Thursday, October 4

Transcript of the First Presidential Debate 2012



Join our Facebook page by clicking here!
the First Presidential Debate 2012


Magness Arena
University of Denver
Denver, Colorado


MR. LEHRER:  Good evening from the Magness Arena at the University of Denver, in Denver, Colorado.  I'm Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour, and I welcome you to the first of the 2012 Presidential Debates between President Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the Republican nominee.
This debate and the next three -- two presidential, one vice presidential -- are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates.  Tonight's 90 minutes will be about domestic issues and will follow a format designed by the Commission.  There will be six roughly 15-minute segments, with 2-minute answers for the first question, then open discussion for the remainder of each segment. 
Thousands of people offered suggestions on segment subjects or questions via the Internet and other means.  But I made the final selections.  And for the record, they were not submitted for approval to the Commission or the candidates.
The segments, as I announced in advance, will be three on the economy, and one each on health care, the role of government, and governing, with an emphasis throughout on differences, specifics, and choices.  Both candidates will also have 2-minute closing statements. 
The audience here in the hall has promised to remain silent. No cheers, applause, boos, hisses, among other noisy, distracting things, so we may all concentrate on what the candidates have to say. 
There is a noise exception right now, though, as we welcome President Obama and Governor Romney.  (Applause.)
Gentlemen, welcome to you both.  Let's start with the economy, segment one, and let's begin with jobs.  What are the major differences between the two of you about how you would go about creating new jobs?  You have two minutes -- each of you have two minutes to start.  A coin toss has determined, Mr. President, you go first.
THE PRESIDENT:  Well, thank you very much, Jim, for this opportunity.  I want to thank Governor Romney, and the University of Denver for your hospitality.
There are a lot of points I want to make tonight, but the most important one is that 20 years ago I became the luckiest man on Earth because Michelle Obama agreed to marry me.  (Laughter.) And so I just want to wish, sweetie, you happy anniversary, and let you know that a year from now we will not be celebrating it in front of 40 million people.  (Laughter.)  
Four years ago, we went through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.  Millions of jobs were lost.  The auto industry was on the brink of collapse.  The financial system had frozen up.  And because of the resilience and the determination of the American people, we’ve begun to fight our way back.  Over the last 30 months, we’ve seen 5 million jobs in the private sector created.  The auto industry has come roaring back and housing has begun to rise.
But we all know that we’ve still got a lot of work to do.  And so the question here tonight is not where we’ve been, but where we’re going. 
Governor Romney has a perspective that says if we cut taxes skewed towards the wealthy and roll back regulations that we’ll be better off.  I’ve got a different view.  I think we’ve got to invest in education and training.  I think it’s important for us to develop new sources of energy here in America; that we change our tax code to make sure that we’re helping small businesses and companies that are investing here in the United States; that we take some of the money that we’re saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild America; and that we reduce our deficit in a balanced way that allows us to make these critical investments.
Now, ultimately, it’s going to be up to the voters -- to you -- which path we should take.  Are we going to double down on the top-down economic policies that helped to get us into this mess? Or do we embrace a new economic patriotism that says America does best when the middle class does best?  And I’m looking forward to having that debate.
MR. LEHRER:  Governor Romney, two minutes.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  Thank you, Jim.  It’s an honor to be here with you, and I appreciate the chance to be with the President.  I’m pleased to be at the University of Denver.  I appreciate their welcome, and also the Presidential Commission on these debates. 
And congratulations to you, Mr. President, on your anniversary.  I’m sure this was the most romantic place you could imagine, here with me.  (Laughter.)  Congratulations.
This is obviously a very tender topic.  I’ve had the occasion over the last couple of years of meeting people across the country -- I was in Dayton, Ohio, and a woman grabbed my arm and she said, I’ve been out of work since May, can you help me?  Ann yesterday was at a rally in Denver and a woman came up to her with a baby in her arms and said, Ann, my husband has had four jobs in three years, part-time jobs.  He’s lost his most recent job and we’ve now just lost our home.  Can you help us? 
And the answer is, yes, we can help, but it’s going to take a different path -- not the one we’ve been on, not the one the President describes as a top-down, cut taxes for the rich.  That’s not what I’m going to do.  My plan has five basic parts:  One, get us energy independent -- North America energy independent.  That creates about 4 million jobs.  Number two, open up more trade, particularly in Latin America; crack down on China if and when they cheat.  Number three, make sure our people have the skills they need to succeed and the best schools in the world -- we are far away from that now.  Number four, get us to a balanced budget.  Number five, champion small business. 
