Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118567700
label
[JGR/Carter Briefing Book for Presidential Debate] (4 of 17)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118567700
contentType
document
title
[JGR/Carter Briefing Book for Presidential Debate] (4 of 17)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
485
collections
Records of the Office of Counsel to the President (Reagan Administration)
John Roberts' Subject Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118567700
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1986-12-31
year
1986
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1982-01-01
year
1982
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
b46cac19122ef254
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Roberts, John G.: Files
Folder Title: [JGR/Carter Briefing Book for
Presidential Debate] (4 of 17)
Box: 7
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
EXPERIENCE
Question:
What have you learned from your experience?
Answer:
THEME
THERE IS A REAL VALUE TO EXPERIENCE IN THE OVAL OFFICE. NO PRIOR
EXPERIENCE CAN PREPARE SOMEONE ADEQUATELY. WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT
THAN HAVING THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING PRESIDENT IS SHOWING THAT YOU
HAVE LEARNED FROM THAT EXPERIENCE. I HAVE. THAT IS WHY I WILL BE
A BETTER PRESIDENT OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
I have learned a great deal about the Presidency, about our
country, about the government, about our role in the world over
the past four years. The experience could not have been
duplicated elsewhere.
I have learned first hand that no prior experience can adequately
prepare someone for the Presidency - certainly not in this ever-
demanding government and complex, changing world.
The difference between now and 1976 is that I have clearly learned
from my experience - learned the importance of extensive consul-
tations with Congress, gotten to know the Congressional leaders and
developed friendships with leaders around the world. I have learned
to target priorities, the dangers and force of inflation, and the
fragility of peace. And I believe I am a better President because
of this, and because of the changes I have made.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
Governor Reagan would face many of the same problems I did when I-
took office - a background in State government, a need to put
together an entire new Administration, a need to develop an entire
new legislative program, a need to get to know well the Members of
Congress, a need to meet the world leaders.
All of that takes precious time, and all of it means that progress
we are already making to solving economic and other problems will
be interrupted.
And, of course, Governor Reagan will have the added burden of
being a Republican, having to deal with a Democratic Congress.
C
&
CAMPAIGN PROMISES
uestion:
Why should the public attach much value in your campaign promises
this year, since you appear to have disregarded SO many of your
1976 campaign promises?
nswer:
THEME
= HAVE A SOUND RECORD IN HONORING MV MAJOR CAMPAIGN PROMISES. = LEARNED FROM
MY EXPERIENCE AS PRESIDENT, THOUGH, THAT SOME OF MY '76 COMMITMENTS WERE EITHER
NOT REALISTIC OR WERE NOT IN OUR COUNTRY'S BEST INTEREST. THE EXPERIENCE OF
BEING PRESIDENT HAS TAUGHT ME WHAT CAN REALISTICALLY BE ACHIEVED OVER THE NEXT
FOUR YEARS, AND I HAVE NOT PROMISED MORE THAN THAT. MY OPPONENT CONTINUES TO
PROMISE MORE THAN CAN BE ACHIEVED.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
0
I was the first President to compile and disclose publicly all my campaign
promises; that was done to alsow the public to judge my performance against
the promises.
Any objective assessment of my performance shows that I have honored an
extraordinary number of the promises, and done everything possible to honor
most of them:
--
Comprehensive energy policy
--
Comprehensive urban policy
--
Appointments -- affirmative action
Humphrey-Hawkins
--
Preserving Social Security System
--
Increased education assistance and a Department of Education
Supporting human rights
--
Peace between Egypt and Israel
--
Improved relations with China
0
In some cases, Congressional resistance has made impossible the fulfillment
of promises during my first term -- National Health Insurance, Welfare
Reform, Tax Reform. But I am determined to pursue these matters over the
next four years.
0
In some instances, I have departed from my '76 commitments because of the
realities I have faced in office and because of the new facts I have learned.
For instance, I decided to decontrol oil prices to increase domestic produc-
tion. I was not able to balance the budget because of the recession. And
: have increased defense spending beyond the levels I discussed in '76 cam-
paign due to the poor state of our armed forces and the continued Russian
buildup.
-2-
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
Governor Reagan's energy policy is purely and simply to "turn the cil
companies loose", and let them keep virtually all of their windfall
profits. He would ignore the need to invest in increased conservation
and in alternative energy resources and technologies.
B.
Carter
I recognized in April of 1977 that doing what was needed in the
energy area would not enhance my popularity. I was right.
I was prepared to take the heat for unpopular energy actions, and
I will continue to be. But, we now recognize the importance of the
steps taken, and that is a vital part of Getting the cooperation
needed for further progress.
