Special Event

Election 2000: Gore and Bush Face Off in Their First Presidential Debate

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ANNOUNCER: They've been slugging it out all year...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Oh, he has flip-flopped on the issue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: ... long distance...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AL GORE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Several people have asked our opponents and they haven't answered it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: ... through caucuses, primaries and conventions...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: God bless America.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GORE: God bless America.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: ... battling the ups and downs of public opinion, now locked in the closest presidential election campaign in 20 years.

Over the next 14 days, Vice President Al Gore and Texas Governor George W. Bush square off in three decisive debates: a former reporter and an ex-oil man, Ivy League scions of political dynasties face to face on a national stage that will propel one of them to the presidency of the United States.

Tonight, from Boston, we bring you the first of those debates. And later, we'll see how voters react. We'll take you to Florida, a key battleground state, for a "CNN & TIME" town meeting.

Now, from the CNN election desk, here's Judy Woodruff.

JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you for joining us.

One hour from now, Al Gore and George W. Bush meet for the most crucial single event so far in their contest to be president. During the next hour, we will talk to CNN reporters and analysts, we'll talk to spokesmen for the Bush and Gore campaigns, and a group of undecided voters in Florida: the kind of voters who will decide this election.

Just five weeks until election day, the latest CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup tracking poll highlights the importance of tonight's debate and the potential impact of those undecided.

In the poll, Al Gore is at 46 percent, George W. Bush at 44 percent. The two men have been in a statistical dead-heat for 10 straight days.

Well, we start our coverage with two of our senior correspondents, who have followed this race from its beginnings this year in the cold of Iowa, and even before. Joining us from the debate site at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, CNN senior White House correspondent John King and CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley.

Candy, we go to you first.

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Judy, high noon comes to Boston at 9:00 p.m.: no confetti, no banners, no able advisers, just Al Gore and George Bush.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BUSH: Tonight's not the night for gimmicks. Tonight is the night for talking about heart, compassion and vision.

CROWLEY (voice-over): Bush's goal is to show himself as a man of substance, ready for primetime, ready for the Oval Office. He needs an error-free powerful evening. Bush will emphasize his education agenda, a subject on which he expounds comfortably; his Social Security reform plan, which he believes has resonance among swing voters; his defense policies and his plans to revamp Medicare.

Aides say Bush is also prepared and eager to defend his across- the-board tax cut, which they fully expect Al Gore to target.

There will be a single theme in Bush's policy talk, a bright line he wants to paint for voters. His agenda, he will argue, gives more freedom to Americans. Gore's agenda, he will say, gives more power to the government. But there is a broader picture that plays to what strategists see as a key Bush strength. In the end, the Bush camp wants viewers to know not just the details of policy, but the nature of the man.

KARL ROVE, SENIOR BUSH STRATEGISTS: What they'll really walk away with is a knowledge of what kind of person he is: that he's plain-spoken, that he's a strong leader, that he's somebody who has firm opinions that don't bend with the wind or the latest focus group or poll.

CROWLEY: Bush is ready to use this side-by-side event to highlight instances where he believes Al Gore has changed positions for political gain.

With polls showing some lingering questions about his readiness for the job, Bush needs to show himself a man of substance with the personal qualities that would make voters comfortable to have him in the Oval Office for four years. As he arrived in Boston, Bush was described by aides as serene and in the zone.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CROWLEY: What he needs to avoid are the danger zones. For months, Bush has been pummeled on late-night TV for his grammatical slips. His critics have tried to frame his as a lightweight beginner. For tonight, there is no danger for Bush except if he slips into those mistake -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: All right, Candy, and we're going to come back to you in just a moment. But right now, let's go to our senior White House correspondent John King -- John.

JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Judy, this is a moment the vice president has been preparing for all his adult life. He's had his eyes on the presidency, the theme from "Rocky" playing a short time ago as the vice president left his hotel to head here to the University of Massachusetts at Boston campus. Aides say a strong performance tonight, in their view, could be the decisive moment in the race for the White House.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KING (voice-over): The vice president's goal is to keep it relaxed, polite and focused on familiar policy differences with Governor Bush. Gore won the coin toss and gets the first answer at tonight's debate. Senior advisers say the vice president will look for every opportunity to draw contrasts on three key issues: health care, education and taxes. The more specific the better in the Gore camp's view.

TAD DEVINE, GORE SENIOR ADVISER: Our goal here is not to surprise anyone but to make sure that they understand the details behind the policy proposals.

KING: The vice president is betting the election will break his way if he can stress these points. On health care: that he favors a prescription drug benefit for all elderly Americans through the Medicare program while Bush relies on insurance companies and HMOs to cover all but low-income seniors. On taxes: that his $500 million mix of targeted tax cuts for things like college costs, health care and retirement savings is a better approach than the governor's $1.3 trillion across-the-board tax cut plan. And on education: that Bush's support of using tax dollars for private school vouchers is a threat to public education.

Stay the course will be the vice president's theme on the economy, the debate issue that most worries Republicans in the big battleground states.

CURT STEINER, GOP STRATEGIST: And one of the things unfortunately that is going to work to the vice president's advantage in this election cycle is going to be that it's generally going to be a pro-incumbent environment in Ohio. And to the extent that Gore can claim that incumbency mantle, unfortunately, that's going to be a little bit of an advantage for him.

KING: It will be a familiar setting. Gore's resume includes more than 40 televised debates dating back to his days in Congress.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: But the stakes, of course, tonight could not be higher: an estimated 60 to 75 million Americans tuning in. Both campaigns realizing the stakes, out already with what they call prebuttals, this one distributed first by the Gore campaign. The Bush campaign quick to follow. As the American people watch tonight, the campaigns also actively trying to shape the media coverage -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: All right, John, and let's bring Candy back in. Speaking of those prebuttals or whatever we're calling them, Candy, what is it that the Bush people are saying ahead of time is the message they want to get out no matter what Vice President Gore says?

CROWLEY: This campaign, Judy, from the beginning, a year and a half ago in June of last year, has really been framed on one issue, and that is leadership. The governor has sold himself as a man who provided leadership in Texas, who can work across the aisles. And everything that he goes to tonight will have that as a subtext.

He will talk policy, he will talk specifics. But all of that goes into that one underlying core belief, and that is that what people are looking for out there is leadership, and George Bush is selling himself as the man who can provide it.

WOODRUFF: Well, John King, if that's what Governor Bush is going to be saying, how does the vice president counter that?

KING: Well, the vice president tries to counter it by making experience his trump card, making the case, especially if international policy comes up, something not discussed every day on the campaign trail, that he is more prepared to assume the presidency.

Another key strategy for the Gore campaign, they give the governor credit. They believe he has moved back to the middle of the electorate after courting the conservative base in the Republican primaries. They want to push him back to the right and try to court independent voters by bringing up his support for privatizing some of Social Security, by bringing up his opposition to abortion rights, if that is possible. They want to try to make Governor Bush more of a conservative, much harder because he's from outside of Washington. He doesn't have the baggage, say, that Bob Dole had four years ago when President Clinton tried to tie him to the controversial House speaker at the time, Newt Gingrich.

WOODRUFF: All right, John King, Candy Crowley, and we'll be hearing much more from you two as the evening goes on. Thank you both.

Well, CNN's coverage wouldn't be complete without hearing from two of our veteran political analysts. CNN's Jeff Greenfield and Bill Schneider join me to talk about what could be a defining moment. Although we all hate that term, we seem to say it over and over and over again.

Bill, we've been talking today about these "undecideds," these people who are supposedly -- could tip the election one way or another. Who are these people? Where are they?

WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, you know, the conventional wisdom is that both of these campaigns are targeting those undecided voters, but they're really different kinds of undecided voters, Judy.

They're just 6 percent of the voters right now who say they're truly undecided, but there are three times as many voters who are now supporting one of the major candidates, but also say they could change their minds. What's the difference between those undecided voters and the swing voters?

Take a look. The swing voters are pretty upscale. Almost half of them have high incomes, over $50,000. Undecided voters are more downscale. Fewer than one in four have incomes that high. And a lot of them are politically uninvolved in the election. You have to reach them through talk shows and late-night comedy shows.

Now, it's those, the larger group of swing voters who are really important in this election, because they're the ones who move back and forth. Remember, Bush was ahead for a while, then Gore was ahead last month, now it's a dead-heat.

When you've got a dead heat, it is tempting to say that the voters are deeply polarized between the two warring camps, that they're fighting over those undecideds. But that isn't what's happening right now. What's happening is the voters, in my view, are really very "two-minded" about this election. They could vote for either Bush or Gore. They want a change of leadership, which brings them to Bush, but they want a change -- they do not want a change of direction in the country, and that leads them to stick with Gore. And that's what makes this election so unpredictable. WOODRUFF: All right, Jeff Greenfield, another interesting, I think, point we want to make about tonight is that this debate is being held in Boston. Now, we know the Bush people originally didn't want a debate in the state of Massachusetts, the heavily Democratic state of Massachusetts. But there is some historical significance, clearly.

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SENIOR ANALYST: Well, this debate actually is taking place about -- very close to the John F. Kennedy Library. And one of the symbols of that, is that 40 years ago, the Nixon- Kennedy debates did introduce something into American politics we had never had before: presidential debates.

We went 16 years without them. But then in '76, when an embattled Gerald Ford challenged his outsider incumbent to a debate, they became a permanent part of the process. The other reason that I think it's interesting historically is from the very -- literally, the very first debate, atmospherics trumped issues.