It’s small business that creates the jobs in America.  And over the last four years, small business people have decided that America may not be the place to open a new business, because new business startups are down to a 30-year low.  I know what it takes to get small business growing again, to hire people.
Now, I’m concerned that the path that we’re on has just been unsuccessful.  The President has a view very similar to the view he had when he ran four years ago, that a bigger government spending more, taxing more, regulating more -- if you will, trickle-down government -- would work.  That's not the right answer for America.  I'll restore the vitality that gets America working again.  Thank you.
MR. LEHRER:  Mr. President, please respond directly to what the Governor just said about trickle-down, his trickle-down approach, as he said yours is. 
THE PRESIDENT:  Well, let me talk specifically about what I think we need to do.  First, we've got to improve our education system.  And we've made enormous progress drawing on ideas both from Democrats and Republicans that are already starting to show gains in some of the toughest to deal with schools. 
We've got a program called Race To The Top that has prompted reforms in 46 states around the country, raising standards, improving how we train teachers.  So now, I want to hire another 100,000 new math and science teachers, and create 2 million more slots in our community colleges so that people can get trained for the jobs that are out there right now.  And I want to make sure that we keep tuition low for our young people.
When it comes to our tax code, Governor Romney and I both agree that our corporate tax rate is too high.  So I want to lower it, particularly for manufacturing, taking it down to 25 percent.  But I also want to close those loopholes that are giving incentives for companies that are shipping jobs overseas
-- I want to provide tax breaks for companies that are investing here in the United States. 
On energy, Governor Romney and I, we both agree that we've got to boost American energy production.  And oil and natural gas production are higher than they've been in years.  But I also believe that we've got to look at the energy sources of the future like wind and solar and biofuels, and make those investments.
So all of this is possible.  Now, in order for us to do it, we do have to close our deficit.  And one of the things I'm sure we'll be discussing tonight is how do we deal with our tax code and how do we make sure that we are reducing spending in a responsible way, but also how do we have enough revenue to make those investments. 
And this is where there's a difference, because Governor Romney's central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut on top of the extension of the Bush tax cuts -- that's another trillion dollars -- and $2 trillion in additional military spending that the military hasn't asked for.  That's $8 trillion. How we pay for that, reduce the deficit, and make the investments that we need to make without dumping those costs onto middle-class Americans I think is one of the central questions of this campaign.
MR. LEHRER:  Both of you have spoken about a lot of different things.  And we're going to try to get through them in as specific a way as we possibly can.  But first, Governor Romney, do you have a question that you'd like to ask the President directly about something he just said?
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  Well, sure, I'd like to clear up the record and go through it piece by piece.  First of all, I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut.  I don't have a tax cut of the scale that you're talking about.  My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class.  But I'm not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.  High-income people are doing just fine in this economy.  They'll do fine whether you're President or I am. 
The people who are having a hard time right now are middle-income Americans.  Under the President's policies, middle-income Americans have been buried.  They're just being crushed.  Middle-income Americans have seen their income come down by $4,300.  This is a tax in and of itself.  I'll call it the economy tax.  It's been crushing.
At the same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the President, electric rates are up, food prices are up, health care costs have gone up by $2,500 a family.  Middle-income families are being crushed.  And so the question is how to get them going again?  And I've described it.  It's energy and trade, the right kind of training programs, balancing our budget and helping small business.  Those are the cornerstones of my plan.
But the President mentioned a couple of other ideas I'll just note.  First, education.  I agree education is key, particularly the future of our economy.  But our training programs right now, we've got 47 of them housed in the federal government, reporting to eight different agencies.  Overhead is overwhelming.  We've got to get those dollars back to the states and go to the workers so they can create their own pathways to get in the training they need for jobs that will really help them.
The second area, taxation:  We agree we ought to bring the tax rates down, and I do -- both for corporations and for individuals.  But in order for us not to lose revenue and have the government run out of money, I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth.
The third area, energy:  Energy is critical, and the President pointed out correctly that production of oil and gas in the U.S. is up -- but not due to his policies, in spite of his policies.  Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land, not on government land.  On government land, your administration has cut the number of permits and licenses in half. 