Because of the investments that we are making today in energy
conservation and in increased product on from alternative energy
sources, further increases in the Drice of foreign oil will
eventually have a much less serious effect on our Nation's economy.
I will continue to provide funding for programs to increase energy
conservation and energy production, to ensure that we escape from
our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.
I want to pass the two remaining pieces of my energy program - The
Utility Oil Backout bill to provide incentives for our utilities to
produce electricity from American coal rather than foreign oil; and
the Energy Mobilization Board, to cut the red-tape out of moving
forward with major energy projects while protecting our environmental
laws.
4260
ENERGY: STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE
Question:
You say that you want America to have "energy security,"
but you have done nothing to fill the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve until the Congress forced you to act. How do you
justify this?
Answer:
THEME
= HAVE PUT OUR NATION'S FIRST ENERGY PROGRAM IN PLACE. GOVERNOR REAGAN
HAS NO REAL ENERGY PROGRAM EXCEPT TURNING THE OIL COMPANIES "LOOSE." I
HAVE MOVED TO FILL THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE (SPR) AS RAPIDLY AS THE
INTERNATIONAL MARKET SITUATION HAS ALLOWED AND I AM NOW FILLING IT AT A
VERY RAPID RATE -- WELL ABOVE THE LEVEL CONGRESS AUTHORIZED. BECAUSE OF
OUR POLICIES, WE NOW -- IN THIS
COUNTRY.
HAVE A RECORD LEVEL OF OIL
RESERVES IN PRIVATE STOCKS.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
o
When I took office there was no effective Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Program (SPR). There had been severe mismanagement and real technical
problems with the pumps. I began to store crude oil in the SPR during
the fourth quarter of 1977 and had reached a level of 91.2 million
barrels at the end of 1979. This slow fill rate was necessary because
of the tight international oil supply due to the cut-off of oil from
Iran. If we had purchased large quantities of oil for the SPR, we
would have contributed to the increase in oil prices and the shortage
of oil supply. As a result of our policies, prices have stabilized
and private stocks are at all-time highs.
O
We have this month purchased 24 million barrels of oil for delivery
this year and early next year. We have also asked for bids on an
additional 12.5 million barrels and expect to award those contracts
within a week, for delivery early in 1981.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reacan
o
Governor Reagan claims that he would have filled the SPR rapidly all
along, as I am now doing. This is typical of the Governor's failure to
understand that energy is really a world problem, in which an apparently
simple solution for one nation can actually create much larger problems
in the world oil markets that will eventually hurt everyone.
3.
Carter
0
= will continue to fill the SPR at above the level required by the statute,
after careful consideration of the world oil market situation.
o
This policy is responsible and will ensure that we have a secure energy
-2-
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reacan
O
Governor Reagan opposes my programs to provide Federal assistance in
order to increase production or decrease consumption: he opposes the
Windfall Profits Tax, the Department of Energy, the commitment to
Solar, the importance of conservation. Governor Reagan believes that
we can solve our energy problems alone, just by "turning the oil
companies loose" to find more oil in this country.
B.
Carter
O
I will continue to provide substantial Federal assistance for energy
conservation and for increased energy production programs. Further
decreasing our dependence on foreign oil is the very best way to escape
OPEC dominance and demands.
I will also continue to strengthen the cooperative structure that I
have forged with our allies, SO that we can work together to resist any
attempts by OPEC to make unreasonable changes in their price or supply
conditions.
I hope to develop a constructive dialogue with moderate OPEC producers
to assure greater certainty prace and supply on world crude oil markets.
I want to complete the few remaining pieces of my energy program
(Utility Oil Backout bill; Energy Mobilization Board)
ENERGY: ROLE OF HIGHER ENERGY PRICES
IN YOUR ENERGY PROGRAM
Question:
Hasn't your energy program caused trouble for you with Democrats
because it is essentially the traditional Republican program of
inducing greater conservation and production through higher prices?
Answer:
THEME
ENERGY POLICY OPTIONS CANNOT
BE
SO
EASILY PLACED INTO PARTISAN PIGEONHOLES.
MY POLICIES HAVE BEEN BASED
NE
NEED TO BALANCE THE ECONOMIC REALITY OF
AN INCREASINGLY SCARCE RESOURCE AGAINST THE LEGITIMATE DEMANDS FOR
ASSISTANCE OF THOSE WHO ARE BRENG HURT BY THE RISING PRICES.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
My energy program has been enacted over these last four years with
bipartisan support.
I made it clear from my first energy message in 1977 that the price
of imported energy was certain to increase. That is a fact of life.
