of government, and governing, with an emphasis throughout on differences,

  • specifics and choices. Both candidates will also have two-minute closing statements.

  • The audience here in the hall has promised to remain silent. No cheers, applause, boos,

  • hissesamong other noisy distracting thingsso we may all concentrate on what the

  • candidates have to say. There is a noise exception right now, though, as we welcome President

  • Obama and Governor Romney. (Cheers, applause.)

  • Gentlemen, welcome to you both.

  • Let's start the economy, segment one. And let's begin with jobs. What are the major

  • differences between the two of you about how you would go about creating new jobs? You

  • have two minuteseach of you have two minutes to start. The coin toss has determined,

  • Mr. President, you go first.

  • PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Well, thank you very much, Jim, for this opportunity. I want to

  • thank Governor Romney and the University of Denver for your hospitality.

  • There are a lot of points that I want to make tonight, but the most important one is that

  • 20 years ago I became the luckiest man on earth because Michelle Obama agreed to marry

  • me. (Laughter.) And so I just want to wish, Sweetie, you happy anniversary and let you

  • know that a year from now, we will not be celebrating it in front of 40 million people.

  • (Laughter.)

  • You know, four years ago we went through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

  • Millions of jobs were lost. The auto industry was on the brink of collapse. The financial

  • system had frozen up. And because of the resilience and the determination of the American people,

  • we've begun to fight our way back.

  • Over the last 30 months, we've seen 5 million jobs in the private sector created. The auto

  • industry has come roaring back and housing has begun to rise. But we all know that we've

  • still got a lot of work to do. And so the question here tonight is not where we've been

  • but where we're going. Governor Romney has a perspective that says if we cut taxes, skewed

  • towards the wealthy, and roll back regulations that we'll be better off.

  • I've got a different view. I think we've got to invest in education and training. I think

  • it's important for us to develop new sources of energy here in America, that we change

  • our tax code to make sure that we're helping small businesses and companies that are investing

  • here in the United States, that we take some of the money that we're saving as we wind

  • down two wars to rebuild America and that we reduce our deficit in a balanced way that

  • allows us to make these critical investments.

  • Now, it ultimately is going to be up to the voters, to you, which path we should take.

  • Are we going to double down on the top-down economic policies that helped to get us into

  • this mess, or do we embrace a new economic patriotism that says, America does best when

  • the middle class does best? And I'm looking forward to having that debate.

  • MR. LEHRER: Governor Romney, two minutes.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Thank you, Jim. It's an honor to be here with you, and I appreciate the

  • chance to be with the president. I am pleased to be at the University of Denver, appreciate

  • their welcome and also the presidential commission on these debates.

  • And congratulations to you, Mr. President, on your anniversary. I'm sure this was the

  • most romantic place you could imagine herehere with me, so I — (laughter) — congratulations.

  • This is obviously a very tender topic. I've had the occasion over the last couple of years

  • of meeting people across the country. I was in Dayton, Ohio, and a woman grabbed my arm,

  • and she said, I've been out of work since May. Can you help me?

  • Ann yesterday was a rally in Denver, and a woman came up to her with a baby in her arms

  • and said, Ann, my husband has had four jobs in three years, part-time jobs. He's lost

  • his most recent job, and we've now just lost our home. Can you help us?

  • And the answer is yes, we can help, but it's going to take a different path, not the one

  • we've been on, not the one the president describes as a top-down, cut taxes for the rich. That's

  • not what I'm going to do.

  • My plan has five basic parts. One, get us energy independent, North American energy

  • independent. That creates about four million jobs. Number two, open up more trade, particularly

  • in Latin America; crack down on China if and when they cheat. Number three, make sure our

  • people have the skills they need to succeed and the best schools in the world. We're far

  • away from that now. Number four, get us to a balanced budget. Number five, champion small

  • business.

  • It's small business that creates the jobs in America. And over the last four years small-business

  • people have decided that America may not be the place to open a new business, because

  • new business startups are down to a 30-year low. I know what it takes to get small business

  • growing again, to hire people.

  • Now, I'm concerned that the path that we're on has just been unsuccessful. The president

  • has a view very similar to the view he had when he ran four years ago, that a bigger

  • government, spending more, taxing more, regulating moreif you will, trickle-down government

  • would work. That's not the right answer for America. I'll restore the vitality that gets

  • America working again.

  • Thank you.

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, please respond directly to what the governor just said about

  • trickle-downhis trickle-down approach. He's — as he said yours is.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, let me talk specifically about what I think we need to do.

  • First, we've got to improve our education system. And we've made enormous progress drawing

  • on ideas both from Democrats and Republicans that are already starting to show gains in

  • some of the toughest-to- deal-with schools. We've got a program called Race to the Top

  • that has prompted reforms in 46 states around the country, raising standards, improving

  • how we train teachers. So now I want to hire another hundred thousand new math and science

  • teachers and create 2 million more slots in our community colleges so that people can

  • get trained for the jobs that are out there right now. And I want to make sure that we

  • keep tuition low for our young people.

  • When it comes to our tax code, Governor Romney and I both agree that our corporate tax rate

  • is too high. So I want to lower it, particularly for manufacturing, taking it down to 25 percent.

  • But I also want to close those loopholes that are giving incentives for companies that are

  • shipping jobs overseas. I want to provide tax breaks for companies that are investing

  • here in the United States.

  • On energy, Governor Romney and I, we both agree that we've got to boost American energy

  • production.

  • And oil and natural gas production are higher than they've been in years. But I also believe

  • that we've got to look at the energy source of the future, like wind and solar and biofuels,

  • and make those investments.

  • So, all of this is possible. Now, in order for us to do it, we do have to close our deficit,

  • and one of the things I'm sure we'll be discussing tonight is, how do we deal with our tax code,

  • and how do we make sure that we are reducing spending in a responsible way, but also how

  • do we have enough revenue to make those investments? And this is where there's a difference because

  • Governor Romney's central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut, on top of the extension

  • of the Bush tax cuts, so that's another $2 trillion, and $2 trillion in additional military

  • spending that the military hasn't asked for. That's $8 trillion. How we pay for that, reduce

  • the deficit and make the investments that we need to make without dumping those costs

  • on the middle-class Americans I think is one of the central questions of this campaign.

  • MR. LEHRER: Both of you have spoken about a lot of different things, and we're going

  • to try to get through them in as specific a way as we possibly can.

  • But first, Governor Romney, do you have a question that you'd like to ask the president

  • directly about something he just said?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, sure. I'd like to clear up the record and go through it piece by piece.

  • First of all, I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don't have a tax cut of a scale that

  • you're talking about. My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle

  • class. But I'm not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high- income people. High-income

  • people are doing just fine in this economy. They'll do fine whether you're president or

  • I am.

  • The people who are having the hard time right now are middle- income Americans. Under the

  • president's policies, middle-income Americans have been buried. They'rethey're just

  • being crushed. Middle-income Americans have seen their income come down by $4,300. This

  • is a — this is a tax in and of itself. I'll call it the economy tax. It's been crushing.

  • The same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the president, electric rates are up,

  • food prices are up, health care costs have gone up by $2,500 a family.

  • Middle-income families are being crushed. And so the question is how to get them going

  • again, and I've described it. It's energy and trade, the right kind of training programs,

  • balancing our budget and helping small business. Those are thethe cornerstones of my plan.

  • But the president mentioned a couple of other ideas, and I'll just note: first, education.

  • I agree, education is key, particularly the future of our economy. But our training programs

  • right now, we got 47 of them housed in the federal government, reporting to eight different

  • agencies. Overhead is overwhelming. We got to get those dollars back to the states and

  • go to the workers so they can create their own pathways to getting the training they

  • need for jobs that will really help them.

  • The second area: taxation. We agree; we ought to bring the tax rates down, and I do, both

  • for corporations and for individuals. But in order for us not to lose revenue, have

  • the government run out of money, I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions so that

  • we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth.

  • The third area: energy. Energy is critical, and the president pointed out correctly that

  • production of oil and gas in the U.S. is up. But not due to his policies. In spite of his

  • policies. Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private

  • land, not on government land. On government land, your administration has cut the number

  • of permits and license in half. If I'm president, I'll double them. And also get thethe

  • oil from offshore and Alaska. And I'll bring that pipeline in from Canada.

  • And by the way, I like coal. I'm going to make sure we continue to burn clean coal.

  • People in the coal industry feel like it's getting crushed by your policies. I want to

  • get America and North America energy independent, so we can create those jobs.

  • And finally, with regards to that tax cut, look, I'm not looking to cut massive taxes

  • and to reduce thethe revenues going to the government. Mymy number one principle

  • is there'll be no tax cut that adds to the deficit.

  • I want to underline thatno tax cut that adds to the deficit. But I do want to reduce

  • the burden being paid by middle-income Americans. And I — and to do that that also means that

  • I cannot reduce the burden paid by high-income Americans. So anyany language to the

  • contrary is simply not accurate.

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I thinklet's talk about taxes because I think it's instructive.

  • Now, four years ago when I stood on this stage I said that I would cut taxes for middle-class

  • families. And that's exactly what I did. We cut taxes for middle-class families by about

  • $3,600. And the reason is because I believe we do best when the middle class is doing

  • well.

  • And by giving them those tax cuts, they had a little more money in their pocket and so

  • maybe they can buy a new car. They are certainly in a better position to weather the extraordinary

  • recession that we went through. They can buy a computer for their kid who's going off to

  • college, which means they're spending more money, businesses have more customers, businesses

  • make more profits and then hire more workers.

  • Now, Governor Romney's proposal that he has been promoting for 18 months calls for a $5

  • trillion tax cut on top of $2 trillion of additional spending for our military. And

  • he is saying that he is going to pay for it by closing loopholes and deductions. The problem

  • is that he's been asked a — over a hundred times how you would close those deductions

  • and loopholes and he hasn't been able to identify them.