All anybody remembers of that first debate is that Richard Nixon looked like he had just undergone root canal. And what we have created, in a sense, is not just a debate between two candidates on issues, but almost a kind of modern trial by ordeal. We throw them into this pit. All of the press is watching for a smirk, a sweaty upper lip.

And if they survive, they have a shot at that, being president. I'm not sure this is what the Lincoln-Douglas debates were about. But it really has become a very unusual mix of the serious and the stylistic.

WOODRUFF: And so, what happened in 1960 really launched all this. I mean, when you had John Kennedy -- who, at that point, was underestimated -- he was believed to be the lightweight United States senator.

GREENFIELD: He had -- he had much the problem of any outsider against a more experienced fellow. What Bill Schneider now calls the "stature gap" was closed in that first debate. And the sign of it was not so much polling. We were much less sophisticated back then, for good or ill.

But the crowds got bigger after that first debate. The Democrats who were fence-sitters, weren't sure Kennedy could win, started showing up at his rallies. And that changed American politics permanently. And you could argue that we put too much emphasis on these debates. But, you know, at a time when so much of these campaigns lack all spontaneity, the very fact these things are live and there is some chance for something unexpected to happen, makes it a fascinating 90 minutes.

WOODRUFF: Makes it riveting television.

GREENFIELD: Well, we'll see.

WOODRUFF: All right. It will be. We promise. GREENFIELD: OK.

WOODRUFF: All right, Jeff Greenfield and Bill Schneider. We'll be back to both of you.

But coming up next: the pre-debate spin. Spokesmen from both campaigns will join us with their perspective. And later, we check in with a CNN/"TIME" town meeting in the battleground state of Florida to hear the voice of the undecided.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOODRUFF: Both campaigns insist their man is ready for tonight's debate. And with the race locked in a dead heat, both sides are eager to get their message out to the all-important undecided.

And joining us now with inside perspective, Bush campaign senior adviser Ari Fleischer, and Gore campaign spokesman, Chris Lehane.

Welcome, gentlemen.

Chris Lehane, to you first. The consensus among the observers, the experts, seems to be that, among other thing, what the vice president has got to do tonight is to show a warmth, a likability, that, for all of his knowledge, doesn't often come across.

CHRIS LEHANE, SPOKESMAN, GORE CAMPAIGN: Well, the great thing about this debate tonight is that 75 million people will be watching. It gives Al Gore a great opportunity to lay out the issues, the specifics, the substance.

What we know from our experience at the Democratic Convention is that the American people really want to hear about ideas. They want to hear specifics. They want to hear issues. And we know that Al Gore is offering the right agenda for America's future. He wants to use our prosperity to benefit all of our people. And we know people respond to that.

WOODRUFF: So the warmth and the likability -- what?

LEHANE: I think people want to know that their president is going to roll up his or her sleeves and fight for them. They want to know they are going have a fighter in the Oval Office for them and their families. Al Gore has a long, long track record of taking on the big, powerful special interests that stand in the way of working families.

And they know, in Al Gore, they have someone who will fight for them.

WOODRUFF: Well, Ari Fleischer, let me -- let me put a -- the analysis that we're getting from a lot of the experts today, and that is that what Governor Bush needs to do is to demonstrate that he is up to the job. And it's a sort of mirror image of what the vice president needs to do. ARI FLEISCHER, BUSH SENIOR ADVISER: Well, Judy, I will answer your question. This is an important moment. And it is important for the voters to be able to look at the two candidates with their own eyes and with their own ears and make that determination about who is up to the job, who does have command of the issues, who is a leader and who is the type of leader who can bring people together.

And I think that's what you're going to see up on the stage tonight. Governor Bush is looking forward, particularly, to discussing education. He has a plan to help improve education. That's what tonight's about: a discussion of the issues.

WOODRUFF: Chris Lehane, what is it that we can count on the vice president to take apart, if you will, in Governor Bush's positions?

LEHANE: Well, there are two very, very different competing visions for America's future that you will see tonight. Al Gore wants to use our prosperity in a responsible way, pay down the debt, invest in our priorities. The Governor, on the other hand, has this massive tax cut that benefits the very, very few at the expense of the very many.

It does not pay down the debt. It doesn't do anything, because of this tax cut, to really invest in our priorities. He's going to be forced tonight to defend the indefensible and explain the unexplainable: why he wants to use our budget prosperity for the very wealthy and not the very many.

WOODRUFF: And, on the other hand, Ari Fleischer, what about Governor Bush? What is it about the vice president's set of positions that we can count on him to try to take apart?

FLEISCHER: Well, Judy, this is a very close race. And it's going to be important, the decisions that people make, based on what they hear tonight, because people are going to have a distinct choice between a vision of government that says: Government knows best, it can make all the decisions for the public. Keep sending those tax dollars to Washington. Washington can invent the new spending program to figure out how best to solve people's problems.

Or a governor who has successfully brought Democrats and Republicans together to empower people, to empower parents through educating their children, to empower families by giving the largest tax cuts in Texas' history, something he wants to do on the national level to provide tax relief, and particularly, to get prescription drugs to our nation's seniors.

Those are the choices people have. That's what we're going to be taking a look at. And it really comes down to whether you want a big government that's going to make all those decisions, do those things for you, or a government that will work with you and trust you and empower you to solve the problems in your life.

GREENFIELD; Gentlemen, it's Jeff Greenfield. I've got a question for both of you. I'd like to start with you, Chris. Is there anything of a political or public-policy nature about the other guy that has impressed you? Being a good husband and father and a good dresser doesn't count. But as you slog through this last year, as you look across the isle, Chris, can you say that there's something about -- anything about Governor Bush where you have said, "not bad"?

LEHANE: Well, I think he's done an incredibly good job of not explaining any of the details of his major programs. He hasn't...

GREENFIELD: Chris, that doesn't -- no, no. That doesn't count. I mean, seriously. I mean, let's not spin it. Just for once, anything about Governor Bush that you can legitimately say not bad?

LEHANE: You know, we, the governor and the vice president, are on agreement that we do need accountability in our public schools. That's something that we've been very forceful on. It's something the governor has talked about. We are in agreement on that issue.

I would also add, though, that we also believe that you need to support our students, which is why we want to use our surplus and prosperity to invest significantly in our schools. But yes, on the issue of accountability, I think both candidates are on agreement.

GREENFIELD: All right. Now, Ari, that was actually a mildly positive thing. Can you reply in kind?

FLEISCHER: It was. I think it shows that they're weak on accountability, and so they want to pretend that they have a strong...

GREENFIELD: Come on now. Come on. Play up.

FLEISCHER: I think you do have to give credit to Al Gore's debating skills, frankly. You know, he did serve in the House of Representatives and the Senate for a number of years, more than 12. He's a career legislator. He's got a wealth of experience in filibusters and debating issues on the floor, and I think that's going to come in handy for the vice president tonight.

He is a strong debater. The governor's experience is in a different area. But he did pretty well in the primaries himself debating. And we'll be all testing that tonight, and I think it's going to be a very interesting contest for the voters to watch tonight.

WOODRUFF: All right, Ari Fleischer, Chris Lehane, thank you both. We'll be watching you both after this debate.

GREENFIELD: And after this break coming up, we will step back from election 2000 for a check on some other news, and something to keep in mind as you watch tonight's debate: You can also log on and enter -- quote -- "the spin room" for some real-time perspective from analysts Bill Press and Tucker Carlson. That's at cnn.com/election2000.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) WOODRUFF: 35 minutes from now, that's where Al Gore and George W. Bush will stand. Moderator Jim Lehrer will be seated there in the middle at that desk. They will be there for their first of three presidential debates.

The scene is the Clark Athletic Center at the University of Massachusetts' Boston campus.

Let's check in now with "THE WORLD TODAY'S" Joie Chen for this day's other top story -- Joie.

JOIE CHEN, CNN ANCHOR: Judy, we want to bring our viewers up to date, breaking away from political coverage just long enough to bring our viewers up to date on this very important story.

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is set to hold talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders in Paris tomorrow amid the escalating violence in the Middle East. The level of bloodshed in the Palestinian-controlled territories is now being likened to a war.

(GUNSHOTS)

In the West Bank, Palestinian rioters fired on an Israeli enclave, shattering a brief cease-fire today. In Gaza, Israeli helicopter gunships were brought in against stone-throwing Palestinians at a crossing point. More than 50 people have been killed in six days of violence following a visit by Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon to one of Jerusalem's most hotly contested holy sites.

Leaders from both sides are placing the blame squarely on each other.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EHUD BARAK, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL: I'm not a prophet. We're trying to calm down the situation. We expect the Palestinian Authority to live up to its responsibilities to put an end to the shooting by the Tanzim, which is a street organization of the Fatah, and the Palestinian police against Israelis.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAEB ERAKAT, CHIEF PALESTINIAN NEGOTIATOR: We've been asking for a commission of inquirers, an independent commission of inquirers to come and see for themselves, because as long as we don't have this coming, the Israelis will continue shooting and at the same time blaming us and finger-pointing and talking about a cease-fire as if the two armies are clashing. No, it's not two armies that are clashing. It's one army. The Israeli army is shooting and Palestinian children who are dying!

(END VIDEO CLIP) CHEN: Secretary of State Madeleine Albright plans to bring Prime Minister Barak and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat together at the Paris talks.