If I’m President, I’ll double them and also get the oil from offshore in Alaska, and I’ll bring that pipeline in from Canada. And by the way, I like coal.  I’m going to make sure we can continue to burn clean coal.  People in the coal industry feel like it’s getting crushed by your policies.  I want to get America and North America energy independent so we can create those jobs.
And finally with regards to that tax cut, look, I’m not looking to cut massive taxes and to reduce the revenues going to the government.  My number-one principle is there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit.  I want to underline that -- no tax cut that adds to the deficit.  But I do want to reduce the burden being paid by middle-income Americans.  And to do that, that also means I cannot reduce the burden paid by high-income Americans.  So any language to the contrary is simply not accurate.
MR. LEHRER:  Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT:  Well, let’s talk about taxes because I think it’s instructive.  Now, four years ago when I stood on this stage, I said that I would cut taxes for middle-class families, and that's exactly what I did.  We cut taxes for middle-class families by about $3,600. 
And the reason is because I believe that we do best when the middle class is doing well.  And by giving them those tax cuts, they had a little more money in their pocket, and so maybe they can buy a new car.  They are certainly in a better position to weather the extraordinary recession that we went through.  They can buy a computer for their kid who is going off to college, which means they're spending more money; businesses have more customers; businesses make more profits and then hire more workers.
Now, Governor Romney’s proposal that he has been promoting for 18 months calls for a $5 trillion tax cut on top of $2 trillion of additional spending for our military.  And he is saying that he is going to pay for it by closing loopholes and deductions.  The problem is that he’s been asked over a hundred times how you would close those deductions and loopholes, and he hasn’t been able to identify them. 
But I’m going to make an important point here, Jim.  When you add up all the loopholes and deductions that upper-income individuals are currently taking advantage of, you take those all away, you don’t come close to paying for $5 trillion in tax cuts and $2 trillion in additional military spending. 
And that’s why independent studies looking at this said the only way to meet Governor Romney’s pledge of not reducing the deficit -- or not adding to the deficit, is by burdening middle-class families; the average middle-class family with children would pay about $2,000 more.
Now, that’s not my analysis.  That’s the analysis of economists who have looked at this.  And that kind of top-down economics where folks at the top are doing well, so the average person making 3 million bucks is getting a $250,000 tax break, while middle-class families are burdened further, that’s not what I believe is a recipe for economic growth.
MR. LEHRER:  All right, what is the difference?  Let’s just stay on taxes for a --
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  But I get -- right, right. 
MR. LEHRER:  Let’s just stay on taxes for a moment here.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  Yes.  Well, but virtually --
MR. LEHRER:  What is the difference?
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  -- virtually everything he just said about my tax plan is inaccurate. 
MR. LEHRER:  All right.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  So if the tax plan he described were a tax plan I was asked to support, I’d say, absolutely not.  I’m not looking for a $5 trillion tax cut.  What I’ve said is, I won’t put in place a tax cut that adds to the deficit.  That’s part one.  So there’s no economist who can say Mitt Romney’s tax plan adds $5 trillion if I say I will not add to the deficit with my tax plan. 
Number two, I will not reduce the share paid by high-income individuals.  I know that you and your running mate keep saying that, and I know it’s a popular thing to say with a lot of people, but it’s just not the case.  Look, I’ve got five boys.  I’m used to people saying something that’s not always true, but just keep on repeating it and ultimately hoping I’ll believe it. (Laughter.)  But that is not the case, all right?  I will not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans.
And number three, I will not, under any circumstances, raise taxes on middle-income families.  I will lower taxes on middle-income families.  Now, you cite a study.  There are six other studies that looked at the study you described and say it’s completely wrong.  I saw a study that came out today that said you’re going to raise taxes by $3,000 to $4,000 on middle-income families.  There are all these studies out there.
But let’s get to the bottom line.  That is, I want to bring down rates.  I want to bring the rates down, at the same time, lower deductions and exemptions and credits and so forth, so we keep getting the revenue we need.  And you think, well, then why lower the rates?  And the reason is, because small business pays that individual rate.  Fifty-four percent of America’s workers work in businesses that are taxed not at the corporate tax rate, but at the individual tax rate.  And if we lower that rate, they will be able to hire more people.
For me, this is about jobs.  This is about getting jobs for the American people.
MR. LEHRER:  All right, that’s where we started.  Yes. 
Do you challenge what the Governor just said about his own plan?