  • But I'm going to make an important point here, Jim.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: When you add up all the loopholes and deductions that upper income individuals

  • canare currently taking advantage ofif you take those all awayyou don't

  • come close to paying for $5 trillion in tax cuts and $2 trillion in additional military

  • spending. And that's why independent studies looking at this said the only way to meet

  • Governor Romney's pledge of not reducing the deficitororor not adding to

  • the deficit, is by burdening middle-class families.

  • The average middle-class family with children would pay about $2,000 more. Now, that's not

  • my analysis; that's the analysis of economists who have looked at this. Andand that

  • kind of toptop-down economics, where folks at the top are doing well so the average

  • person making 3 million bucks is getting a $250,000 tax break while middle- class families

  • are burdened further, that's not what I believe is a recipe for economic growth.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right. What is the difference?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well

  • MR. LEHRER: Let's just stay on taxes for

  • MR. ROMNEY: But I — but I — right, right.

  • MR. LEHRER: OK. Yeah, justlet's just stay on taxes for a moment.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Yeah. Well, butbut

  • MR. LEHRER: What is the difference?

  • MR. ROMNEY: — virtually everyvirtually everything he just said about my tax plan

  • is inaccurate.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right, go

  • MR. ROMNEY: Soso ifif the tax plan he described were a tax plan I was asked to

  • support, I'd say absolutely not. I'm not looking for a $5 trillion tax cut. What I've said

  • is I won't put in place a tax cut that adds to the deficit. That's part one. So there's

  • no economist can say Mitt Romney's tax plan adds 5 trillion (dollars) if I say I will

  • not add to the deficit with my tax plan.

  • Number two, I will not reduce the share paid by high-income individuals. I — I know that

  • you and your running mate keep saying that, and I know it's a popular things to say with

  • a lot of people, but it's just not the case. Look, I got five boys. I'm used to people

  • saying something that's not always true, but just keep on repeating it and ultimately hoping

  • I'll believe it — (scattered laughter) — but thatthat is not the case, all right?

  • I will not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans.

  • And number three, I will not, under any circumstances, raise taxes on middle-income families. I will

  • lower taxes on middle-income families. Now, you cite a study. There are six other studies

  • that looked at the study you describe and say it's completely wrong. I saw a study that

  • came out today that said you're going to raise taxes by 3(,000 dollars) to $4,000 onon

  • middle-income families. There are all these studies out there.

  • But let's get to the bottom line. That is, I want to bring down rates. I want to bring

  • down the rates down, at the same time lower deductions and exemptions and credits and

  • so forth so we keep getting the revenue we need.

  • And you think, well, then why lower the rates? And the reason is because small business pays

  • that individual rate. Fifty-four percent of America's workers work in businesses that

  • are taxed not at the corporate tax rate but at the individual tax rate. And if we lower

  • that rate, they will be able to hire more people.

  • For me, this is about jobs.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right. That's where we started.

  • MR. ROMNEY: This is about getting jobs for the American people.

  • MR. LEHRER: Yeah.

  • Do you challenge what the governor just said about his own plan?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, for 18 months he's been running on this tax plan. And now, five

  • weeks before the election, he's saying that his big, bold idea is "never mind." And the

  • fact is that if you are lowering the rates the way you describe, Governor, then it is

  • not possible to come up with enough deductions and loopholes that only affect high-income

  • individuals to avoid either raising the deficit or burdening the middle class. It's — it's

  • math. It's arithmetic.

  • Now, Governor Romney and I do share a deep interest in encouraging small-business growth.

  • So at the same time that my tax plan has already lowered taxes for 98 percent of families,

  • I also lowered taxes for small businesses 18 times. And what I want to do is continue

  • the tax ratesthe tax cuts that we put into place for small businesses and families.

  • But I have said that for incomes over $250,000 a year that we should go back to the rates

  • that we had when Bill Clinton was president, when we created 23 million new jobs, went

  • from deficit to surplus and created a whole lot of millionaires to boot.

  • And the reason this is important is because by doing that, we can not only reduce the

  • deficit, we can not only encourage job growth through small businesses, but we're also able

  • to make the investments that are necessary in education or in energy.

  • And we do have a difference, though, when it comes to definitions of small business.

  • Now, underunder my plan, 97 percent of small businesses would not see their income

  • taxes go up. Governor Romney says, well, those top 3 percent, they're the job creators. They'd

  • be burdened.

  • But under Governor Romney's definition, there are a whole bunch of millionaires and billionaires

  • who are small businesses. Donald Trump is a small business. And I know Donald Trump

  • doesn't like to think of himself as small anything, butbut that's how you define

  • small businesses if you're getting business income. And that kind of approach, I believe,

  • will not grow our economy because the only way to pay for it without either burdening

  • the middle class or blowing up our deficit is to make drastic cuts in things like education,

  • making sure that we are continuing to invest in basic science and research, all the things

  • that are helping America grow. And I think that would be a mistake.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Jim, let me just come back on thaton that point.

  • MR. LEHRER: Just for thejust for the record

  • MR. ROMNEY: These small businesses we're talking about

  • MR. LEHRER: Excuse me. Just so everybody understands

  • MR. ROMNEY: Yeah.

  • MR. LEHRER: — we're way over our first 15 minutes.

  • MR. ROMNEY: It's fun, isn't it?

  • MR. LEHRER: It's OK. It's great.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: That's OK.

  • MR. LEHRER: No problem. No, you don't haveyou don't have a problem, I don't have

  • a problem, because we're still on the economy, but we're going to come back to taxes and

  • we're going to move on to the deficit and a lot of other things, too.

  • OK, but go ahead, sir.

  • MR. ROMNEY: You bet.

  • Well, President, you'reMr. President, you're absolutely right, which is that with

  • regards to 97 percent of the businesses are notnot taxed at the 35 percent tax rate,

  • they're taxed at a lower rate. But those businesses that are in the last 3 percent of businesses

  • happen to employ halfhalfof all of the people who work in small business.

  • Those are the businesses that employ one quarter of all the workers in America. And your plan

  • is take their tax rate from 35 percent to 40 percent.

  • Now, I talked to a guy who has a very small business. He's in the electronics business

  • inin St. Louis. He has four employees.

  • He said he and his son calculated how much they pay in taxes. Federal income tax, federal

  • payroll tax, state income tax, state sales tax, state property tax, gasoline taxit

  • added up to well over 50 percent of what they earned.

  • And your plan is to take the tax rate on successful small businesses from 35 percent to 40 percent.

  • The National Federation of Independent Businesses has said that will cost 700,000 jobs. I don't

  • want to cost jobs. My priority is jobs. And so what I do is I bring down the tax rates,

  • lower deductions and exemptionsthe same idea behind Bowles-Simpson, by the way. Get

  • the rates down, lower deductions and exemptions to create more jobs, because there's nothing

  • better for getting us to a balanced budget than having more people working, earning more

  • money, paying — (chuckles) — more taxes. That's by far the most effective and efficient

  • way to get this budget balanced.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Jim, I — you may want to move on to another topic, but I would just

  • say this to the American people. If you believe that we can cut taxes by $5 trillion and add

  • $2 trillion in additional spending that the military is not asking for — $7 trillion,

  • just to give you a sense, over 10 years that's more than our entire defense budgetand

  • you think that by closing loopholes and deductions for the well-to-do, somehow you will not end

  • up picking up the tab, then Governor Romney's plan may work for you.

  • But I think math, common sense and our history shows us that's not a recipe for job growth.

  • Look, we've tried thiswe've tried both approaches. The approach that Governor Romney's

  • talking about is the same sales pitch that was made in 2001 and 2003. And we ended up

  • with the slowest job growth in 50 years. We ended up moving from surplus to deficits.

  • And it all culminated in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

  • Bill Clinton tried the approach that I'm talking about. We created 23 million new jobs. We

  • went from deficit to surplus, and businesses did very well.

  • So in some ways, we've got some data on which approach is more likely to create jobs and

  • opportunity for Americans, and I believe that the economy works best when middle-class families

  • are getting tax breaks so that they've got some money in their pockets and those of us

  • who have done extraordinarily well because of this magnificent country that we live in,

  • that we can afford to do a little bit more to make sure we're not blowing up the deficit.

  • MR. LEHRER: OK. (Inaudible) —

  • MR. ROMNEY: Jim, the president began this segment, so I think I get the last word, so

  • I'm going to take it. All right? (Chuckles.)

  • MR. LEHRER: Well, you're going to get the first word in the next segment.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, butbut he gets the first word of that segment. I get the last

  • word of that segment, I hope. Let me just make this comment.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Chuckles.) He canyou can have it. He can

  • MR. ROMNEY: First of all

  • MR. LEHRER: That's not how it works.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Let melet me repeatlet me repeat what I said — (inaudible). I'm

  • not in favor of a $5 trillion tax cut. That's not my plan. My plan is not to put in place

  • any tax cut that will add to the deficit. That's point one. So you may keep referring

  • to it as a $5 trillion tax cut, but that's not my plan.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: OK.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Number two, let's look at history. My plan is not like anything that's been tried

  • before. My plan is to bring down rates but also bring down deductions and exemptions

  • and credits at the same time so the revenue stays in, but that we bring down rates to

  • get more people working. My priority is putting people back to work in America. They're suffering

  • in this country. And we talk about evidencelook at the evidence of the last four

  • years. It's absolutely extraordinary. We've got 23 million people out of work or stop

  • looking for work in this country.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right.

  • MR. ROMNEY: It's justit's — we've gotwe gotwhen the president took office,

  • 32 million people on food stamps; 47 million on food stamps today. Economic growth this

  • year slower than last year, and last year slower than the year before. Going forward

  • with the status quo is not going to cut it for the American people who are struggling

  • today.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right. Let's talkwe're still on the economy. This is, theoretically

  • now, a second segment still on the economy, and specifically on what do about the federal

  • deficit, the federal debt. And the questionyou each have two minutes on thisand,

  • Governor Romney you go first because the president went first on segment one. And the question

  • is this: What are the differences between the two of you as to how you would go about

  • tackling the deficit problem in this country?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, good. I'm glad you raised that. And it's a — it's a critical issue.