Now we go back to Judy Woodruff and CNN's coverage of the upcoming presidential debate -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: Thanks, Joie, and I want to remind our viewers there's a familiar face who happens to be missing tonight from our coverage. Of course, he's our colleague Bernie Shaw. He happens to be the moderator of Thursday night's vice presidential debate in Danville, Kentucky.

Bernie is already headed to Danville. That's where he will be for the next few days, and we will be talking with him Thursday night after that debate.

Coming up next, though, in this special program leading up to tonight's presidential tonight, we'll talk to two Washington bureau chiefs, CNN's Frank Sesno, "TIME" magazine's Michael Duffy. They've been working the phones. We'll get their perspective. And a little bit later, Wolf Blitzer with some undecided voters in Florida. We'll be back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOODRUFF: Live pictures from Tampa, Florida, a group of undecided voters. They will be talking to our own Wolf Blitzer in just a few moments. We'll be going right back to them.

And welcome back to CNN's special preview of the first presidential debate of election 2000. Just half an hour from now, Al Gore and George W. Bush will be face to face for 90 minutes on the Boston campus of the University of Massachusetts in front of a television audience that is estimated could be as many as 75 million viewers.

Now, we want to turn to two veterans of these major political events, who have extensive contacts in both campaigns: CNN's Washington bureau chief, Frank Sesno, and the Washington bureau chief for "TIME" magazine, Michael Duffy.

Gentlemen, it's great to see you both. Thanks for joining us.

FRANK SESNO, CNN WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Great to see you, as always.

WOODRUFF: You both have been talking, among other things, to folks in the Gore and the Bush campaigns. Frank, why don't you start us off? What are you hearing? What are they telling you?

SESNO: Well, we're hearing a lot of things. And Mike, I know you and I have been kind of hearing somewhat flip sides of the same coin here, which is to say that what's going to happen tonight should not be scene as a snapshot, that a snapshot is important. This is a continuum. It's going to go over several days. They're looking at the week. I'm told it starts and ends bracketed by these debates. Look at Thursday night as well: the vice presidential. It takes a couple days for these opinions to settle out. What I'm being told anyway is, we'll have a pretty good sense as to how the enduring bounce or impact or dynamic has changed by the weekend.

MICHAEL DUFFY, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, "TIME": That's right. And there are really two debates going on. There's the one that starts in 30 minutes. And there's this desk (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the one that's happening on television screens all across America. Because even as the debates go on -- whatever the tone we see tonight -- there is a whole different one in the television advertisements.

And both campaigns have begun to ramp up considerably the amount of money -- in this key period -- the amount of money they are spending in the key states -- Florida, Michigan, Ohio -- on issues like education and prescription drugs. And so, all along, there's -- as soon as this debate ends, there is going to be a whole other wave of ads that hit the air tonight to sort of, you know, buttress what these guys are saying.

SESNO: And in the end, they are playing for a narrow audience. What is estimated is there are about 10 percent of Bush supporters who are wavering enough; 10 percent of Gore supporters wavering enough to be influenced by all this -- about 10 percent in the middle -- two groups that I'm told, one group that doesn't really care, and the other group that is really deeply conflicted -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: Frank, you both -- you and Michael both have been talking, as well, to the campaigns. You've been talking to their Washington allies, the folks there in the nation's capitol who watch these things year-round, 365 days a year. They have concerns, clearly, going into tonight.

What are they?

DUFFY: Well, the Gore campaign, I think, its allies really wanted to see four words: more Mr. Nice guy. They know that Al Gore is really good on the issues. But they want to make sure that he comes across as personable and doesn't overdo it on the attacks. And they say if George Bush goes looking tonight for the attack dog in Al Gore, that he'll come home empty-handed.

They remind us -- when you talk to them, they remind us that when Jack Kemp and Al Gore debated four years ago, the vice president sort of changed the tone of the thing right at the top by sort of showering, smothering Kemp with deference and respect. And it threw Kemp completely off his game. Gore often does this in the first few minutes of a debate. He bangs the gong early. And so they are looking for Gore to do that.

SESNO: Meanwhile, from Bush, a couple of very senior Republicans on the Hill I was talking to today said they were a bit nervous, a bit nervous that on some of these issues -- and on the heft question -- that it may not be there. The "soft underbelly" -- that's a quote from a ranking Republican -- was the way one person described Bush's tax plan. As a result, the Bush camp is saying: Watch us very closely. We'll do a little math to show that it ads up -- because that's one of Al Gore's charges, is that it doesn't -- and we're going to hit hard the question of fairness: that the tax plan is simple and it's fair and it can work.

DUFFY: Right, they don't want to hit just taxes, because they know that that doesn't help them with that key group of people you're talking about: those swing voters that they need to convince tonight.

SESNO: That's right -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: All right, Frank Sesno, Michael Duffy, we always like to know what you guys are hearing. Thanks very much. Appreciate it.

And we're going to take a break. When we come back, Wolf Blitzer with those voters in Tampa. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOODRUFF: This is the scene at this hour in Boston, Massachusetts, the Clark Athletic Center at the University of Massachusetts, Boston Campus. The setting you see carefully agreed to by the Bush and Gore campaigns: each lectern 48 inches high. That was the subject of discussion. The Bush campaign wanted it a little bit lower.

In the end, they agreed on this height. They have talked about the temperature of the room. They have talked about microphones. Nothing has been left to chance. In fact, there is an agreement between the two campaigns that goes on for dozens of pages.

You see standing there on the stage, the two co-chairs of the Commission on Presidential Debates, Frank Fahrenkopf on the left, former chairman of the Republican Party, and on the right, Paul Kirk, former chairman of the Democratic Party -- Jeff Greenfield.

GREENFIELD: We should mention that this is -- that one of the winners of this debate is the commission, because, in past years, the candidates have kind of changed the formats, changed the timings. In this case, we remember Governor Bush's campaign wanted only one commission debate, and then a Larry King and a Tim Russert debate.

WOODRUFF: Right.

GREENFIELD: And it turns out the commission runs all four of these debates in the cities that they wanted.

WOODRUFF: And the Bush campaign didn't want it as Boston as well. This is the "spin room," for lack of a better term. That's we call it. This is where the reporters are gathered to write their stories on their laptop computers. There are probably as many campaign representatives in that room -- if there aren't now, there will be right after the debate -- as there are reporters.

I think it's a one-to-one ratio of campaign spinners to reporters waiting to be told exactly what happened.

GREENFIELD: And they will be putting out their rebuttals. Some of them have already. But I'm always amused when I'm up there, that 30 minutes into the debate, with an hour to go, the campaign starts showering you with instant pieces of paper, proving that their guy won and the other guy was a complete moron.

WOODRUFF: And it always starts before the debate is over.

GREENFIELD: Before the debate absolutely ends. One day, we are going to see a candidate fall to the ground in a dead faint. And the spin doctor is going to come out and say it was a great victory.

WOODRUFF: All right.

(CROSSTALK)

SCHNEIDER: ... tells the story of a spin room, where a candidate -- where a candidate supporter got up and started talking and talking. And all the reporters were taking notes. And finally, the candidate's spokesman walked away. And the reporters looked at each other and said, "Who was that?"

(LAUGHTER)

WOODRUFF: Well, we'll join CNN's Wolf Blitzer for a town meeting in a moment. We've been telling you about it. But first, a snapshot of the -- let's go to Wolf. Let's go -- let's right now go to a snapshot of the national picture on the CNN electoral map.

Based on our analysis, Vice President Gore has the lead in 15 states, including California, New York, and Pennsylvania. That gives him a total of 215 electoral votes. Governor Bush: 21 states in his column, for a total of 176 electoral votes. Bush's power base lies mainly in the South and in the Rocky Mountain region. But there are still plenty of undecided voters. We've been talking about them, with 147 electoral votes up for grabs in 14 states, including Tennessee, the home state of Al Gore.

And now, let's go back to Tampa, Florida, where CNN's Wolf Blitzer is going to host a town meeting -- Wolf.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Judy, we're at the University of Tampa; the Plant Hall, Fletcher Lounge here, a beautiful campus. We've come here for two objectives.

First objective: to speak to so-called undecided swing voters, what we call persuadable voters, voters who may be leaning one way or another, but have not yet completely made up their mind. They want to hear tonight some substance. They want to hear from these candidates. And perhaps they will make up their mind.

We also want to hear from them on the issues that are most important to them, whether those issues be education or health care, energy, tax cuts. The issues we want to hear from them will be significant, of course, because these are a representative group of other so-called persuadable voters around the country.

We were helped by the Gallup polling organization, our polling partners, in finding these voters here in Tampa. They did some pre- interviews. We came to this city, we came to Tampa for one important reason: Florida is right now an important battleground state.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BUSH: I believe Florida is going to be Bush country come November.

BLITZER (voice-over): Conventional wisdom once had Florida firmly in George W. Bush's column, given his comfortable lead during the summer months and the fact his brother is the state's governor.

GOV. JEB BUSH (R), FLORIDA: With great pride that I introduce him to you.

BLITZER: But Florida is now a toss-up. So how did Al Gore catch up?

TOM FIEDLER, "MIAMI HERALD": The master stroke there was putting Joe Lieberman on the ticket with him.

BLITZER: Lieberman has helped energize the Democratic base in south Florida.

SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D-CT), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And lessum (ph) shalom, peace to you, mayor.

BLITZER: Seniors and Jewish voters.

FIEDLER: The most Democratic county in the country in the 1996 election was Broward County, which is around Fort Lauderdale, the northern Miami suburbs, and so what Al Gore has to do in this case is strike those issues that will really maximize the turnout in southeastern Florida.