To accomplish our goals I have supported the deregulation of energy
prices. We cannot have the production and conservation we need with
artificial controls on energy. But I have decontrolled on a gradual
basis and have gotten the Congress to pass the Windfall Profits Tax
to insure that all of the additional profits from decontrol do not
go into oil company coffers. That revenue ($227 billion over ten years)
will be used to develop and to conserve more energy here in America,
and to help the poor who are most affected by the energy price increases.
The only way to combat the increasing energy price tag -- up to
$85 billion sent overseas for foreign oil this year -- is to increase
domestic production and to decrease comsumption. And my policies
have succeeded in both of those goals:
-- More new oil and gas wells this year than ever before.
-- The highest coal production in our Nation's history.
Imports of oil down 2 million barrels since I took office.
-- Consuming 8% less gasoline than one year ago.
These policies ultimately will assure lower prices than if we
continued to be more and more dependent on OPEC.
-2-
Plants are now being licensed again but under much stricter
safety standards.
2.
THE FUTURE
A. Reagan
o
Governor Reagan simply does not understand the complicated issues
presented by nuclear power. For instance, he always speaks in terms
of speeding up the licensing process for nuclear power plants rather
than emphasizing making sure that they are truly safe.
And just this year, Governor Reagan said that "all of the waste
in a year from a nuclear power plant could be stored under a desk."
That obviously is not true. This cavalier attitude completely
ignores the responsibility of the Federal Government to find and
to establish a safe nuclear waste disposal program.
B.
Carter
I am committed to ensuring that nuclear reactors are operated safely.
I receive regular reports from the Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee
that I established, and I will take any actions that I can to guarantee
the American people that their power plants pose no threat to their
health or welfare.
I am committed to the passage of nuclear waste legislation implementing
the comprehensive program that I sent to the Congress last February.
o
I am committed to the rapid development of alternative fuels to ensure
that we are not overly dependent on nuclear power. I hope ultimately
we can phase-out nuclear power but this cannot be done in the short-run.
ENERGY: RELATIONSHIP WITH OPEC
Question:
Haven't you let OPEC dictate our energy policies? What are you
prepared to do if OPEC announces another doubling of oil prices?
Answer:
THEME
WHEN = TOOK OFFICE IN JANUARY 1977, OPEC HAS A STRANGLEHOLD ON THE OIL-
DEPENDENT ECONOMIES OF THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD. WE HAVE REVERSED -- IN ÷
HISTORIC WAY -- THE DECADES OF GROWING DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL SINCE
WORLD WAR II. MY ENERGY POLICY HAS STEADILY FREED OUR NATION FROM THE GRIP
OF THIS DANGEROUS DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL. EVERY YEAR I HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE
WE HAVE REDUCED OUR DEPENDENCE ON OPEC. AND I HAVE LED THE WAY TO INCREASING
COOPERATION AMONG MAJOR CONSUMING NATIONS TO BE READY TO RESPOND TOGETHER TO
ANY UNREASONABLE PRICE INCREASES.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
o
Despite the experience of the oil embargo in 1973, the Republican
Administrations that preceded me did little but talk about energy
policy while our dependence on imported où *steadily increased. When
= took office, the United States imported nearly half of the oil we
used -- 8.8 million barrels per day.
0:
Within 90. days after I took office, in my first major address to the
Nation, I announced a comprehensive energy policy to increase domestic
production and decrease energy consumption. These policies have decreased
our oil imports by 2 million barrels per day since I took office; there
is no better way to avoid having OPEC dictate our national choices and
policies than by cutting down the only real weapon they have -- their
oil supply. Production of coal, natural gas and crude oil are up.
Solar and synthetic energy is being accelerated. Conservation is
working.
0
I have also tried to lead the major industrial democracies to make a
silimar commitment, to reduce their oil imports and to develop alternative
resources. In Tokyo in 1979, and then in Venice this past summer, we
reached agreements that allow us to withstand -- together -- any challenge
in the world.
o
As recently as this month, the member nations of the International Energy
Agency agreed to moderate their activity in the spot market and to prevent
market disruptions that the Iraq/Iran conflict might have caused. This
effort could not be effective if it were attempted by just one nation,
but the cooperative structure that we have forged has proved very effective
in this tense period. Spot market prices remain calm and there are no
indications of panic buying or hoarding. This shows the progress we have
been making very clearly -- we are now prepared for the type of shortfalls
caused by the war.
ENERGY AND COPY
ENERGY: NUCLEAR POWER
Question:
What do you see as the future of nuclear power in this country?
Do you accept the Democratic Platform's position that existing
nuclear plants can be phased-out as alternative fuel sources
become available?