  • I think it's not just an economic issue. I think it's a moral issue. I think it's, frankly,

  • not moral for my generation to keep spending massively more than we take in, knowing those

  • burdens are going to be passed on to the next generation. And they're going to be paying

  • the interest and the principle all their lives. And the amount of debt we're adding, at a

  • trillion a year, is simply not moral.

  • So how do we deal with it? Well, mathematically there arethere are three ways that you

  • can cut a deficit. One, of course, is to raise taxes. Number two is to cut spending. And

  • number three is to grow the economy because if more people work in a growing economy they're

  • paying taxes and you can get the job done that way.

  • The presidents wouldpresident would prefer raising taxes. I understand. The problem with

  • raising taxes is that it slows down the rate of growth and you could never quite get the

  • job done. I want to lower spending and encourage economic growth at the same time.

  • What things would I cut from spending? Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs

  • by this testif they don't pass it: Is the program so critical it's worth borrowing

  • money from China to pay for it? And if not, I'll get rid of it. "Obamacare" is on my list.

  • I apologize, Mr. President. I use that term with all respect.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: I like it.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Good. OK, good. (Laughter.) So I'll get rid of that. I'm sorry, Jim. I'm

  • going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS. I love Big

  • Bird. I actually like you too. But I'm not going to — I'm not going to keep on spending

  • money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it. That's number one.

  • Number two, I'll take programs that are currently good programs but I think could be run more

  • efficiently at the state level and send them to state.

  • Number three, I'll make government more efficient, and to cut back the number of employees, combine

  • some agencies and departments. My cutbacks will be done through attrition, by the way.

  • This is the approach we have to take to get America to a balanced budget. The president

  • said he'd cut the deficit in half. Unfortunately, he doubled it. Trillion-dollar deficits for

  • the last four years. The president's put it in place as much public debtalmost as

  • much debt held by by the public as all prior presidents combined.

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President. two minutes.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: When I walked in the Oval Office, I had more than a trillion dollar

  • deficit greeting me, and we know where it came from. Two wars that were paid for on

  • a credit card. Two tax cuts that were not paid for, and a whole bunch of programs that

  • were not paid for. And then a massive economic crisis.

  • And despite that, what we've said is, yes, we had to take some initial emergency measures

  • to make sure we didn't slip into a Great Depression. But what we've also said is, let's make sure

  • that we are cutting out those things that are not helping us grow.

  • So, 77 government programseverything from aircrafts that the Air Force had ordered

  • but weren't working very well. Eighteen government — 18 government programs for education that

  • were well- intentioned but weren't helping kids learn. We went after medical fraud in

  • Medicare and Medicaid very aggressivelymore aggressively than ever before, and have saved

  • tens of billions of dollars. Fifty billion dollars of waste taken out of the system.

  • And I worked with Democrats and Republicans to cut a trillion dollars out of our discretionary

  • domestic budget. That's the largest cut in the discretionary domestic budget since Dwight

  • Eisenhower.

  • Now, we all know that we've got to do more. And so I've put forward a specific $4 trillion

  • deficit-reduction plan.

  • It's on a website. You can look at all the numbers, what cuts we make and what revenue

  • we raise.

  • And the way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for a dollar of additional revenue,

  • paid for, as I indicated earlier, by asking those of us who have done very well in this

  • country to contribute a little bit more to reduce the deficit.

  • And Governor Romney earlier mentioned the Bowles-Simpson commission. Well, that's how

  • the commissionbipartisan commission that talked about how we should move forward suggested

  • we have to do itin a balanced way with some revenue and some spending cuts. And this

  • is a major difference that Governor Romney and I have.

  • Letlet me just finish this point because you're looking for contrast. You know, when

  • Governor Romney stood on a stage with other Republican candidates for the nomination,

  • and he was asked, would you take $10 of spending cuts for just $1 of revenue, and he said no.

  • Now, if you take such an unbalanced approach, then that means you are going to be gutting

  • our investments in schools and education. It means thatGovernor Romney talked about

  • Medicaid and how we could send it back to the states, but effectively this means a 30

  • percent cut in the primary program we help for seniors who are in nursing homes, for

  • kids who are with disabilities

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, I'm sorry

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: And that is not a right strategy for us to move forward.

  • MR. LEHRER: Way over the two minutes.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Sorry.

  • MR. LEHRER: Governor, what about Simpson-Bowles. Will you support Simpson-Bowles?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Simpson-Bowles, the president should have grabbed that.

  • MR. LEHRER: No, I mean do you support Simpson-Bowles?

  • MR. ROMNEY: I have my own plan. It's not the same as Simpson- Bowles. But in my view, the

  • president should have grabbed it. If you wanted to make some adjustments to it, take it, go

  • to Congress, fight for it.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: That's what we've done, made some adjustments to it; and we're putting

  • it forward before Congress right now, a $4 trillion plan, (a balanced ?) —

  • MR. ROMNEY: But you've beenbut you've been president four years. You've been president

  • four years. You said you'd cut the deficit in half. It's now four years later. We still

  • have trillion- dollar deficits.

  • The CBO says we'll have a trillion-dollar deficit each of the next four years. If you're

  • re-elected, we'll get to a trillion-dollar debt. You have said before you'd cut the deficit

  • in half. And this four — I love this idea of 4 trillion (dollars) in cuts. You've found

  • $4 trillion of ways to reduce or to get closer to a balanced budget, except we still show

  • trillion dollar deficits every year. That doesn't get the job done.

  • Let me come back and say, why is that I don't want to raise taxes? Why don't I want to raise

  • taxes on people? And actually, you said it back in 2010. You said, look, I'm going to

  • extend the tax policies that we have. Now, I'm not going to raise taxes on anyone because

  • when the economy's growing slow like this, when we're in recession you shouldn't raise

  • taxes on anyone.

  • Well, the economy is still growing slow. As a matter of fact, it's growing much more slowly

  • now than when you made that statement. And so if you believe the same thing, you just

  • don't want to raise taxes on people. And the reality is it's not just wealthy peopleyou

  • mentioned Donald Trumpit's not just Donald Trump you're taxing; it's all those businesses

  • that employ one-quarter of the workers in America. These small businesses that are taxed

  • as individuals. You raise taxes and you kill jobs. That's why the National Federation of

  • Independent Businesses said your plan will kill 700,000 jobs. I don't want to kill jobs

  • in this environment.

  • Let me make one more point. And that's — and that

  • MR. LEHRER: Let's let him answer the taxes thing for a moment, OK?

  • MR. ROMNEY: OK.

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, we've had this discussion before.

  • MR. LEHRER: No, about the idea that in order to reduce the deficit there has to be revenue

  • in addition to cuts.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: There has to be revenue in addition to cuts. Now, Governor Romney has

  • ruled out revenue. He's — he's ruled out revenue.

  • MR. LEHRER: That's true, right?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Absolutely.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: OK, so

  • MR. LEHRER: Completely?

  • MR. ROMNEY: I — look, the revenue I get is by more people working, getting higher

  • pay, paying more taxes. That's how we get growth and how we balance the budget. But

  • the idea of taxing people more, putting more people out of workyou'll never get there.

  • You never balance the budget by raising taxes.

  • SpainSpain spends 42 percent of their total economy on government. We're now spending

  • 42 percent of our economy on government.

  • I don't want to go down the path to Spain. I want to go down the path of growth that

  • puts Americans to work, with more money coming in because they're working.

  • MR. LEHRER: Yeah.

  • But Mr. President, you're saying in order to get itthe job done, it's got to be

  • balanced. You've got to have

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: If we're serious, we've got to take a balanced, responsible approach.

  • And by the way, this is not just when it comes to individual taxes.

  • Let's talk about corporate taxes. Now, I've identified areas where we can, right away,

  • make a change that I believe would actually help the economy. Thethe oil industry

  • gets $4 billion a year in corporate welfare. Basically, they get deductions that those

  • small businesses that Governor Romney refers to, they don't get. Now, does anybody think

  • that ExxonMobil needs some extra money when they're making money every time you go to

  • the pump? Why wouldn't we want to eliminate that?

  • Why wouldn't we eliminate tax breaks for corporate jets? My attitude is if you got a corporate

  • jet, you can probably afford to pay full freight, not get a special break for it.

  • When it comes to corporate taxes, Governor Romney has said he wants to, in a revenue-neutral

  • way, close loopholes, deductionshe hasn't identified which ones they arebut thereby

  • bring down the corporate rate. Well, I want to do the same thing, but I've actually identified

  • how we can do that.

  • And part of the way to do it is to not give tax breaks to companies that are shipping

  • jobs overseas. Right now you can actually take a deduction for moving a plant overseas.

  • I think most Americans would say that doesn't make sense. And all that raises revenue.

  • And so if we take a balanced approach, what that then allows us to do is also to help

  • young people, the way we already have during my administration, make sure that they can

  • afford to go to college. It means that the teacher that I met in Las Vegas, wonderful

  • young lady, who describes to meshe's got 42 kids in her class.

  • The first two weeks, she's got themsome of them sitting on the floor until finally

  • they get reassigned. They're using textbooks that are 10 years old. That is not a recipe

  • for growth; that's not how America was built.

  • And so budgets reflect choices. Ultimately we're going to have to make some decisions.

  • And if we're asking for no revenue, then that means that we've got to get rid of a whole

  • bunch of stuff, and the magnitude of the tax cuts that you're talking about, Governor,

  • would end up resulting in severe hardship for people, but more importantly, would not

  • help us grow.

  • As I indicated before, when you talk about shifting Medicaid to states, we're talking

  • about potentially a — a 30 — a 30 percent cut in Medicaid over time. Now, you know,

  • that may not seem like a big deal when it just isyou know, numbers on a sheet of

  • paper, but if we're talking about a family who's got an autistic kid and is depending

  • on that Medicaid, that's a big problem. And governors are creative. There's no doubt about

  • it. But they're not creative enough to make up for 30 percent of revenue on something

  • like Medicaid. What ends up happening is some people end up not getting help.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Jim, let's — wewe've gone on a lot of topics there, andso I've

  • got to takeit's going to take a minute to go from Medicaid to schools to

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Inaudible.)