BLITZER: Seniors make up about a third of the Florida electorate. The best way to court them, emphasize their issues, both in personal appearances and on the airwaves.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, BUSH CAMPAIGN AD)

G. BUSH: We will make prescription drugs available and affordable for every senior who needs them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, GORE CAMPAIGN AD)

NARRATOR: Al Gore, the only prescription plan that gives all seniors coverage and choice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: The Democrats' strength may be in the southern part of the state, but the Republicans dominate up north.

LARRY HARRIS, MASON-DIXON POLLING AND RESEARCH: Northern Florida, we euphemistically referred to it as southern Alabama. As the South turned more and more to the Republican Party, so did northern Florida.

BLITZER: And even though the Hispanic vote split four years ago, Bush will count on strong support from Cuban-Americans.

SUSAN MACMANUS, UNIV. OF SOUTH FLORIDA: The Cuban vote is by far and away the largest portion of the Hispanic vote and probably the portion that is most likely to turn out in high numbers, a backlash from the Elian Gonzalez scenario.

BLITZER: That leaves central Florida as the real battleground. Known as the I-4 corridor stretching from Daytona Beach west to Tampa, it's an area that grew tremendously in the '90s.

MACMANUS: It is filled with independent voters, new arrivals to Florida, younger voters with families, and seniors that are a little bit better off than is true in other parts of the state.

FIEDLER: We've seen that area be very volatile. It can be influenced by what attention a candidate pays to it, to TV commercials. They run heavily in that corridor. So it's a -- every candidate knows that almost who is last to strike, whoever is last to strike in the corridor there is apt to benefit.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And remember, Florida is the fourth largest state, with 25 electoral votes. Bill Clinton carried this state in 1996. But given the current political math, it's a must-win for George W. Bush.

Let's check in with some of these persuadable voters and ask.

First of all, tell us your name, where you are from. What are you going to be looking for, listening for in this debate tonight?

BARBARA TATLOW (ph), FLORIDA VOTER: My name is Barbara Tatlow. I'm from Tampa, Florida. And I'm concerned with the health-care issues, with providing coverage for all Americans, not just the elderly, not just the poor, but also the uninsured, even the working class, anybody who even has insurance coverage, how can we provide insurance or coverage -- health-care coverage for the rest of the people.

BLITZER: Health care an important issue for you.

What's an important issue for you?

PENNY TABEN (ph), FLORIDA VOTER: Yes.

BLITZER: Tell us your name, too.

TABEN: My name is Penny Taben. I'm from Largo, Florida. And I'm interested in learning how the Middle East conflict is going to cause the rise in oil prices and what interventions the candidates see as necessary to keep prices down.

BLITZER: So far you haven't made up your mind one way or another, whether it should be Bush or Gore?

TABEN: No, I have not.

BLITZER: You're still waiting for some more information.

TABEN: Yes.

BLITZER: What about over here, what are you looking for this evening?

PHILIP CHABEDO (ph), FLORIDA VOTER: Hi, my name is Philip Chabedo. I live in Gwendon (ph), Florida. My main thing is military readiness, because we are -- in the military right now we are losing a lot of seniors to the civilian force because of better wages and incentives. I would like to know what plan, if any, any of those candidates have.

BLITZER: A lot of military personnel, retired military personnel live in this area of Florida. Do you have a special interest in this subject?

CHABEDO: Yes, because myself, I'm in the military.

BLITZER: You are in the military. And as a result, you want to know -- have you heard any differences yet in the course of this campaign that are important to you on this issue, between Gore and Bush?

CHABEDO: Not exactly. They haven't defined any of the -- they haven't defined exactly what's their plan to keep the military readiness of the country.

BLITZER: All right, let's go over here. What are you looking for this evening? Tell us your name, too.

DIANA MILLER (ph), FLORIDA VOTER: Hello. My name is Diana Miller. I live in Tampa, Florida. And my primary concern is education, I'm concerned about why we have more technology with more illiterate children. And I'm looking for passion tonight. I'm looking for trust. I want to know that I can trust the next president. I'm looking for conviction.

BLITZER: Is there an implication there you didn't trust the current president?

MILLER: I think that was a primary concern that was fed to us through the media, that we could not trust our president. And apparently, that is something I should be looking for. Is he credible? Is trust an issue that makes him more of a credible president?

BLITZER: So far, do you have good feelings about both Bush and Gore, that they are trustworthy?

MILLER: No, I don't see a passion for why they want to be president aside from the issues.

BLITZER: You will be watching very closely for the next 90 minutes.

MILLER: Yes, I will.

BLITZER: And tell us your name.

KIMBERLY DICKERSON (ph), FLORIDA VOTER: Hello. My name is Kimberly Dickerson, and I'm from Tampa, Florida. And my issues are education as well, and I feel that education is one of the biggest things now, because our children are our future, and one day they will be maybe a candidate elect for president, and I want the best education possible for our children. And I can remember a time where I used to be a school bus driver in Pinellas County and I would drop my bus off at the compound and I went in my own personal vehicle and took a student to the library for -- so she can be able to get her report done for school, because without my help, she probably would have got a failing grade. And like I said, I'm all for education, I will bend over backwards to help anyone that wants it and needs it.

BLITZER: All right, education, health care, military readiness, a lot of issues that these voters out here are going to be looking for. We'll be watching this debate with them over the course of the 90 minutes and when it's all over with, we'll hear the expert analysis, but we'll also get the analysis of the voters who are still up in the air.

Back to you, Judy.

WOODRUFF: Thanks, Wolf. And we always learn something when we listen to those folks.

When we come back -- we're going to take a break now. When we come back, we're going to talk to two people who have seen these and other campaigns from the inside, and this note for those -- and that's Mike McCurry and Mary Matalin. And for those who want to keep score at home during tonight's debate, you can simply log onto our Web site at cnn.com/election2000 and click onto the CNN debate scorecard. You can check later to see how our online visitors voted.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOODRUFF: You're looking at the scene at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. That's Jim Lehrer, the anchor of the PBS "News Hour With Jim Lehrer." He is the moderator for tonight's first presidential debate. No doubt he's telling this audience at the university to hold their applause and not to take up precious time in this 90 minutes.

Well, we are just a few minutes away, in fact, 10 minutes away from this first debate between Al Gore and George W. Bush. But first, we want to turn to two opposing views on all of this. We're joined again today by Mary Matalin, co-host of CNN's "CROSSFIRE" -- she joins us from the campus of George Washington University -- and former White House spokesman Mike McCurry.

You've both been there on the inside. Mike, what is going on inside Al Gore's head at this moment, do you think?

MIKE MCCURRY, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, hopefully, he's just kind of relaxing and trying to remember the main points that he wants to make. He's got to give people some sense of his passion for the presidency, his vision for the future, as one of our town hall guests put it.

This is kind of a weird moment for me, because in 1996 my job in the mock debates was to play Jim Lehrer -- so hearing him describe the rules of the debate.

It strikes me -- one thing, Judy -- this is a very complicated format, and I think it's going to be difficult for both candidates to get in those kinds of zingers that sometime define the success or failure in a presidential debate. I think that being the case, both candidates need to just think about those broad themes they want to articulate, the main message they want to make, the main reasons why they should be president of the United States.

WOODRUFF: Well, if it's such a complicated format, why did they insist on it? I mean, this is their proposal, their agreement?

MCCURRY: Well, it's -- it's very highly structured, and I think, you know, we'll have some other debates later in the schedule that really are more free-flowing. But it doesn't look to me like there's a lot of opportunity for those spontaneous engagement moments that really define a debate. But we'll have to see how that goes.

WOODRUFF: Mary Matalin, what's likely going on inside George Bush -- George W. Bush's head right now?

MARY MATALIN, CNN "CROSSFIRE": Well, I love the Gore people walking down the beach and saying he's not nervous about it. If they're not nervous, they're not in this race. There hasn't been one this close in 40 years, and the reality is you have to find -- and each guy does it on his own, in his own way -- you have to get in your zone.

And you just remarked on how precious the time is, how complicated the format is. You saw those undecideds in Tampa. They asked seven specific policy questions, one human quotient question. After all is said and done, the candidates will have a mere 35, 37 minutes each to go through a lot of stuff today, tonight, which they have to hit, and they can't spend a lot of time thinking about gimmicks and one-liners and those kinds of things that the press like but don't get any information across to the voters.

WOODRUFF: Mary, we are watching Tipper Gore, of course, the wife of the vice president. She's just come into -- into the auditorium, and there with at least two of the Gore daughters, Sarah and Kristin. And we assume that Mrs. Bush will be arriving in just a moment. Mike McCurry, how much of what they are saying tonight is geared -- and indeed, I think this is going to be Laura Bush walking in.

(APPLAUSE)

It is. And Governor Jeb Bush, entirely logical that he would be there. His brother, of course, is the candidate for president. Jeb Bush, the governor of the state of Florida.

Mike, how much of what they say tonight is geared to those undecideds? Have they just pretty much, they assume that the folks are in their camp are in their camp to stay, and they don't have to worry about their political base, they just have to aim for the undecideds tonight?

MCCURRY: Not entirely. They have to be able to make arguments that really appeal to their strong supporter, keep them revved up. They have to convince some of those undecided voters we've been talking to tonight. They also have to try to reach across that partisan divide and see if they can pull some people over.

This is a very fluid electorate. People indicate that they're willing to reconsider their choice that they made at this point. And so some -- some -- there might be some cherry-picking going on tonight, maybe reaching over and seeing with a couple of well-timed issue responses you could pull some people over.