THE PRESIDENT:  Well, for 18 months, he’s been running on this tax plan.  And now, five weeks before the election, he’s saying that his big, bold idea is "never mind."  And the fact is that if you are lowering the rates the way you described, Governor, then it is not possible to come up with enough deductions and loopholes that only affect high-income individuals to avoid either raising the deficit or burdening the middle class.  It’s math.  It’s arithmetic.
Now, Governor Romney and I do share a deep interest in encouraging small business growth.  So at the same time that my tax plan has already lowered taxes for 98 percent of families, I also lowered taxes for small business 18 times.  And what I want to do is continue the tax rates -- the tax cuts that we put into place for small businesses and families. 
But I have said that for incomes over $250,000 a year that we should go back to the rates that we had when Bill Clinton was President, when we created 23 million new jobs, went from deficit to surplus, and created a whole lot of millionaires to boot.  And the reason this is important is because by doing that, we can not only reduce the deficit, we can not only encourage job growth through small businesses, but we’re also able to make the investments that are necessary in education or in energy.
And we do have a difference, though, when it comes to definitions of small business.  Under my plan, 97 percent of small businesses would not see their income taxes go up.  Governor Romney says, well, those top 3 percent, they’re the job creators, they’d be burdened.  But under Governor Romney’s definition, there are a whole bunch of millionaires and billionaires who are small businesses.  Donald Trump is a small business -- and I know Donald Trump doesn’t like to think of himself as small anything.  But that’s how you define small businesses if you’re getting business income. 
And that kind of approach, I believe, will not grow our economy because the only way to pay for it without either burdening the middle class or blowing up our deficit is to make drastic cuts in things like education, making sure that we are continuing to invest in basic science and research -- all the things that are helping America grow.  And I think that would be a mistake.
MR. LEHRER:  All right.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  Jim, let me just come back on that point, which is these --
MR. LEHRER:  Just for the record --
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  -- small businesses we’re talking about --
MR. LEHRER:  Excuse me, just so everybody understands, we’re way over our first 15 minutes.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  It’s fun, isn’t it?
MR. LEHRER:  It’s okay.  It’s great. 
THE PRESIDENT:  That’s okay.
MR. LEHRER:  Great, no problem.  As long as you all don’t have a problem, I don’t have a problem.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  That’s good.
MR. LEHRER:  Because we’re still on the economy.  We’re going to come back to taxes, and we’re going to move on to the deficit and a lot of other things, too.  But go ahead, sir.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  You bet.  President, you’re -- Mr. President, you’re absolutely right, which is that with regards to 97 percent of the businesses are not taxed at the 35 percent tax rate, they’re taxed at a lower rate.  But those businesses that are in the last 3 percent of businesses happen to employ half -- half -- of all the people who work in small business.  Those are the businesses that employ one-quarter of all the workers in America.  And your plan is to take their tax rate from 35 percent to 40 percent.
Now, I talked to a guy who has a very small business.  He’s in the electronics business in St. Louis.  He has four employees. He said he and his son calculated how much they pay in taxes -- federal income tax, federal payroll tax, state income tax, state sales tax, state property tax, gasoline tax.  It added up to well over 50 percent of what they earned.  And your plan is to take the tax rate on successful small businesses from 35 percent to 40 percent.  The National Federation of Independent Businesses has said that will cost 700,000 jobs. 
I don’t want to cost jobs.  My priority is jobs.  And so what I do is I bring down the tax rates, lower deductions and exemptions -- the same idea behind Bowles-Simpson, by the way.  Get the rates down, lower deductions and exemptions to create more jobs, because there’s nothing better for getting us to a balanced budget than having more people working, earning more money, paying more taxes.  That’s by far the most effective and efficient way to get this budget balanced.
THE PRESIDENT:  Jim, you may want to move on to another topic, but I would just say this to the American people:  If you believe that we can cut taxes by $5 trillion and add $2 trillion in additional spending that the military is not asking for -- $7 trillion -- just to give you a sense, over 10 years, that’s more than our entire defense budget -- and you think that by closing loopholes and deductions for the well-to-do, somehow you will not end up picking up the tab, then Governor Romney’s plan may work for you.