  • MR. LEHRER: Come back to Medicaid, here, yeah, yeah, right.

  • MR. ROMNEY: — oil to tax breaks and companies overseas. So let's go through them one by

  • one. First of all, the Department of Energy has said the tax break for oil companies is

  • $2.8 billion a year. And it's actually an accounting treatment, as you know, that's

  • been in place for a hundred years. Now

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: It's time to end it.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Andand in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy

  • world. Now, I like green energy as well, but that's about 50 years' worth of what oil and

  • gas receives, and you say Exxon and Mobilactually, this $2.8 billion goes largely

  • to small companies, to drilling operators and so forth.

  • But you know, if we get that tax rate from 35 percent down to 25 percent, why, that $2.8

  • billion is on the table. Of course it's on the table. That's probably not going to survive,

  • you get that rate down to 25 percent.

  • Butbut don't forget, you put $90 billionlike 50 years worth of breaksinto

  • solar and wind, toto Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1. I mean, I — I had a

  • friend who said, you don't just pick the winners and losers; you pick the losers. All right?

  • Soso this is notthis is not the kind of policy you want to have if you want

  • to get America energy-secure.

  • The second topic, which is you said you get a deduction for getting a plant overseas.

  • Look, I've been in business for 25 years. I have no idea what you're talking about.

  • I maybe need to get a new accountant.

  • MR. LEHRER: Let's —

  • MR. ROMNEY: But thethe idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is

  • simply not the case.

  • MR. LEHRER: Let's have

  • MR. ROMNEY: What we do have right now is a setting

  • MR. LEHRER: Excuse me.

  • MR. ROMNEY: — where I'd like to bring money from overseas back to this country.

  • And finally, Medicaid to states, I'm not quite sure where that came in, except this, which

  • is, I would like to take the Medicaid dollars that go to states and say to a state, you're

  • going to get what you got last year plus inflationinflationplus 1 percent. And then

  • you're going to manage your care for your poor in the way you think best.

  • And I remember as a governor, when this idea was floated by Tommy Thompson, the governors,

  • Republican and Democrats, said, please let us do that. We can care for our own poor in

  • so much better and more effective a way than having the federal government tell us how

  • to care for our poor.

  • So let statesone of the magnificent things about this country is the whole idea that

  • states are the laboratories of democracy. Don't have the federal government tell everybody

  • what kind of training programs they have to have and what kind of Medicaid they have to

  • have. Let states do this.

  • And by the way, if a states getgets in trouble, why, we could step in and see if

  • we could find a way to help them. But

  • MR. LEHRER: Let's go.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Butbut the rightthe right approach is one which relies on the

  • brilliance

  • MR. LEHRER: Two seconds.

  • MR. ROMNEY: — of our people and states, not the federal government.

  • MR. LEHRER: Two seconds and we're going on, still on the economy on anotherbut another

  • part of it.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: OK.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right? All right, this is this is segment three, the economy, entitlements.

  • First answer goes to you. It's two minutes. Mr. President, do you see a major difference

  • between the two of you on Social Security?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, I suspect that on Social Security, we've got a somewhat similar

  • position. Social Security is structurally sound. It's going to have to be tweaked the

  • way it was by Ronald Reagan and SpeakerDemocratic Speaker Tip O'Neill. But it isthe basic

  • structure is sound. Butbut I want to talk about the values behind Social Security

  • and Medicare and then talk about Medicare, because that's the big driver

  • MR. LEHRER: Sureityou bet.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: — of our deficits right now.

  • You know, my grandmother, some of you know, helped to raise me. My grandparents did. My

  • grandfather died awhile back. My grandmother died three days before I was elected president.

  • And she was fiercely independent. She worked her way up, only had a high school education,

  • started as a secretary, ended up being the vice president of a local bank. And she ended

  • up living alone by choice. And the reason she could be independent was because of Social

  • Security and Medicare. She had worked all her life, put in this money and understood

  • that there was a basic guarantee, a floor under which she could not go.

  • And that's the perspective I bring when I think about what's called entitlements. You

  • know, the name itself implies some sense of dependency on the part of these folks. These

  • are folks who've worked hard, like my grandmother. And there are millions of people out there

  • who are counting on this.

  • So my approach is to say, how do we strengthen the system over the long term? And in Medicare,

  • what we did was we said, we are going to have to bring down the costs if we're going to

  • deal with our long- term deficits, but to do that, let's look where some of the money

  • is going. Seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars we were able to save from the Medicare

  • program by no longer overpaying insurance companies, by making sure that we weren't

  • overpaying providers.

  • And using that money, we were actually able to lower prescription drug costs for seniors

  • by an average of $600, and we were also able to make a — make a significant dent in providing

  • them the kind of preventive care that will ultimately save money through thethroughout

  • the system.

  • So the way for us to deal with Medicare in particular is to lower health care costs.

  • But when it comes to Social Security, as I said, you don't need a major structural change

  • in order to make sure that Social Security is there for the future.

  • MR. LEHRER: We'll follow up on this.

  • First, Governor Romney, you have two minutes on Social Security and entitlements.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, Jim, our seniors depend on these programs. And I know any time we

  • talk about entitlements, people become concerned that something's going to happen that's going

  • to change their life for the worst, and the answer is, neither the president nor I are

  • proposing any changes for any current retirees or near retirees, either to Social Security

  • or Medicare. So if you're 60 or around 60 or older, you don't need to listen any further.

  • But for younger people, we need to talk about what changes are going to be occurring.

  • Oh, I just thought about one, and that is in fact I was wrong when I said the president

  • isn't proposing any changes for current retirees. In fact, he is on Medicare. On Social Security,

  • he's not.

  • But on Medicare, for current retirees he's cutting $716 billion from the program. Now,

  • he says by not overpaying hospitals and providers, actually just going to them and saying we're

  • going to reduce the rates you get paid across the board, everybody's going to get a lower

  • rate. That's not just going after places where there's abuse, that's saying we're cutting

  • the rates. Some 15 percent of hospitals and nursing homes say they won't take anymore

  • Medicare patients under that scenario.

  • We also have 50 percent of doctors who say they won't take more Medicare patients. This

  • we have 4 million people on Medicare Advantage that will lose Medicare Advantage because

  • of those $716 billion in cuts. I can't understand how you can cut Medicare $716 billion for

  • current recipients of Medicare.

  • Now, you point out, well, we're putting some back; we're going to give a better prescription

  • program. That's onethat's $1 for every 15 (dollars) you've cut. They're smart enough

  • to know that's not a good trade.

  • I want to take that $716 billion you've cut and put it back into Medicare. By the way,

  • we can include a prescription program if we need to improve it, but the idea of cutting

  • $716 billion from Medicare to be able to balance the additional cost of "Obamacare" is, in

  • my opinion, a mistake. And with regards to young people coming along, I've got proposals

  • to make sure Medicare and Social Security are there for them without any question.

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: First of all, I think it's important for Governor Romney to present this

  • plan that he says will only affect folks in the future. And the essence of the plan is

  • that he would turn Medicare into a voucher program. It's called premium support, but

  • it's understood to be a voucher program. His running mate

  • MR. LEHRER: And youand you don't support that?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: I don't. Andand let me explain why.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Again, that's for future people

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: I understand.

  • MR. ROMNEY: — right, not for current retirees.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Forforso if you'reif youyou're 54 or 55, you might

  • want to listen, because thisthis will affect you. The idea, which was originally

  • presented by Congressman Ryan, your running mate, is that we would give a voucher to seniors,

  • and they could go out in the private marketplace and buy their own health insurance. The problem

  • is that because the voucher wouldn't necessarily keep up with health care inflation, it was

  • estimated that this would cost the average senior about $6,000 a year.

  • Now, in fairness, what Governor Romney has now said is he'll maintain traditional Medicare

  • alongside it. But there's still a problem, because what happens is those insurance companies

  • are pretty clever at figuring out who are the younger and healthier seniors.

  • They recruit them leaving the older, sicker seniors in Medicare. And every health care

  • economist who looks at it says over time what'll happen is the traditional Medicare system

  • will collapse. And then what you've got is folks like my grandmother at the mercy of

  • the private insurance system, precisely at the time when they are most in need of decent

  • health care.

  • So I don't think vouchers are the right way to go. And this is not my ownonly my

  • opinion. AARP thinks that thethe savings that we obtained from Medicare bolster the

  • system, lengthen the Medicare trust fund by 8 years. Benefits were not affected at all

  • and ironically if you repeal "Obamacare" — and I have become fond of this term, "Obamacare"

  • — (laughter) — if you repeal it, what happens is those seniors right away are going

  • to be paying $600 more in prescription care. They're now going to have to be paying copays

  • for basic check-ups that can keep them healthier.

  • And the primary beneficiary of that repeal are insurance companies that are estimated

  • to gain billions of dollars back when they aren't making seniors any healthier. And I

  • — I don't think that's right approach when it comes to making sure that Medicare is stronger

  • over the long term.

  • MR. LEHRER: We'll talk aboutspecifically about health care in a moment, but what is

  • do you support the voucher system, Governor?

  • MR. ROMNEY: What I support is no change for current retirees and near-retirees to Medicare

  • and the president supports taking $716 billion out of that program.

  • MR. LEHRER: What about the vouchers?

  • MR. ROMNEY: So that's — that's number one.

  • MR. LEHRER: OK. All right.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Number two is for people coming along that are young. What I'd do to make

  • sure that we can keep Medicare in place for them is to allow them either to choose the

  • current Medicare program or a private plantheir choice. They get toand they'll

  • have at least two plans that will be entirely at no cost to them. So they don't have to

  • pay additional money, no additional $6,000. That's not going to happen.

  • They'll have at least two plans.

  • And by the way, if the government can be as efficient as the private sector and offer

  • premiums that are as low as the private sector, people will be happy to get traditional Medicare,

  • or they'll be able to get a private plan. I know my own view is I'd rather have a private

  • plan. I — I'd just as soon not have the government telling me what kind of health

  • care I get. I'd rather be able to have an insurance company. If I don't like them, I

  • can get rid of them and find a different insurance company. But people will make their own choice.