WOODRUFF: How tricky is that, Mary, to both appeal to the folks who are wavering, who haven't made up their mind, and at the same time hold onto your base?

MATALIN: It's pretty tricky, but you have to do it, particularly since this whole campaign so far has been geared to those undecideds. A lot of people use debates as a drunk uses a lamppost, more for validation than illumination. But the base needs the validation, and they're going to have to do both of it. It's tricky, but being president is tricky.

WOODRUFF: All right, just one quick question. Why was the temperature important, Mike? We understand Gore wanted it to be 50 degrees and it's 65. To me, that's still cold.

MCCURRY: Well, I tell you, I've been under those hot lights before, and when the sweat breaks out and you get nervous, you're glad when it's about 65 degrees. But it's freezing in here right now.

WOODRUFF: All right, Mike McCurry, Mary Matalin, we know you want to go watch. And we'll let you do that. We are five minutes away, just about exactly, from the beginning of this debate.

We're going to take a break. Jeff Greenfield, Bill Schneider and I will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOODRUFF: It is just about two minutes before 9:00 Eastern Time, and the moment of the first presidential debate between Al Gore and George W. Bush is nigh upon us. This is a moment of sweaty palms and perspiring upper lips. If they are to be there, this is the time for them.

You're looking at Clark Athletic Center at the University of Massachusetts, Boston campus. Jim Lehrer, the moderator, there on the left, and in just a moment or two, Al Gore and George W. Bush will walk on that red-carpeted stage to face one another for the first time in this campaign. And today is October the 3rd. I'm here with Jeff Greenfield and Bill Schneider.

Bill, we were talking about this a minute ago, Jeff, they've negotiated every detail of this debate. Nothing has been left to chance.

GREENFIELD: Including the fact that the microphones are fixed so that neither Gore nor Bush can wander away from the podiums, there are no props.

WOODRUFF: Which was something Gore wanted, we're told.

GREENFIELD: Right. But it's also true that this is the most rigid format of the three presidential debates. There's a two-minute open, a minute rebuttal. But the one thing to keep in mind, as Jim Lehrer has the option to continue the conversation on an issue if he wants for another 3 1/2 minutes. So there is a chance for a little more give-and-take than you would think in this format.

Now, next week they're going to be sitting around a table, which is what George Bush wanted. You remember in South Carolina that was an effective format for him against -- against John McCain. But you're quite right: This is about as rigidly negotiated as a peace treaty.

SCHNEIDER: But you know, George Bush didn't want to be here at all in Boston. He said that he really didn't want to have the first debate in Boston because that was hostile territory. It's right next to the Kennedy Library, named, of course, for a famous Democratic president, but he gave in on that point.

WOODRUFF: Yes, Jeff?

GREENFIELD: One thing that viewers might want to keep in mind is let's see who quotes John Kennedy first...

(LAUGHTER)

... because, you know, there's a tax cut bill that George Bush has. John Kennedy did...

WOODRUFF: Or let's see who refers to John Kennedy, as Lloyd Bentsen did in 1988 in the vice presidential debate.

SCHNEIDER: Something interesting. You know, there's always a stature gap when you're running against a president or a vice president, and that's what George Bush faces tonight. He's running against a vice president.

Kennedy faced that when he ran against the vice president in 1960, and in that debate, he compared himself to of all people Abraham Lincoln and pointed to the fact that Lincoln had very little experience before he became president. I don't think there was anyone there to say, "Mr. Kennedy..."

GREENFIELD: I knew Abe Lincoln.

SCHNEIDER: "... I knew Abe Lincoln and you're no Abe Lincoln."

WOODRUFF: We're told that the candidates are standing in the wings. They will be walking out on stage literally in just a few seconds.

I don't think we can underline enough how much the imprint of the candidates is on these three -- four debates, if you count the vice presidential debate. Again, they negotiated not just the height of the lecterns, the microphones, the temperature, the fact that they can't bring any props. We're told that the Gore campaign wanted, the vice president wanted to have the option of carrying something on stage with him. The ultimate decision was no.

The -- we're -- if I'm not mistaken, the candidates are permitted to bring several sheets of blank paper with them on the stage, but that paper will be inspected by someone representing the commission to make sure there's nothing written on it.

And we're about 30 seconds away...

GREENFIELD: And you will remember that in Iowa Al Gore brought somebody out of the audience, had him stand up, and challenge Bill Bradley. Why did you vote against the flood control program for this farmer? I don't believe you're going to be seeing any of that tonight, based on the rules.

SCHNEIDER: Yes, this is the debate, the kind of format that Al Gore supposedly likes, where you can lay out your issue position in more detail. Next week they'll be talking face-to-face with more interaction.

WOODRUFF: All right. We are going to be quiet, and we're going to turn it over to the moderator, Jim Lehrer of PBS.

JIM LEHRER, MODERATOR/PBS "THE NEWS HOUR WITH JIM LEHRER": Good evening from the Clark Athletic Center at the University of Massachusetts in Boston. I'm Jim Lehrer of "The NewsHour" on PBS, and I welcome you to the first of three 90-minute debates between the Democratic candidate for president, Vice President Al Gore, and the Republican candidate, Governor George W. Bush of Texas.

The debates are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, and they will be conducted within formats and rules agreed to by the commission, and the two campaigns.

Tonight, we'll have the candidates at podiums. No answer to a question can exceed two minutes. Rebuttals are limited to one minute. But as moderator, I have the option to follow up and to extend any particular give-and-take another 3 1/2 minutes. But even then, no single answer can exceed two minutes.

The candidates, under their rules, may not question each other directly. There will be no opening statements, but each candidate may have up to two minutes for a closing statement.

The questions and the subjects were chosen by me alone. I have told no one from the two campaigns or the commission or anyone else involved what they are.

There's a small audience in the hall tonight. They're not here to participate -- only to listen. I have asked and they have agreed to remain silent for the next 90 minutes: except for right now, when they will applaud as we welcome the two candidates, Governor Bush and Vice President Gore.

(APPLAUSE)

And now, the first question: as determined by a flip of a coin, it goes to Vice President Gore.

Vice President Gore, you have questioned whether Governor Bush has the experience to be president of the United States. What exactly do you mean?

AL GORE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, Jim, first of all I would like to thank the sponsors of this debate and the people of Boston for hosting the debate. I'd like to thank Governor Bush for participating. And I'd like to say I'm happy to be here with Tipper and our family.

I have actually not questioned Governor Bush's experience; I have questioned his proposals. And here's why: I think this is a very important moment for our country. We have achieved extraordinary prosperity. And in this election, America has to make an important choice: Will we use our prosperity to enrich not just the few but all of our families?

I believe we have to make the right and responsible choices.

If I'm entrusted with the presidency, here are the choices that I will make: I'll balance the budget every year, I will pay down the national debt, I will put Medicare and Social Security in a lockbox and protect it, and I will cut taxes for middle class families.

I believe it's important to resist the temptation to squander our surplus. If we make the right choices, we can have a prosperity that endures and enriches all of our people.

If I'm entrusted with the presidency, I will help parents and strengthen families, because, you know, if we have prosperity that grows and grows, we still won't be successful unless we strengthen families by, for example, ensuring that children can always go to schools that are safe, by giving parents the tools to protect their children against cultural pollution.

I will make sure that we invest in our country and our families. And I mean investing in education, health care, the environment and middle class tax cuts and retirement security. That's my agenda, and that's why I think that it's not just question of experience.

LEHRER: Governor Bush, one minute rebuttal.

BUSH: Well, we do come from different places. And I come from West Texas. I've been a governor. Governor is the chief executive officer and learns how to set agendas, and I think you're going to find the difference reflect in our budgets.

I want to take one-half of the surplus and dedicate it to Social Security, one-quarter of the surplus for important projects, and I want to send one-quarter of the surplus back to the people who pay the bills. I want everybody who pays taxes to have their tax rates cut.

Now that stands in contrast to my worthy opponent's plan, which will increase the size of government dramatically. His plan is three times larger than President Clinton's proposed plan eight years ago. It's a plan that will have 200 new programs, as well -- or expanded programs. It'll create 20,000 new bureaucrats. In other words, it empowers Washington.

And tonight you're going to hear that my passion and my vision is to empower Americans to be able to make decisions for themselves in their own lives.

LEHRER: So, I take it by your answer then, Mr. Vice President, that in your -- an interview recently with the New York Times, when you said that you question whether vice president -- or Governor Bush was experienced enough to be president, you were talking about strictly policy differences?

GORE: Yes, Jim. I said that his tax cut plan, for example, raises the question of whether it's the right choice for the country.

And let me give you an example of what I mean: Under Governor Bush's tax cut proposal, he would spend more money on tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent than all of the new spending that he proposes for education, health care, prescription drugs and national defense, all combined. Now, I think those are the wrong priorities.

Now, under my proposal, for every dollar that I propose in spending for things like education and health care, I will put another dollar into middle class tax cuts.

And for every dollar that I spend in those two categories, I'll put two dollars toward paying down the national debt. I think it's very important to keep the debt going down and completely eliminate it.

And I also think it's very important to go to the next stage of welfare reform. Our country has cut the welfare rolls in half. I fought hard, from my days in the Senate and as vice president, to cut the welfare rolls, and we've moved millions of people in America into good jobs. But it's now time for the next stage of welfare reform and include fathers and not only mothers.

LEHRER: We're going to get to a lot of those.

Yes, go ahead, Governor.