But I think math, common sense, and our history shows us that’s not a recipe for job growth.  Look, we’ve tried this -- we’ve tried both approaches.  The approach that Governor Romney is talking about is the same sales pitch that was made in 2001 and 2003.  And we ended up with the slowest job growth in 50 years.  We ended up moving from surplus to deficits, and it all culminated in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Bill Clinton tried the approach that I’m talking about.  We created 23 million new jobs.  We went from deficit to surplus.  And businesses did very well.  So in some ways we’ve got some data on which approach is more likely to create jobs and opportunity for Americans.  And I believe that the economy works best when middle-class families are getting tax breaks so that they’ve got some money in their pockets, and those of us who have done extraordinarily well because of this magnificent country that we live in, that we can afford to do a little bit more to make sure we’re not blowing up the deficit.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  The President began this segment, so I think I get the last word.  So I’m going to take it.
MR. LEHRER:  You’re going to get the first part in the next segment. 
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  But he gets the first word of that segment.  I get the last word of that segment -- well, I hope -- let me just make this comment.   
MR. LEHRER:  That's not how it works.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  Let me repeat what I said.  I’m not in favor of a $5 trillion tax cut.  That's not my plan.  My plan is not to put in place any tax cut that will add to the deficit.  That's point one.  So you may keep referring to the $5 trillion tax cut, but that's not my plan.
Number two, let’s look at history.  My plan is not like anything that's been tried before.  My plan is to bring down rates but also bring down deductions and exemptions and credits at the same time, so the revenue stays in, but that we bring down rates to get more people working.  My priority is putting people back to work in America.  They’re suffering in this country. 
And we talk about evidence.  Look at the evidence of the last four years.  It’s absolutely extraordinary.  We’ve got 23 million people out of work or stopped looking for work in this country.  It’s just -- we’ve got -- when the President took office, 32 million people on food stamps; 47 million on food stamps today; economic growth this year slower than last year; and last year slower than the year before.  Going forward with the status quo is not going to cut it for the American people who are struggling today.
MR. LEHRER:  All right, let’s talk -- we’re still on the economy.  This is theoretically now a second segment, still on the economy, and specifically on what to do about the federal deficit, the federal debt.  And the question -- you each have two minutes on this.  And Governor Romney, you go first because the President went first on segment one. 
And the question is this:  What are the differences between the two of you as to how you would go about tackling the deficit problem in this country?
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  Good, I’m glad you raised that, and it’s a critical issue.  I think it’s not just an economic issue.  I think it’s a moral issue.  I think it’s, frankly, not moral for my generation to keep spending massively more than we take in, knowing those burdens are going to passed on to the next generation, and they’re going to be paying the interest and the principal all their lives.  And the amount of debt we’re adding, at a trillion a year, is simply not moral.
So how do we deal with it?  Well, mathematically, there are three ways that you can cut a deficit.  One, of course, is to raise taxes.  Number two is to cut spending.  And number three is to grow the economy, because if more people work in a growing economy, they’re paying taxes and you can get the job done that way. 
The President would prefer raising taxes.  I understand.  The problem with raising taxes is that it slows down the rate of growth, and you can never quite get the job done.  I want to lower spending and encourage economic growth at the same time. 
What things would I cut from spending?  Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs by this test if they don't pass it: Is the program so critical it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?  And if not, I’ll get rid of it.  Obamacare is on my list.  I apologize, Mr. President.  I use that term with all respect.
THE PRESIDENT:  I like it.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY:  Okay, good.  So I’ll get rid of that.  I’m sorry, Jim, I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS.  I’m going to stop other things.  I like PBS.  I love Big Bird.  I actually like you, too.  But I’m not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it.  That's number one.
Number two, I’ll take programs that are currently good programs but I think could be run more efficiently at the state level and send them to the state.
Number three, I’ll make government more efficient and cut back the number of employees, combine some agencies and departments.  My cutbacks will be done through attrition, by the way. 
This is the approach we have to take to get America to a balanced budget.  The President said he’d cut the deficit in half.  Unfortunately, he doubled it -- trillion-dollar deficits for the last four years.  The President has put in place as much public debt -- almost as much debt held by the public as all prior Presidents combined.
MR. LEHRER:  Mr. President, two minutes.

507640_Protect Your Family
Protect your family with Quality disaster and emergency food made in America with a 25 year shelf life and Get Free Shipping on all orders!


Join the conversation and post your thoughts in the comments! Read the 1461 Comment Guidelines.

 1461 is currently being read by over 500,000 People and spreading! Help the 1461 continue to Grow and spread the truth - invite your friends and family to join the 1461 and learn the truth rather than BS!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Welcome to the 1461. Join the conversation.
If this is your first visit - read the Comment Guidelines
Remember you have a Constitutionally protected right to anonymous political free speech, not a free pass to be an ass.