  • The other thing we have to do to save Medicare, we have to have the benefits high for those

  • that are low-income, but for higher-income people, we're going to have to lower some

  • of the benefits. We have to make sure this program is there for the long term. That's

  • the plan that I've put forward.

  • And by the way, the idea came not even from Paul Ryan oror Senator Wyden, who's a

  • co-author of the bill withwith Paul Ryan in the Senate, but also it came from Bill

  • Clinton's — Bill Clinton's chief of staff. This is an idea that's been around a long

  • time, which is saying, hey, let's see if we can't get competition into the Medicare world

  • so that people can get the choice of different plans at lower cost, better quality. I believe

  • in competition.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Jim, if I — if I can just respond very quickly, first of all, every

  • study has shown that Medicare has lower administrative cost than private insurance does, which is

  • why seniors are generally pretty happy with it. And private insurers have to make a profit.

  • Nothing wrong with that; that's what they do. And so you've got higher administrative

  • costs, plus profit on top of that, and if you are going to save any money through what

  • Governor Romney's proposing, what has to happen is is that the money has to come from somewhere.

  • And when you move to a voucher system, you are putting seniors at the mercy of those

  • insurance companies. And over time, if traditional Medicare has decayed or fallen apart, then

  • they're stuck. And this is the reason why AARP has said that your plan would weaken

  • Medicare substantially, and that's why they were supportive of the approach that we took.

  • One last point I want to make. We do have to lower the cost of health care. Not just

  • in Medicare and

  • MR. LEHRER: We'll talk about that in a minute.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: — butbut overall.

  • MR. LEHRER: Go. OK.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: And so

  • MR. ROMNEY: That's — that's a big topic. Could wecould we stay on Medicare?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Is that a — is that a separate topic? I'm sorry.

  • MR. LEHRER: Yeah, we're going toyeah. I want to get to it, but all I want to do

  • is very quickly

  • MR. ROMNEY: Let's get back to Medicare.

  • MR. LEHRER: — before we leave the economy

  • MR. ROMNEY: Let's get back to Medicare.

  • MR. LEHRER: No, no, no, no

  • MR. ROMNEY: The president said that the government can provide the service at lower

  • MR. LEHRER: No.

  • MR. ROMNEY: — cost and without a profit.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right.

  • MR. ROMNEY: If that's the case, then it will always be the best product that people can

  • purchase. But my experience

  • MR. LEHRER: Wait a minute, Governor.

  • MR. ROMNEY: My experience is the private sector typically is able to provide a better product

  • at a lower cost.

  • MR. LEHRER: Can wecan the two of you agree that the voters have a choice, a clear

  • choice between the two of you

  • MR. ROMNEY: Absolutely.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yes.

  • MR. LEHRER: — on Medicare?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Absolutely.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right. So, to finish quickly, briefly, on the economy, what is your view

  • about the level of federal regulation of the economy right now? Is there too much, and

  • in your case, Mr. President, is thereshould there be more? Beginning with youthis

  • is not a new two-minute segmentto start, and we'll go for a few minutes and then we're

  • going to go to health care. OK?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Regulation is essential. You can't have a free market work if you don't have

  • regulation. As a business person, I had to have — I needed to know the regulations.

  • I needed them there. You couldn't have people opening up banks in theirin their garage

  • and making loans. I mean, you have to have regulations so that you can have an economy

  • work. Every free economy has good regulation.

  • At the same time, regulation can become excessive.

  • MR. LEHRER: Is it excessive now, do you think?

  • MR. ROMNEY: In some places, yes, in other places, no.

  • MR. LEHRER: Like where?

  • MR. ROMNEY: It can become out of date. And what's happened inwith some of the legislation

  • that's been passed during the president's term, you've seen regulation become excessive

  • and it's hurt theit's hurt the economy. Let me give you an example. Dodd- Frank was

  • passed, and it includes within it a number of provisions that I think have some unintended

  • consequences that are harmful to the economy. One is it designates a number of banks as

  • too big to fail, and they're effectively guaranteed by the federal government.

  • This is the biggest kiss that's been given toto New York banks I've ever seen. This

  • is an enormous boon for them. There's been — 122 community and small banks have closed

  • since Dodd-Frank. So there's one example.

  • Here's another. In Dodd-Frank, it says that

  • MR. LEHRER: You want to repeal Dodd-Frank?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, I would repeal it and replace it. Youwe're not going to get rid of

  • all regulation. You have to have regulation. And there's some parts of Dodd-Frank that

  • make all the sense in the world. You need transparency, you need to have leverage limits

  • for institutes

  • MR. LEHRER: Well, here's a specificlet's — excuse me

  • MR. ROMNEY: Let me mention the other one. Let's talk the

  • MR. LEHRER: No, no, let's doright now, let's not. Let's let him respond.

  • MR. ROMNEY: OK.

  • MR. LEHRER: Let's let him respond to this specific on Dodd-Frank and what the governor

  • just said.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I think this is a great example. The reason we have been in such a

  • enormous economic crisis was prompted by reckless behavior across the board. Now, it wasn't

  • just on Wall Street. You hadloan officers werethey were giving loans and mortgages

  • that really shouldn't have been given, because they'rethe folks didn't qualify. You

  • had people who were borrowing money to buy a house that they couldn't afford. You had

  • credit agencies that were stamping these as A-1 (ph) great investments when they weren't.

  • But you also had banks making money hand-over-fist, churning out products that the bankers themselves

  • didn't even understand in order to make big profits, but knowing that it made the entire

  • system vulnerable.

  • So what did we do? We stepped in and had the toughest reforms on Wall Street since the

  • 1930s. We said you've gotbanks, you've got to raise your capital requirements. You

  • can't engage in some of this risky behavior that is putting Main Street at risk. We're

  • going to make sure that you've got to have a living will, soso we can know how you're

  • going to wind things down if you make a bad bet so we don't have other taxpayer bailouts.

  • In the meantime, by the way, we also made sure that all the help that we provided those

  • banks was paid back, every single dime, with interest.

  • Now, Governor Romney has said he wants to repeal Dodd-Frank, and, you know, I appreciate,

  • and it appears we've got some agreement that a marketplace to work has to have some regulation,

  • but in the past, Governor Romney has said he just wants to repeal Dodd-Frank, roll it

  • back. And so the question is does anybody out there think that the big problem we had

  • is that there was too much oversight and regulation of Wall Street? Because if you do, then Governor

  • Romney is your candidate. But that's not what I believe.

  • MR. ROMNEY: (Inaudible) — sorry, Jim. Thatthat's just notthat's just not the

  • facts. Look, we have to have regulation of Wall Street.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Thatthat's why I'd have regulation. But I wouldn't designate five banks as too

  • big to fail and give them a blank check. That's one of the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank.

  • It wasn't thought through properly. We need to get rid of that provision, because it's

  • killing regional and small banks. They're getting hurt.

  • Let me mention another regulation of Dodd-Frank. You say we were giving mortgages to people

  • who weren't qualified. That's exactly right. It's one of the reasons for the great financial

  • calamity we had. And so Dodd-Frank correctly says we need to

  • MR. LEHRER: All right.

  • MR. ROMNEY: — have qualified mortgages, and if you give a mortgage that's not qualified,

  • there are big penalties. Except they didn't ever go on to define what a qualified mortgage

  • was.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right.

  • MR. ROMNEY: It's been two years. We don't know what a qualified mortgage is yet. So

  • banks are reluctant to make loans, mortgages. Try and get a mortgage these days. It's hurt

  • the housing market

  • MR. LEHRER: All right

  • MR. ROMNEY: — because Dodd-Frank didn't anticipate putting in place the kinds of regulations

  • you have to have. It's not that Dodd- Frank always was wrong with too much regulation.

  • Sometimes they didn't come out with a clear regulation.

  • MR. LEHRER: OK.

  • MR. ROMNEY: I will make sure we don't hurt the functioning of ourof our marketplace

  • and our businesses, because I want to bring back housing and get good jobs.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right, I think we have another clear difference between the two of you. Now

  • let's move to health care, where I know there is a clear difference — (laughter) — and

  • that has to do with the Affordable Care Act, "Obamacare."

  • And it's a two-minute new segment, and it's — that means two minutes each. And you go

  • first, Governor Romney. You wanted repeal. You want the Affordable Care Act repealed.

  • Why?

  • MR. ROMNEY: I sure do. Well, in part, it comes, again, from my experience. I was in New Hampshire.

  • A woman came to me, and she said, look, I can't afford insurance for myself or my son.

  • I met a couple in Appleton, Wisconsin, and they said, we're thinking of dropping our

  • insurance; we can't afford it. And the number of small businesses I've gone to that are

  • saying they're dropping insurance because they can't afford itthe cost of health

  • care is just prohibitive. Andand we've got to deal with cost.

  • And unfortunately, whenwhen you look at "Obamacare," the Congressional Budget Office

  • has said it will cost $2,500 a year more than traditional insurance. So it's adding to cost.

  • And as a matter of fact, when the president ran for office, he said that by this year

  • he would have brought down the cost of insurance for each family by $2,500 a family. Instead,

  • it's gone up by that amount. So it's expensive. Expensive things hurt families. So that's

  • one reason I don't want it.

  • Second reason, it cuts $716 billion from Medicare to pay for it. I want to put that money back

  • in Medicare for our seniors.

  • Number three, it puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people, ultimately,

  • what kind of treatments they can have. I don't like that idea.

  • Fourth, there was a survey done of small businesses across the country. It said, what's been the

  • effect of "Obamacare" on your hiring plans? And three-quarters of them said, it makes

  • us less likely to hire people. I just don't know how the president could have come into

  • office, facing 23 million people out of work, rising unemployment, an economic crisis at

  • theat the kitchen table and spent his energy and passion for two years fighting

  • for "Obamacare" instead of fighting for jobs for the American people.

  • It has killed jobs. And the best course for health care is to do what we did in my state,

  • craft a plan at the state level that fits the needs of the state. And then let's focus

  • on getting the costs down for people rather than raising it with the $2,500 additional

  • premium.