BUSH: Well, let me just said that obviously tonight we're going to hear some phony numbers about what I think and what we ought to do. People need to know that, over the next 10 years, there's going to be $25 trillion of revenue that comes into our Treasury, and we anticipate spending $21 trillion.

And my plan says, "Why don't we pass $1.3 trillion of that back to the people who pay the bills?" Surely we can afford 5 percent of the $25 trillion that are coming into the Treasury to the hard- working people who pay the bills.

There's a difference of opinion. My opponent thinks the government -- the surplus is the government's money. That's not what I think. I think it's the hard-working people of America's money, and I want to share some of that money with you, so you've got more money to build and save and dream for your families.

It's a difference of opinion. It's the difference between government making decisions for you and you getting more of your money to make decisions for yourself.

LEHRER: Let me just follow up, one quick question. When you hear Vice President Gore question your experience, do you read it the same way, that he's talking about policy differences only?

BUSH: Yes. I take him for his word.

I mean, look, I fully recognize I'm not of Washington. I'm from Texas. And he's got a lot of experience, but so do I. And I've been the chief executive officer of the second-biggest state in the Union. And I've had a proud record of working with both Republicans and Democrats, which is what our nation needs. We need somebody who can come up to Washington and say, "Look, let's forget all the politics and all the finger-pointing and get some positive things done on Medicare and prescription drugs and Social Security." And so, I take him for his word.

GORE: Jim, if I could just respond.

LEHRER: Just quick and then we need to move on.

GORE: I know that.

The governor used the phrase "phony numbers," but if you -- if you look at the plan and add the numbers up, these numbers are correct. He spends more money for tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent in all of his new spending proposals for health care, prescription drugs, education and national defense, all combined. I agree that the surplus is the American people's money; it's your money. That's why I don't think we should give nearly half of it to the wealthiest 1 percent, because the other 99 percent have had an awful lot to do with building this surplus and our prosperity.

LEHRER: All right, three and a half minutes is up. New question.

BUSH: I hope it's about wealthy people.

LEHRER: Governor Bush, you have questioned -- this is a companion question to the question I asked Vice President Gore.

BUSH: OK.

LEHRER: You have questioned whether Vice President Gore has demonstrated the leadership qualities necessary to be president of the United States. What do you mean by that?

BUSH: Well, here's what I've said: I've said, Jim, I've said that eight years ago they campaigned on prescription drugs for seniors, and four years ago they campaigned on getting prescription drugs for seniors, and now they're campaigning on getting prescription drugs for seniors. It seems like they can't get it done.

Now they may blame other folks, but it's time to get somebody in Washington who's going to work with both Republicans and Democrats to get some positive things done when it comes to our seniors.

And so what I've said is, is there's been some missed opportunities. They've had a chance. They've had a chance to form consensus. I've got a plan on Medicare, for example, that's a two- stage plan that says we're going to have immediate help for seniors in what I call "Immediate Helping Hand," a $48 billion program.

But I also want to say to seniors, "If you're happy with Medicare the way it is, fine, you can stay in the program. But we're going to give you additional choices just like they give federal employees in the federal employee health plan." Federal employees have got a variety of choices from which to choose, so should seniors.

And my point has been, as opposed to politicizing an issue like Medicare -- in other words, holding it up as an issue, hoping somebody bites and then try to clobber them over the head with it for political purposes -- this year, in the year 2000, it's time to say, "Let's get it done once and for all." And that's what I have been critical about the administration for.

Same with Social Security. I think there was a good opportunity to bring Republicans and Democrats together to reform the Social Security system so the seniors will never go without. Those on Social Security today will have their promise made.

But also to give younger workers the option, at their choice, of being able to manage some of their own money in the private sectors to make sure there's a Social Security system around tomorrow. There's a lot of young workers at our rallies we go to, that when they hear that I'm going to trust them, at their option, to be able to manage, under certain guidelines, some of their own money to get a better rate of return so that they'll have a retirement plan in the future, they begin to nod their heads. And they want a different attitude in Washington.

LEHRER: One minute rebuttal, Vice President Gore.

GORE: Well, Jim, under my plan, all seniors will get prescription drugs under Medicare. The governor has described Medicare as a government HMO; it's not. And let me explain the difference.

Under the Medicare prescription drug proposal I'm making, here's how it works: You go to your own doctor and your doctor chooses your prescription, and no HMO or insurance company can take those choices away from you. Then you go to your own pharmacy, you fill the prescription and Medicare pays half the cost. If you're in a very poor family or you have very high costs, Medicare will pay all the costs -- a $25 premium and much better benefits than you can possibly find in the private sector.

Now here's the contrast. Ninety-five percent of all seniors would get no help whatsoever, under my opponent's plan, for the first four or five years.

Now, one thing I don't understand, Jim, is, why is it that the wealthiest 1 percent get their tax cuts the first year, but 95 percent of seniors have to wait four to five years before they get a single penny.

LEHRER: Governor?

BUSH: I guess my answer to that is, the man's running on Mediscare, trying to frighten people in the voting booth. That's just not the way I think, and I that's just not my intentions. That's not my plan.

I want all seniors to have prescription drugs and Medicare. We need to reform Medicare. There have been opportunity to do so, but this administration has failed to do it.

And so seniors are going to have not only a Medicare plan where the poor seniors will have their prescriptions paid for, but there will be a variety of options.

The current system today has meant a lot for a lot of seniors, and I really appreciate the intentions of the current system. And as I mentioned, if you're happy with the system, you can stay in it.

But there's a lot of procedures that have not kept up in Medicare with the current times. There's no prescription drug benefits, there's no drug therapies, there's no preventing medicines, there's no vision care.

I mean, we need to have a modern system to help seniors. And the idea of supporting a federally controlled, 132,000-page document bureaucracy as being a compassionate way for seniors is -- and the only compassionate source of care for seniors, is just not my vision.

I believe we ought to give seniors more options. I believe we ought to make the system work better. But I know this: I know it's going to require a different kind of leader to go to Washington to say to both Republicans and Democrats, "Let's come together."

You've had your chance, Vice President. You've been there for eight years and nothing has been done.

And my point is is that my plan not only trusts seniors with options, my plan sets aside $3.4 trillion for Medicare over the next 10 years. My plan also says it's going to require a new approach in Washington, D.C.

It's going to require somebody who can work across the partisan divide.

GORE: If I could respond to that, Jim, under my plan, I will put Medicare in an iron-clad lockbox and prevent the money from being used for anything other than Medicare. The governor has declined to endorse that idea, even though the Republican as well as Democratic leaders of Congress have endorsed it.

I'd be interested to see if he would this evening say that he would put Medicare in a lockbox. I don't think he will, because under his plan, if you work out the numbers, $100 billion comes out of Medicare just for the wealthiest 1 percent in the tax cut.

Now here is the difference: Some people who say the word "reform" actually mean cuts. Under the governor's plan, if you kept the same fee-for-service that you have now under Medicare, your premiums would go up by between 18 and 47 percent. And that's the study of the congressional plan that he's modeled his proposal on by the Medicare actuaries.

Let me just give you one quick example: There's a man here tonight named George McKinney from Milwaukee. He's 70 years old, he has high blood pressure, his wife has heart trouble. They have income of $25,000 a year. They cannot pay for their prescription drugs. And so they're some of the ones that go to Canada regularly in order to get their prescription drugs.

Under my plan, half of their costs would be paid right away. Under Governor Bush's plan, they would get not one penny for four to five years, and then they would be forced to go into an HMO or to an insurance company and ask them for coverage, but there would be no limit on the premiums or the deductibles or any other terms and conditions.

BUSH: I cannot let this go by, the old-style Washington politics, of "We're going to scare you in the voting booth."

Under my plan, the man gets immediate help with prescription drugs. It's called "Immediate Helping Hand." Instead of squabbling and finger-pointing, he gets immediate help.

Let me say something. Now, I understand -- excuse me...

LEHRER: All right, excuse me, gentlemen...

GORE: Jim, can I...

(CROSSTALK)

LEHRER: ... minutes is up, but we'll finish that.

GORE: Can I make one other point? They get $25,000 a year income. That makes them ineligible.

BUSH: Look, this is the man who's got great numbers. He talks about numbers. I'm beginning to think, not only did he invent the Internet, but he invented the calculator.

(LAUGHTER)

It's fuzzy math. It's to scare them, trying to scare people in the voting booth.

Under my tax plan, that he continues to criticize, I set a third. You know, the federal government should take more of that -- no more than a third of anybody's check. But I also dropped the bottom rate from 15 percent to 10 percent, because, by far, the vast majority of the help goes to the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder.

If you're a family of four in Massachusetts making $50,000, you get a 50 percent cut in the federal income taxes you pay. It's from $4,000 to about $2,000.

Now, the difference in our plans is, I want that $2,000 to go to you.

LEHRER: All right. Let me -- hold on.

BUSH: And the vice president would like to be spending the $2,000 on your behalf.

LEHRER: One quick thing, gentlemen. These are your rules. I'm doing my best. We're way over the three and a half. I have no problems with it, but we wanted -- do you want to have a quick response, and we'll move on. We're already almost five minutes on this, all right?

GORE: Yes. It's just clearer -- you can go to the web site and look. If you make more than $25,000 a year, you don't get a penny of help under the Bush prescription drug proposal for at least four to five years. And then you're pushed into a Medicare -- into an HMO or an insurance company plan, and there's no limit on the premiums or the deductibles or any of the conditions. And the insurance companies say that it won't work and they won't offer these plans.