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, the argument against repeal.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, four years ago when I was running for office I was traveling around

  • and having those same conversations that Governor Romney talks about. And it wasn't just that

  • small businesses were seeing costs skyrocket and they couldn't get affordable coverage

  • even if they wanted to provide it to their employees; it wasn't just that this was the

  • biggest driver of our federal deficit, our overall health care costs. But it was families

  • who were worried about going bankrupt if they got sickmillions of families, all across

  • the country.

  • If they had a pre-existing condition they might not be able to get coverage at all.

  • If they did have coverage, insurance companies might impose an arbitrary limit. And so as

  • a consequence, they're paying their premiums, somebody gets really sick, lo and behold they

  • don't have enough money to pay the bills because the insurance companies say that they've hit

  • the limit. So we did work on this alongside working on jobs, because this is part of making

  • sure that middle-class families are secure in this country.

  • And let me tell you exactly what "Obamacare" did. Number one, if you've got health insurance

  • it doesn't mean a government take over. You keep your own insurance. You keep your own

  • doctor. But it does say insurance companies can't jerk you around. They can't impose arbitrary

  • lifetime limits. They have to let you keep your kid on their insuranceyour insurance

  • plan till you're 26 years old. And it also says that they'reyou're going to have

  • to get rebates if insurance companies are spending more on administrative costs and

  • profits than they are on actual care.

  • Number two, if you don't have health insurance, we're essentially setting up a group plan

  • that allows you to benefit from group rates that are typically 18 percent lower than if

  • you're out there trying to get insurance on the individual market.

  • Now, the last point I'd make before

  • MR. LEHRER: Two minutes

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: — before

  • MR. LEHRER: Two minutes is up, sir.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: No, I — I think I've — I had five seconds before you interrupted me

  • was — (laughter) — that the irony is that we've seen this model work really

  • well in Massachusetts, because Governor Romney did a good thing, working with Democrats in

  • the state to set up what is essentially the identical model. And as a consequence, people

  • are covered there. It hasn't destroyed jobs. And as a consequence, we now have a system

  • in which we have the opportunity to start bringing down cost, as opposed to just

  • MR. LEHRER: Your five

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: — leaving millions of people out in the cold.

  • MR. LEHRER: Your five seconds went away a long time ago. (Laughter.)

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: That

  • MR. LEHRER: All right, Governor. Governor, tell thetell the president directly why

  • you think what he just said is wrong about "Obamacare."

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, I did with my first statement.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: You did.

  • MR. ROMNEY: But I'll go on.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Please elaborate.

  • MR. ROMNEY: I'll elaborate.

  • Exactly right.

  • First of all, I like the way we did it in Massachusetts. I like the fact that in my

  • state, we had Republicans and Democrats come together and work together. What you did instead

  • was to push through a plan without a single Republican vote. As a matter of fact, when

  • Massachusetts did something quite extraordinary, elected a Republican senator to stop "Obamacare,"

  • you pushed it through anyway. So entirely on a partisan basis, instead of bringing America

  • together and having a discussion on this important topic, you pushed through something that you

  • and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid thought was the best answer and drove it through.

  • What we did, in a legislature 87 percent Democrat, we worked together. Two hundred legislators

  • in my legislatureonly two voted against the plan by the time we were finished.

  • What were some differences?

  • We didn't raise taxes. You've raised them by a trillion dollars under "Obamacare." We

  • didn't cut Medicare. Of course, we don't have Medicare, but we didn't cut Medicare by $716

  • billion. We didn't put in place a board that can tell people ultimately what treatments

  • they're going to receive.

  • We didn't — we didn't also do something that I think a number of people across this

  • country recognize, which is putput people in a position where they're going to lose

  • the insurance they had and they wanted. Right now, the CBO says up to 20 million people

  • will lose their insurance as "Obamacare" goes into effect next year. And likewise, a study

  • by McKinsey & Company of American businesses said 30 percent of them are anticipating dropping

  • people from coverage. So for those reasons, for the tax, for Medicare, for this board

  • and for people losing their insurance, this is why the American people don't wantdon't

  • want "Obamacare." It's why Republicans said, do not do this.

  • And the Republicans had a — had a plan. They put a plan out. They put out a plan,

  • a bipartisan plan. It was swept aside. I think something this big, this important has to

  • be done in a bipartisan basis. And we have to have a president who can reach across the

  • aisle and fashion important legislation with the input from both parties.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Governor Romney said this has to be done on a bipartisan basis. This

  • was a bipartisan idea. In fact, it was a Republican idea.

  • And Governor Romney, at the beginning of this debate, wrote and said, what we did in Massachusetts

  • could be a model for the nation. And I agree that the Democratic legislators in Massachusetts

  • might have given some advice to Republicans in Congress about how to cooperate, but the

  • fact of the matter is, we used the same advisers, and they say it's the same plan.

  • Itwhen Governor Romney talks about this board, for exampleunelected board that

  • we've createdwhat this is, is a group of health care experts, doctors, et cetera,

  • to figure out how can we reduce the cost of care in the system overall, because thethere

  • are two ways of dealing with our health care crisis.

  • One is to simply leave a whole bunch of people uninsured and let them fend for themselves,

  • to let businesses figure out how long they can continue to pay premiums until finally

  • they just give up and their workers are no longer getting insured, and that's been the

  • trend line. Or, alternatively, we can figure out how do we make the cost of care more effective.

  • And there are ways of doing it.

  • So atat Cleveland Clinic, one of the best health care systems in the world, they

  • actually provide great care cheaper than average. And the reason they do is because they do

  • some smart things. Theythey say, if a patient's coming in, let's get all the doctors

  • together at once, do one test instead of having the patient run around with 10 tests. Let's

  • make sure that we're providing preventive care so we're catching the onset of something

  • like diabetes. Let's — let's pay providers on the basis of performance as opposed to

  • on the basis of how many procedures they'vethey've engaged in. Now, so what this

  • board does is basically identifies best practices and says, let's use the purchasing power of

  • Medicare and Medicaid to help to institutionalize all these good things that we do.

  • And the fact of the matter is that when "Obamacare" is fully implemented, we're going to be in

  • a position to show that costs are going down. And over the last two years, health care premiums

  • have gone up, it's true, but they've gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years.

  • So we're already beginning to see progress. In the meantime, folks out there with insurance,

  • you're already getting a rebate.

  • Let me make one last point. Governor Romney says we should replace it. I'm just going

  • to repeal it, but we can replace it with something. But the problem is he hasn't described what

  • exactly we'd replace it with other than saying we're going to leave it to the states.

  • But the fact of the matter is that some of the prescriptions that he's offered, like

  • letting you buy insurance across state lines, there's no indication that that somehow is

  • going to help somebody who's got a pre-existing condition be able to finally buy insurance.

  • In fact, it's estimated that by repealing "Obamacare," you're looking at 50 million

  • people losing health insurance at a time when it's vitally important.

  • MR. LEHRER: Let's let the governor explain what you would do if "Obamacare" is repealed.

  • How would you replace it? What do you have in mind?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Letwell, actuallyactually it's — it's — it's a lengthy description,

  • but number one, pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan. Number two, young people

  • are able to stay on their family plan. That's already offered in the private marketplace;

  • you don't havehave the government mandate that for that to occur.

  • But let's come back to something the president — I agree on, which is thethe key task

  • we have in health care is to get the costs down so it's more affordable for families,

  • andand then he has as a model for doing that a board of people at the government,

  • an unelected board, appointed board, who are going to decide what kind of treatment you

  • ought to have.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: No, it isn't.

  • MR. ROMNEY: In my opinion, the government is not effective inin bringing down the

  • cost of almost anything. As a matter of fact, free people and free enterprises trying to

  • find ways to do things better are able to be more effective in bringing down the costs

  • than the government will ever be. Your example of the Cleveland clinic is my case in point,

  • along with several others I could describe. This is the private market. These are small

  • these are enterprises competing with each other, learning how to do better and better

  • jobs.

  • I used to consult to businessesexcuse me, to hospitals and to health care providers.

  • I was astonished at the creativity and innovation that exists in the American people. In order

  • to bring the cost of health care down, we don't need to have a — an — a board of

  • 15 people telling us what kinds of treatments we should have. We instead need to put insurance

  • plans, providers, hospitals, doctors on targets such that they have an incentive, as you say,

  • performance pay, for doing an excellent job, for keeping costs down, and that's happening.

  • Intermountain Health Care does it superbly well.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: They do.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Mayo Clinic is doing it superbly well, Cleveland Clinic, others. But the right

  • answer is not to have the federal government take over health care and start mandating

  • to the providers across America, telling a patient and a doctor what kind of treatment

  • they can have. That's the wrong way to go. The private market and individual responsibility

  • always work best.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Let me just point out, first of all, this board that we're talking about

  • can't make decisions about what treatments are given. That's explicitly prohibited in

  • the law.

  • But let's go back to what Governor Romney indicated, that under his plan he would be

  • able to cover people with pre-existing conditions. Well, actually, Governor, that isn't what

  • your plan does. What your plan does is to duplicate what's already the law, which says

  • if you are out of health insurance for three months then you can end up getting continuous

  • coverage and an insurance company can't deny you if you'veif it's been under 90 days.

  • But that's already the law. And that doesn't help the millions of people out there with

  • pre-existing conditions. There's a reason why Governor Romney set up the plan that he

  • did in Massachusetts. It wasn't a government takeover of health care. It was the largest

  • expansion of private insurance. But what it does say is that insurers, you've got to take

  • everybody. Now, that also means that you've got more customers.

  • But when Governor Romney says that he'll replace it with something but can't detail how it

  • will be in fact replaced, and the reason he set up the system he did in Massachusetts

  • is because there isn't a better way of dealing with the pre-existing conditions problem,

  • itit just reminds me ofyou know, he says that he's going to close deductions

  • and loopholes for his tax plan.

  • That's how it's going to be paid for. But we don't know the details. He says that he's

  • going to replace Dodd-Frank, Wall Street reform. But we don't know exactly which ones. He won't

  • tell us. He now says he's going to replace "Obamacare" and assure that all the good things

  • that are in it are going to be in there and you don't have to worry.

  • And at some point, I think the American people have to ask themselves, is the reason that

  • Governor Romney is keeping all these plans to replace secret because they're too good?

  • Isis it because that somehow middle-class families are going to benefit too much from

  • them? No, thethe reason is because when we reform Wall Street, when we tackle the

  • problem of pre-existing conditions, then, you know, these are tough problems, and we've

  • got to make choices. And the choices we've made have been ones that ultimately are benefiting

  • middle-class families all across the country.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right, we're going to move to a —

  • MR. ROMNEY: No, I — I have to respond to that

  • MR. LEHRER: No, but

  • MR. ROMNEY: — which iswhich is my experience as a governor is if I come in andand

  • lay down a piece of legislation and say it's my way or the highway, I don't get a lot done.

  • What I do is the same way that Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan worked together some years

  • ago. When Ronald Reagan ran for office, he laid out the principles that he was going

  • to foster. He said he was going to lower tax rates. He said he was going to broaden the

  • base. You've said the same thing: You're going to simplify the tax code, broaden the base.

  • Those are my principles.

  • I want to bring down the tax burden on middle-income families. And I'm going to work together with

  • Congress to say, OK, what are the various ways we could bring down deductions, for instance?

  • One way, for instance, would be to have a single number. Make up a number — 25,000

  • (dollars), $50,000. Anybody can have deductions up to that amount. And then that number disappears

  • for high-income people. That's one way one could do it. One could follow Bowles-Simpson

  • as a model and take deduction by deduction and make differences that way.

  • There are alternatives to accomplish the objective I have, which is to bring down rates, broaden

  • the base, simplify the code and create incentives for growth.

  • And with regards to health care, you had remarkable details with regards to my pre-existing condition

  • plan. You obviously studied up onon my plan. In fact, I do have a plan that deals

  • with people with pre-existing conditions. That's part of my health care plan. And what

  • we did in Massachusetts is a model for the nation, state by state. And I said that at

  • that time. The federal government taking over health care for the entire nation and whisking

  • aside the 10th Amendment, which gives states the rights for these kinds of things, is not

  • the course for America to have a stronger, more vibrant economy.

  • MR. LEHRER: That is a terrific segue to our next segment, and is the role of government.

  • And let's see, role of government and it isyou are first on this, Mr. President.

  • The question is this. Do you believeboth of youbut you have the first two minutes

  • on this, Mr. Presidentdo you believe there's a fundamental difference between the

  • two of you as to how you view the mission of the federal government?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I definitely think there are differences.

  • MR. LEHRER: Andyeah.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: The first role of the federal government is to keep the American people

  • safe. That's its most basic function. And as commander in chief, that is something that

  • I've worked on and thought about every single day that I've been in the Oval Office.

  • But I also believe that government has the capacitythe federal government has the

  • capacity to help open up opportunity and create ladders of opportunity and to create frameworks

  • where the American people can succeed. Look, the genius of America is the free enterprise

  • system, and freedom, and the fact that people can go out there and start a business, work

  • on an idea, make their own decisions.

  • But as Abraham Lincoln understood, there are also some things we do better together.

  • So in the middle of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln said, let's help to finance the Transcontinental

  • Railroad. Let's start the National Academy of Sciences. Let's start land grant colleges,

  • because we want to give these gateways of opportunity for all Americans, because if

  • all Americans are getting opportunity, we're all going to be better off. That doesn't restrict

  • people's freedom; that enhances it.

  • And so what I've tried to do as president is to apply those same principles. And when

  • it comes to education, what I've said is we've got to reform schools that are not working.

  • We use something called Race to the Top. Wasn't a top-down approach, Governor. What we've

  • said is to states, we'll give you more money if you initiate reforms. And as a consequence,

  • you had 46 states around the country who have made a real difference.

  • But what I've also said is let's hire another hundred thousand math and science teachers

  • to make sure we maintain our technological lead and our people are skilled and able to

  • succeed. And hard-pressed states right now can't all do that. In fact, we've seen layoffs

  • of hundreds of thousands of teachers over the last several years, and Governor Romney

  • doesn't think we need more teachers. I do, because I think that that is the kind of investment

  • where the federal government can help. It can't do it all, but it can make a difference,

  • and as a consequence, we'll have a better-trained workforce, and that will create jobs, because

  • companies want to locate in places where we've got a skilled workforce.

  • MR. LEHRER: Two minutes, Governor, on the role of government, your view.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, first, I love great schools. Massachusetts, our schools are ranked number

  • one of all 50 states. And the key to great schools: great teachers. So I reject the idea

  • that I don't believe in great teachers or more teachers. Every school district, every

  • state should make that decision on their own.

  • The role of governmentlook behind us: the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

  • The role of government is to promote and protect the principles of those documents. First,

  • life and liberty. We have a responsibility to protect the lives and liberties of our

  • people, and that means the military, second to none. I do not believe in cutting our military.

  • I believe in maintaining the strength of America's military.

  • Second, in that line that says, we are endowed by our Creator with our rights — I believe

  • we must maintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country. That

  • statement also says that we are endowed by our Creator with the right to pursue happiness

  • as we choose. I interpret that as, one, making sure that those people who are less fortunate

  • and can't care for themselves are cared byby one another.

  • We're a nation that believes we're all children of the same God. And we care for those that

  • have difficultiesthose that are elderly and have problems and challenges, those that

  • disabled, we care for them. And we look for discovery and innovation, all these thing

  • desired out of the American heart to provide the pursuit of happiness for our citizens.

  • But we also believe in maintaining for individuals the right to pursue their dreams, and not

  • to have the government substitute itself for the rights of free individuals. And what we're

  • seeing right now is, in my view, a — a trickle-down government approach which has government thinking

  • it can do a better job than free people pursuing their dreams. And it's not working.

  • And the proof of that is 23 million people out of work. The proof of that is one out

  • of six people in poverty. The proof of that is we've gone from 32 million on food stamps

  • to 47 million on food stamps. The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates

  • this year can't find work.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Inaudible) —

  • MR. ROMNEY: We know that the path we're taking is not working. It's time for a new path.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right, let's go through some specifics in terms of whathow each of

  • you views the role of government. How doeducation. Does the federal government have a responsibility

  • to improve the quality of public education in America?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Well, the primary responsibility for education isis of course at the state

  • and local level. But the federal government also can play a very important role. And I

  • and I agree with Secretary Arne Duncan. He's — there's some ideas he's put forward

  • on Race to the Topnot all of them but some of them I agree with, and congratulate

  • him for pursuing that. The federal government can get local andand state schools to

  • do a better job.

  • My own view, by the way, is I've added to that. I happen to believe — I want the kids

  • that are getting federal dollars from IDEA oror Title I — these are disabled kids

  • oror poor kids oror lower-income kids, rather. I want them to be able to go

  • to the school of their choice. So all federal funds, instead of going to theto the

  • state or to the school district, I'd have goif you will, follow the child and let

  • the parent and the child decide where to send theirtheirtheir student.

  • MR. LEHRER: How do you see the federal government's responsibility toas I say, to improve

  • the quality of public education in this country?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, as I've indicated, I think that it has a significant role to

  • play. Through our Race to the Top program, we've worked with Republican and Democratic

  • governors to initiate major reforms, and they're having an impact right now.

  • MR. LEHRER: Do you think you have a difference with your views and those of Governor Romney

  • onabout education and the federal government?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, this is where budgets matter because budgets reflect choices. So

  • when Governor Romney indicates that he wants to cut taxes and potentially benefit folks

  • like me and him, and to pay for it, we're having to initiate significant cuts in federal

  • support for education, that makes a difference.

  • You know, his running mate, Congressman Ryan, put forward a budget that reflects many of

  • the principles that Governor Romney's talked about. And it wasn't very detailed. This seems

  • to be a trend. Butbut what it did do is toif you extrapolated how much money

  • we're talking about, you'd look at cutting the education budget by up to 20 percent.

  • When it comes to community colleges, we are seeing great work done out there all over

  • the country because we have the opportunity to train people for jobs that exist right

  • now. And one of the things I suspect Governor Romney and I probably agree on is getting

  • businesses to work with community colleges so that they're setting up their training

  • programs

  • MR. LEHRER: Do you agree, Governor?

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Letletlet me just finish the point.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: I suspect it'll be a small agreement.

  • MR. ROMNEY: It's going over well in my state, by the way, yeah.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thewhere their partnering so thatthey're designing training programs,

  • and people who are going through them know that there's a job waiting for them if they

  • complete them. That makes a big difference. But that requires some federal support.

  • Let me just say one final example. When it comes to making college affordablewhether

  • it's two-year or four-yearone of the things that I did as president was we were

  • sending $60 billion to banks and lenders as middle men for the student loan program, even

  • though the loans were guaranteed. So there was no risk for the banks or the lenders but

  • they were taking billions out of the system.

  • And we said, why not cut out the middle man? And as a consequence, what we've been able

  • to do is to provide millions more students assistance, lower or keep low interest rates

  • on student loans. And this is an example of where our priorities make a difference. Governor

  • Romney, I genuinely believe, cares about education. But when he tells a student that, you know,

  • you should borrow money from your parents to go to college, you know, that indicates

  • the degree to which, you know, there may not be as much of a focus on the fact that folks

  • like myself, folks like Michelle, kids probably who attend University of Denver just don't

  • have that option.

  • And for us to be able to make sure that they've got that opportunity and they can walk through

  • that door, that is vitally importantnot just to those kids. It's how we're going to

  • grow this economy over the long term.

  • MR. LEHRER: We're running out of time.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Jim, Jim

  • MR. LEHRER: I'm certainly going give you a chance to respond to that. Yes, sir, Governor.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Mr. — Mr. President, you're entitled, as the president, to your own airplane

  • and to your own house, but not to your own facts — (laughter) — all right? I'm — I'm

  • not going to cut education funding. I don't have any plan to cut education funding and

  • grants that go to people going to college. I'm planning on continuing to grow, so I'm

  • not planning on making changes there.