LEHRER: Let me ask you both this, and we'll move on, on this subject. As a practical matter, both of you want to bring prescription drugs to seniors, correct?

BUSH: Correct.

GORE: Correct, but the difference is -- the difference is I want to bring it to 100 percent, and he brings it only to 5 percent.

LEHRER: All right. All right. All right.

BUSH: That's just -- that's just -- that's just totally false.

LEHRER: All right. What difference does it make how...

BUSH: Wait a minute. It's just totally false for him to stand up here and say that.

Let me make sure the seniors hear me loud and clear. They've had their chance to get something done. I'm going to work with both Republicans and Democrats to reform the system. All seniors will be covered. All poor seniors will have their prescription drugs paid for. In the meantime -- in the meantime, we're going to have a plan to help poor seniors. And "in the meantime" could be one year or two years.

GORE: Let me -- let me call your attention to the key word there. He said all "poor" seniors.

BUSH: No. Wait a minute, all seniors are covered under prescription drugs in my plan.

GORE: In the first year? In the first year?

BUSH: If we can get it done in the first year, you bet. Yours is phased in in eight years.

GORE: No. No. No. No. It's a two-phase plan, Jim. And for the first four years -- it takes a year to pass it. And for the first four years, only the poor are covered. Middle class seniors, like George McKinney and his wife, are not covered for four to five years.

LEHRER: I've got an idea.

GORE: OK.

LEHRER: You have any more to say about this, you can say it in your closing statement, so we'll move on, OK?

New question, Vice President Gore, how would you contrast your approach to preventing future -- future oil price and supply problems like we have now to the approach of Governor Bush?

GORE: Excellent question, and here's the -- here's the simple difference: My plan has not only a short-term component, but also a long-term component, and it focuses not only on increasing the supply, which I think we have to do, but also on working on the consumption side. Now, in the short term, we have to free ourselves from the domination of the big oil companies that have the ability to manipulate the price, from OPEC when they want to raise the price. And in the long term, we have to give new incentives for the development of domestic resources, like deep gas in the western Gulf, like stripper wells for oil, but also renewable sources of energy and domestic sources that are cleaner and better.

And I'm proposing a plan that will give tax credits and tax incentives for the rapid development of new kinds of cars and trucks and buses and factories and boilers and furnaces that don't have as much pollution, that don't burn as much energy and that help us get out on the cutting edge of the new technologies that will create millions of new jobs, because when we sell these new products here, we'll then be able to sell them overseas. And there's a ravenous demand for them overseas.

Now another big difference is, Governor Bush is proposing to open up our -- some of our most precious environmental treasures, like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, to the big oil companies to go in and start producing oil there. I think that is the wrong choice. It would only give us a few months worth of oil, and the oil wouldn't start flowing for many years into the future. And I don't think it's a fair price to pay to -- to destroy precious parts of America's environment.

We have to bet on the future and move beyond the current technologies to have a whole new generation of more efficient, cleaner energy technologies.

LEHRER: Governor Bush, one minute.

BUSH: Well, it's an issue I know a lot about. I was a small oil person for a while in West Texas. This is an administration that's had no plan, and all of a sudden, the results of having no plan have caught up with America.

First and foremost, we got to make sure we fully fund LIHEAP, which is a way to help low-income folks, particularly here in the East, to pay for their high fuel bills.

Secondly, we need an active exploration program in America. The only way to become less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil is to explore at home.

And you bet I want to open up a small part of -- a part of Alaska because when that field is on-line, it will produce a million barrels a day. Today we import a million barrels from Saddam Hussein.

I would rather that a million come from our own hemisphere, our own country, as opposed from Saddam Hussein.

I want to build more pipelines to move natural gas throughout this hemisphere. I want to develop the coal resources in America and have clean-coal technologies. We've got abundant supplies of energy here in America, and we better get out there and better start exploring it, otherwise we're going to be in deep trouble in the future because of our dependency upon foreign sources of crude.

LEHRER: So, if somebody is watching tonight, listening to what the two of you just said, is it fair to say, OK, the differences between Vice President Gore and George W. Bush, Governor Bush, are the following: You are for doing something on the consumption end, you're for doing something on the production end...

GORE: Let me clarify. I'm for doing something both on the supply side and production side and on the consumption side. And let me say that I found one thing in Governor Bush's answer that we certainly agree on, and that's the low-income heating assistance program, and I commend you for supporting that. I worked to get $400 million just a couple of weeks ago and to establish a permanent home heating oil reserve here in the Northeast.

Now, as for the proposals that I've worked for, for renewables and conservation and efficiency and the new technologies, the fact is, for the last few years in the Congress, we've faced a lot of opposition to them, and they've only -- they've only approved about 10 percent of the agenda that I've helped to send up there.

And I think that we need to get serious about this energy crisis, both in the Congress and in the White House. And if you entrust me with the presidency, I will tackle this problem and focus on new technologies that will make us less dependent on Big Oil or foreign oil.

LEHRER: How would you draw the difference, Governor?

BUSH: Well, I would first say that he should have been tackling it for the last seven years. And secondly, the difference is that we need to explore at home. And the vice president doesn't believe in exploration, for example, in Alaska. There's a lot of shut-in gas that we need to be moving out of Alaska by pipeline.

There's an interesting issue up in the Northwest, as well. And that is whether or not we remove dams that propose hydroelectric energy. I'm against removing dams in the Northwest. I don't know where the vice president stands. But that's a renewable source of energy we need to keep in-line.

I was in coal country yesterday, in West Virginia. There's an abundant supply of coal in America. I know we can do a better job of clean-coal technologies. I'm going to ask the Congress for $2 billion to make sure that we have the cleanest coal technologies in the world.

My answer to you is, is that, in the short term, we need to get after it here in America. We need to explore our resources, and we need to develop our reservoirs of domestic production.

We also need to have a hemispheric energy policy where Canada and Mexico and the United States come together. I brought this up recently with Vicente Fox, who's the newly elected president. He's a man I know from Mexico. And I talked about how best to be able to expedite the exploration of natural gas in Mexico and transport it up to the United States, so we become less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil.

This is a major problem facing America. The administration did not deal with it. It's time for a new administration to deal with the energy problem.

GORE: If I could just -- just briefly, Jim, I know.

I found a couple of other things that we agree on, and we may not find that many this evening, so I wanted to emphasize them.

I strongly supply the new investments in clean-coal technology.

I made a proposal three months ago on this. And also domestic exploration, yes, but not in the environmental treasures of our country. We don't have to do that; that's the wrong choice. I know the oil companies have been itching to do that, but it is not the right thing for the future.

BUSH: No, it's the right thing for the consumers. Less dependency upon foreign sources of crude is good for consumers, and we can do so in an environmentally friendly way.

GORE: Well, can I have the last word on this?

LEHRER: New question.

BUSH: Of course.

GORE: OK. Go ahead.

LEHRER: New question. New subject.

GORE: All right.

LEHRER: Governor Bush, if elected president, would you try to overturn the FDA's approval last week of the abortion pill RU-486?

BUSH: I don't think a president can do that. I was disappointed in the ruling because I think abortions ought to be more rare in America. And I'm worried that that pill will create more abortion, will cause more people to have abortions.

This is a very important topic, and it's a very sensitive topic because a lot of good people disagree on the issue. I think what the next president ought to do is to -- is to promote a culture of life in America, is the life of the elderly and the life of those living all across the country, life of the unborn.

As a matter of fact, I think a noble goal for this country is that every child, born and unborn, ought to be protected in law and welcomed into life. But I know we got to change a lot of minds before we -- before we get there in America. What I do believe is, we can find good common ground on issues like parental notification or parental consent. And I know we need to ban partial-birth abortions. This is a place where my opponent and I have strong disagreements. I believe banning partial-birth abortion would be a positive step toward reducing the number of abortions in America.

This is an issue that's going to require a new attitude. We've been battling over abortion for a long period of time.

Surely this nation can come together to promote the value of life. Surely we can fight off these laws that will encourage doctors -- to allow doctors to take the lives of our seniors. Surely we can work together to create a cultural life so some of these youngsters that feel like they can take a neighbor's life with a gun will understand that that's not the way America's meant to be.

And surely we can find common ground to reduce the number of abortions in America. As to the drug itself, I mentioned I was disappointed. I hope -- and I'm -- I hope the FDA took its time to make sure that American women will be safe who use this -- who use this drug.

LEHRER: Vice President Gore?

GORE: Well, Jim, the FDA took 12 years. And I do support that decision. They determined it was medically safe for the women who use that drug.

Now, this is, indeed, a very important issue. First of all, on the issue of partial-birth or so-called late-term abortion, I would sign a law banning that procedure, provided that doctors have the ability to save a women's life or to act if her health is severely at risk. And that's not the main issue.

The main issue is whether or not the Roe v. Wade decision is going to be overturned. I support a woman's right to choose; my opponent does not.

It is important because the next president is going to appoint three, maybe even four, justices of the Supreme Court.

And Governor Bush has declared to the anti-choice groups that he will appoint justices in the mold of Scalia and Clarence Thomas, who are known for being the most vigorous opponents of a woman's right to choose.

Here's the difference: He trusts the government to order a woman to do what he thinks she ought to do. I trust women to make the decisions that affect their lives, their destinies and their bodies. And I think a woman's right to choose ought to be protected and defended.

LEHRER: Governor, we'll go to the Supreme Court question in a moment. But, to make sure I understand your position on RU-486, if you're elected president will you not throw appointments to the FDA, you won't support legislation to overturn this?