  • But you make a very good point, which is that thethe place you put your money makes

  • a pretty clear indication of where your heart is. You put $90 billion intointo green

  • jobs. Andand I — look, I'm all in favor of green energy. Ninety billion (dollars)

  • thatthat would havethat would have hired 2 million teachers. Ninety billion

  • dollars. And these businessesmany of them have gone out of business. I think about

  • half of them, of the ones have been invested in, they've gone out of business. A number

  • of them happened to be owned byby people who were contributors to your campaigns.

  • Look, the right course forfor America's governmentwe were talking about the role

  • of governmentis not to become the economic player picking winners and losers, telling

  • people what kind of health treatment they can receive, taking over the health care system

  • thatthat has existed in this country forfor a long, long time and has produced

  • the best health records in the world. The right answer for government is to say, how

  • do we make the private sector become more efficient and more effective?

  • How do we get schools to be more competitive? Let's grade them. I propose we grade our schools

  • so parents know which schools are succeeding and failing, so they can take their child

  • to a — to a school that's being more successful. I don't — I don't want to cut our commitment

  • to education; I wanted to make it more effective and efficient.

  • And by the way, I've had that experience. I don't just talk about it. I've been there.

  • Massachusetts schools are ranked number one in the nation. This is not because I didn't

  • have commitment to education. It's because I care about education for all of our kids.

  • MR. LEHRER: All right, gentlemen, look

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Jim, I — (inaudible) —

  • MR. LEHRER: Excuse me, one secexcuse, me sir. (Laughter.) We've gotwe've got

  • barely have three minutes left. I'm not going to grade the two of you and say you've

  • your answers have been too long or I've done a poor job

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: You've done a great job, Jim.

  • MR. LEHRER: Oh, well, no. But the fact is, governmentthe role of government and

  • governing, we've lost a (pod ?), in other words, so we only have three minutes left

  • in thein the debate before we go to your closing statements. And so I want to ask finally

  • hereand remember, we've got three minutes total time here.

  • And the question is this: Many of the legislative functions of the federal government right

  • now are in a state of paralysis as a result of partisan gridlock. If elected in your case,

  • if re-elected in your case, what would you do about that?

  • Governor?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Jim, I had the great experienceit didn't seem like it at the timeof

  • being elected in a state where my legislature was 87 percent Democrat, and that meant I

  • figured out from day one I had to get along and I had to work across the aisle to get

  • anything done. We drove our schools to be number one in the nation. We cut taxes 19

  • times.

  • MR. LEHRER: Well, what would you do as president?

  • MR. ROMNEY: Weas president, I will sit down on day oneactually the day after

  • I get elected, I'll sit down with leadersthe Democratic leaders as well as Republican

  • leaders andas we did in my state. We met every Monday for a couple hours, talked

  • about the issues and the challenges in thein thein our state, in that case.

  • We have to work on a collaborative basisnot because we're going to compromise our principle(s),

  • but because there's common ground.

  • And the challenges America faces right nowlook, the reason I'm in this race is there

  • are people that are really hurting today in this country, and we facethis deficit

  • could crush the future generations. What's happening in the Middle East? There are developments

  • around the world that are of real concern. And Republicans and Democrats both love America,

  • but we need to have leadershipleadership in Washington that will actually bring people

  • together and get the job done and could not care less if it's a Republican or a Democrat.

  • I've done it before. I'll do it again.

  • MR. LEHRER: Mr. President.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, I think Governor Romney's going to have a busy first

  • day, because he's also going to repeal "Obamacare," which will not be very popular among Democrats

  • as you're sitting down with them.

  • (Laughter.)

  • But look, my philosophy has been I will take ideas from anybody, Democrat or Republican,

  • as long as they're advancing the cause of making middle-class families stronger and

  • giving ladders of opportunity into the middle class. That's how we cut taxes for middle-class

  • families and small businesses. That's how we cut a trillion dollars of spending that

  • wasn't advancing that cause. That's how we signed three trade deals into law that are

  • helping us to double our exports and sell more American products around the world. That's

  • how we repealed "don't ask, don't tell." That's how we ended the war in Iraq, as I promised,

  • and that's how we're going to wind down the war in Afghanistan. That's how we went after

  • al-Qaida and bin Laden.

  • So we'vewe've seen progress even under Republican control of the House or Representatives.

  • But ultimately, part of being principled, part of being a leader is, A, being able to

  • describe exactly what it is that you intend to do, not just saying, I'll sit down, but

  • you have to have a plan.

  • Number two, what's important is occasionally you've got to say now tototo folks

  • both in your own party and in the other party. And you know, yes, have we had some fights

  • between me and the Republicans when they fought back against us, reining in the excesses of

  • Wall Street? Absolutely, because that was a fight that needed to be had. Whenwhen

  • we were fighting about whether or not we were going to make sure that Americans had more

  • security with their health insurance and they said no, yes, that was a fight that we needed

  • to have. And so part of leadership and governing is both saying what it is that you are for,

  • but also being willing to say no to some things.

  • And I've got to tell you, Governor Romney, when it comes to his own party during the

  • course of this campaign, has not displayed that willingness to say no to some of the

  • more extreme parts of his party.

  • MR. LEHRER: That brings us to closing statements. There was a coin toss. Governor Romney, you

  • won the toss, and you elected to go last.

  • So you have a closing two minutes, Mr. President.

  • PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, Jim, I want to thank you and I want to thank Governor Romney, because

  • I think this was a terrific debate and I very much appreciate it.

  • And I want to thank the University of Denver.

  • You know, four years ago we were going through a major crisis, and yet my faith and confidence

  • in the American future is undiminished. And the reason is because of its people. Because

  • of the woman I met in North Carolina who decided at 55 to go back to school because she wanted

  • to inspire her daughter, and now has a new job from that new training that she's gotten.

  • Because of the company in Minnesota who was willing to give up salaries and perks for

  • their executives to make sure that they didn't lay off workers during a recession. The auto

  • workers that you meet in Toledo or Detroit take such pride in building the best cars

  • in the worldnot just because of a paycheck, but because it gives them that sense of pride,

  • that they're helping to build America.

  • And so the question now is, how do we build on those strengths? And everything that I've

  • tried to do and everything that I'm now proposing for the next four years in terms of improving

  • our education system, or developing American energy, or making sure that we're closing

  • loopholes for companies that are shipping jobs overseas and focusing on small businesses

  • and companies that are creating jobs here in the United States, oror closing our

  • deficit in a responsible, balanced way that allows us to invest in our futureall

  • those things are designed to make sure that the American people, their genius, their grit,

  • their determination isis channeled, andandand they have an opportunity to

  • succeed.

  • And everybody's getting a fair shot and everybody's getting a fair share. Everybody's doing a

  • fair share and everybody's playing by the same rules.

  • You know, four years ago I said that I'm not a perfect man and I wouldn't be a perfect

  • president. And that's probably a promise that Governor Romney thinks I've kept. But I also

  • promised that I'd fight every single day on behalf of the American people and the middle

  • class and all those who are striving to get in the middle class.

  • I've kept that promise and if you'll vote for me, then I promise I'll fight just as

  • hard in a second term.

  • MR. LEHRER: Governor Romney, your two-minute closing.

  • MR. ROMNEY: Thank you, Jim and Mr. President. And thank you for tuning in this evening.

  • This is a — this is an important election. And I'm concerned about America. I'm concerned

  • about the direction America has been taking over the last four years. I know this is bigger

  • than election about the two of us as individuals. It's bigger than our respective parties. It's

  • an election about the course of Americawhat kind of America do you want to have for yourself

  • and for your children.

  • And there really are two very different paths that we began speaking about this evening.

  • And over the course of this month we're going to have two more presidential debates and

  • vice presidential debate. We'll talk about those two paths. But they lead in very different

  • directions. And it's not just looking to our words that you have to take in evidence of

  • where they go; you can look at the record.

  • There's no question in my mind that if the president were to be re-elected you'll continue

  • to see a middle-class squeeze with incomes going down and prices going up. I'll get incomes

  • up again. You'll see chronic unemployment. We've had 43 straight months with unemployment

  • above 8 percent. If I'm president, I will createhelp create 12 million new jobs

  • in this country with rising incomes.

  • If the president's re-elected, "Obamacare" will be fully installed. In my view, that's

  • going to mean a whole different way of life for people who counted on the insurance plan

  • they had in the past. Many will lose it. You're going to see health premiums go up by some

  • $2,500 perper family. If I'm elected, we won't have "Obamacare." We'll put in place

  • the kind of principles that I put in place in my own state and allow each state to craft

  • their own programs to get people insured. And we'll focus on getting the cost of health

  • care down.

  • If the president were to be re-elected, you're going to see a $716 billion cut to Medicare.

  • You'll have 4 million people who will lose Medicare advantage. You'll have hospitals

  • and providers that'll no longer accept Medicare patients.

  • I'll restore that $716 billion to Medicare.

  • And finally, military. If the president's re-elected, you'll see dramatic cuts to our

  • military. The secretary of defense has said these would be even devastating. I will not

  • cut our commitment to our military. I will keep America strong and get America's middle

  • class working again.

  • Thank you, Jim.

  • MR. LEHRER: Thank you, Governor.

  • Thank you, Mr. President.

  • The next debate will be the vice presidential event on Thursday, October 11th at Center

  • College in Danville, Kentucky. For now, from the University of Denver, I'm Jim Lehrer.

  • Thank you, and good night. (Cheers, applause.)

JIM LEHRER: Good evening from the Magness Arena at the University of Denver in Denver,

字幕と単語

ワンタップで英和辞典検索 単語をクリックすると、意味が表示されます

B1 中級

第1回大統領討論会。オバマ対ロムニー (コンプリートHD-高音質) (First Presidential Debate: Obama vs. Romney (Complete HD - Quality Audio))

  • 568 38
    緯偉瑋 に公開 2021 年 01 月 14 日
動画の中の単語