BUSH: I don't think a president can unilaterally overturn it. I think the FDA's made its decision.

LEHRER: That means that you wouldn't throw appointments to the FDA and ask them to reappraise it?

BUSH: I think once the decision's made, it's been made, unless it's proven to be unsafe to women.

GORE: Well, Jim, you know, the question you asked, if I heard you correctly, was would he support legislation to overturn it. And if I heard the statement the day before yesterday, you said you would order -- he said he would order his FDA appointee to review the decision. Now, that sounds to me a little bit different. And I just think that we ought to support the decision.

BUSH: I said I would make sure that -- that women would be safe to use the drug.

LEHRER: All right, on the Supreme Court question, should a voter assume -- you're pro-life. You just stated your position.

BUSH: I am pro-life.

LEHRER: Should a voter assume that all judicial appointments you make to the Supreme Court or any other federal court will also be pro- life?

BUSH: Voters should assume that I have no litmus test on that issue or any other issue. The voters will know I'll put competent judges on the bench, people who will strictly interpret the Constitution and will not use the bench to write social policy.

And that's going to be a big difference between my opponent and me. I believe that -- I believe that the judges ought not to take the place of the legislative branch of government, that they're appointed for life and that they ought to look at the Constitution as sacred. They shouldn't misuse their bench. I don't believe in liberal, activist judges. I believe in -- I believe in strict constructionists. And those are the kind of judges I will appoint.

I've named four Supreme Court judges in the state of Texas, and I would ask the people to check out their qualifications, their deliberations. They're good, solid men and women who have made good, sound judgments on behalf of the people of Texas.

LEHRER: What kind of appointments should they expect from you, Vice President Gore?

GORE: Both of us use similar language to reach an exactly opposite outcome. I don't favor litmus tests, but I know that there are ways to assess how a potential justice interprets the Constitution. And, in my view, the Constitution ought to be interpreted as a document that grows with our country and our history.

And I believe, for example, that there is a right of privacy in the Fourth Amendment.

And when the phrase "strict constructionist" is used, and when the names of Scalia and Thomas are used as benchmarks for who would be appointed, those are code words, and nobody should mistake this, for saying that the governor would appoint people who would overturn Roe v. Wade. I mean, just -- it's very clear to me.

And I would appoint people who have a philosophy that I think would make it quite likely that they would uphold Roe v. Wade.

LEHRER: Is the vice president right? Is that a code word for overturning Roe v. Wade?

BUSH: Sounds like the vice president is not very right many times tonight. I just told you the criteria in which I'll appoint judges. I've had a record of appointing judges in the state of Texas. That's what a governor gets to do. A governor gets to name Supreme Court judges, and I've given...

(CROSSTALK)

BUSH: He also reads all kinds of things into my tax plan and into my Medicare plan. And I just want the viewers out there to listen to what I have to say about it.

GORE: That's a yes; it is a code.

LEHRER: Reverse the question. What code phrases should we read by what you said about what kind of people you will appoint to the U.S. Supreme Court?

GORE: It'd be very likely that they'd uphold Roe v. Wade. But I do believe it's wrong to use a litmus test.

But if you look at the history of a lower court judge's rulings, you can get a pretty good idea of how they're going to interpret questions. Now, a lot of questions are first impression. And these questions that have been seen many times comes up in a new context.

And so, but -- you know, this is a very important issue, because a lot of young women in this country take this right for granted, and it could be lost.

It is on the ballot in this election, make no mistake about it.

BUSH: I'll tell you what kind of judges he'll put on there. He'll put liberal, activist judges who will use their bench to subvert the legislature. That's what he'll do.

GORE: That's not right.

LEHRER: New subject, new question.

Vice President Gore, if President Milosevic of Yugoslavia refuses to accept the election results and leave office, what action, if any, should the United States take to get him out of there? GORE: Well, Milosevic has lost the election. His opponent, Kostunica, has won the election. It's overwhelming. Milosevic's government refuses to release the vote count. There's now a general strike going on. They're demonstrating.

I think we should support the people of Serbia and the -- Yugoslavia, as they call Serbia plus Montenegro, and put pressure in every way possible to recognize the lawful outcome of the election.

The people of Serbia have acted very bravely in kicking this guy out of office. Now he is trying to not release the votes, and then go straight to a so-called run-off election without even announcing the results of the first vote.

Now, we've made it clear, along with our allies, that when Milosevic leaves, then Serbia will be able to have a more normal relationship with the rest of the world. That is a very strong incentive that we have given them to do the right thing.

Bear in mind, also, Milosevic has been indicted as a war criminal, and he should be held accountable for his actions.

Now, we have to take measured steps, because the sentiment within Serbia is, for understandable reasons, still against the United States, because their nationalism has led -- even if they don't like Milosevic, they still have some feelings lingering from the NATO action there. So we have to be intelligent in the way we go about it.

But make no mistake about it: We should do everything we can to see that the will of the Serbian people, expressed in this extraordinary election, is done. And I hope that he'll be out of office very shortly.

LEHRER: Governor Bush, one minute.

BUSH: Well, I'm pleased with the results of the elections, as the vice president is. It's time for the man to go. And it means that the United States must have a strong diplomatic hand with our friends in NATO. That's why it's important to make sure our alliances are as strong as they possibly can be, to keep the pressure on Mr. Milosevic.

But this'll be an interesting moment for the Russians to step up and lead as well, be a wonderful time for the -- for the -- Russia to step into the Balkans and convince Mr. Milosevic it's in his best interest and his country's best interest to leave office. The Russians have got a lot of sway in that part of the world, and we'd like to see them use that sway to encourage democracy to take hold.

And so it's an encouraging election. It's time for the man to leave.

LEHRER: But what if he doesn't leave, Mr. Vice -- what if all the things, all the diplomatic efforts, all the pressure from all over the world and he still doesn't go? Is this the kind of thing, to be specific, that you as president would consider the use of U.S. military force to get him gone?

In this particular situation, no. Bear in mind that we have a lot of sanctions in force against Serbia right now. And the people of Serbia know that they can escape all those sanctions if this guy is turned out of power.

Now, I understand what the governor has said about asking the Russians to be involved. And under some circumstances, that might be a good idea. But being as they have not yet been willing to recognize Kostunica as the lawful winner of the election, I'm not sure that it's right for us to invite the president of Russia to mediate this dispute there, because we might not like the result that comes out of that.

They currently favor going forward with a run-off election. I think that's the wrong thing. I think the governor's instinct is not necessarily bad, because we have worked with the Russians in a constructive way, in Kosovo, for example, to end the conflict there. But I think we need to be very careful in the present situation before we invite the Russians to play the lead role in mediating.

BUSH: Well, obviously we wouldn't use the Russians if they didn't agree with our answer, Mr. Vice President.

GORE: Well, they don't.

BUSH: But let me say this to you: I wouldn't use force. I wouldn't use force.

LEHRER: You wouldn't use force?

BUSH: No.

LEHRER: Why not?

BUSH: Because it's not in our national interest to use force in this case. I would keep pressure. I would use diplomacy.

There's a difference between what the president did, who I supported in Kosovo, and this. And it's up for the people in this region to figure out how to take control of their country.

LEHRER: New question: How would you go about, as president, deciding when it was in the national interest to use U.S. force, generally?

BUSH: Well, if it's in our vital national interests. And that means whether or not our territory -- our territory is threatened, our people could be harmed, whether or not our alliances -- our defense alliances are threatened, whether or not our friends in the Middle East are threatened. That would be a time to seriously consider the use of force.

Secondly, whether or not the mission was clear, whether or not it was a clear understanding as to what the mission would be.

Thirdly, whether or not we were prepared and trained to win, whether or not our forces were of high morale and high standing and well-equipped.

And finally, whether or not there was an exit strategy.

I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops.

The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation-building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders.

I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place.

And so I take my responsibility seriously. And it starts with making sure we rebuild our military power.

Morale in today's military is too low. We're having trouble meeting recruiting goals. We met the goals this year, but in the previous years, we have not met recruiting goals. Some of our troops are not well-equipped. I believe we're overextended in too many places.

And, therefore, I want to rebuild the military power. It starts with a billion dollar pay raise for the men and women who wear the uniform, a billion dollars more than the president recently signed into law, to make sure our troops are well-housed and well-equipped; bonus plans to keep some of our high-skilled folks in the services; and a commander in chief who clearly sets the mission, and the mission is to fight and win war, and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place.

LEHRER: Vice President Gore, one minute.

GORE: Let me tell you what I'll do. First of all, I want to make it clear: Our military is the strongest, best-trained, best- equipped, best-lead fighting force in the world and in the history of the world. Nobody should have any doubt about that, least of all our adversaries or potential adversaries.

I -- if you entrust me with the presidency, I will do whatever is necessary in order to make sure our forces stay the strongest in the world.

In fact, in my 10-year budget proposal, I have set aside more than twice as much for this purpose as Governor Bush has in his proposal.

Now, I think we should be reluctant to get involved in someplace, in a foreign country. But, if our national security is at stake, if we have allies, if we've tried every other course, if we're sure military action will succeed, and if the costs are proportionate to the benefits, we should get involved.

Now, just because we don't want to get involved everywhere doesn't mean we should back off anywhere it comes up.

And I disagree with the -- with the proposal that maybe only when oil supplies are at stake that our national security is at risk. I think that there are situations, like in Bosnia or Kosovo where there's a genocide, where our national security is at stake there.

LEHRER: Governor?