Answer:
THEME
WE MUST PUT SAFETY FIRST IN THE USE OF NUCLEAR POWER. FOR THE NEXT
20 YEARS OR so, UNTIL WE HAVE DEVELOPED MORE
SYNTHETIC
FUELS
AND
RENEWABLE RESOURCES AND HAVE DEVELOPED FUSION. WE SIMPLY CANNOT MEET
OUR ECONOMY'S NEEDS WITHOUT UTILIZING EVERY DOMESTIC SOURCE OF POWER
AVAILABLE TO US -- INCLUDING NUCLEAR POWER. HOWEVER IT SHOULD BE A
LAST RESORT, AND ULTIMATELY I DO HOPE WE CAN RHASE IT OUT.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
After the accident at Three Mile Island, I moved promptly to appoint
the Kemeny Commission to make a careful study of that incident. They
submitted an important set of recommendations, and I took a number
of immediate steps to ensure that nuclear power plants were operated
safely:
-- Reorganized the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and nominated
a new Chairman.
-- Established the Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee, an expert
advisory group to monitor the progress of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, other Federal agencies and others in improving the
safety of nuclear power plants.
-- Put the Federal Emergency Management Agency in charge of all
off-site emergency activities, and had them complete a review
of all emergency plans.
-- Accelerated the program to place a resident Federal inspector at
every reactor site, and I can now report that there are such
inspectors at every operating reactor.
I have also established the Nation's first comprehensive radioactive
waste management program:
-- Submitted my comprehensive program to the Congress and have worked
with them to enact nuclear waste legislation.
-- Established the State Planning Council to provide an effective
role for State and local governments in the development and
implementation of our nuclear waste management program.
SOVIET GRAIN SUSPENSION
Question:
Hasn't the grain embargo hurt our farmers more than it has
hurt the Soviets? Under what circumstances would you be
prepared to lift it?
Answer:
THEME
I TOOK THIS ACTION IN RESPONSE TO THE BLATANT DISREGARD OF THE SOVIET
UNION FOR THE FREEDOM OF THE AFGHANISTAN PEOPLE AND THE THREAT THAT
IMPLIED FOR WORLD SECURITY. AT THE SAME TIME I SUSPENDED SHIPMENT OF
SOVIET GRAIN, I ACTED TO PROTECT AMERICA'S FARMERS FROM BEARING A
DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE BURDEN. BOTH THE SUSPENSION AND THE
OFFSETTING ACTIONS TO PROTECT FARMERS HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL. I WILL
LIFT THE EMBARGO ONLY IF IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT: (1) IT HAS
BECOME INEFFECTIVE OR (2) THE SOVIETS HAVE ALTERED THEIR BEHAVIOR.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
In the 1976 campaign, I promised America's farmers I would resort
to an embargo only if our national security or our foreign policy
interests were threatened that I would never embargo grain
shipments just to keep farm prices down as the Republicans did on
at least three occasions. I have kept that promise.
Armed Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan last year. I was faced
with three options: (1) do nothing, (2) respond militarily, or
(3) use economic sanctions. I chose the latter.
In addition to suspending all grain shipments above the 8 million
ton level called for in the grain agreement, I ordered a curtail-
ment of Russian fishing privileges in our waters, cut off the sale
of high technology products, halted the sale of phosphate fertilizers,
and called for a boycott of the Moscow Olympic games.
At the same time, I directed the Secretary of Agriculture to take
whatever actions were necessary to ensure that American farmers
did not bear a disproportionate share of the resulting burden.
This was accomplished by isolating from the market slightly more
than 17 million tons of grain.
By every measure, the suspension has accomplished its purpose. It
has shorted the Soviets of 8 to 10 million tons of badly needed
feed grains for their livestock. It has caused the Soviets to
draw-down their stocks of grain to rock-bottom levels. It has
caused meat and dairy production to fall. It has been a major
embarrassment to Kremlin leaders. It has even caused worker
unrest, both in the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe.
-2-
The measures taken to protect America's farmers have also been
successful. Not only did our isolation of grain provide needed
support to farm prices, but through the aggressive promotion
of farm exports, we increased the level above what we had
expected before the suspension. Farm prices are up. As a
result, we will set our fourth straight farm export record this
year, $40 billion
a net positive contribution to our balance
of payments of $23 billion. We have expanded our world markets -
e.g., to Mexico and China.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
0
Governor Reagan has taken different positions on this issue at every
turn. Just three months before I suspended grain shipments to the
Soviet Union, he said: "If the Russians want to buy wheat from
us
I wouldn't sell it to them.
"
Yet, when it came time to campaign emong farmers in the Iowa
caucus, Governor Reagan had changed his position, saying the
embargo shouldn't have been ordered, wouldn't hurt the Soviets,
and would only hurt our
careers.
C
Seyond their vacillation Republican critics seem to forget
their embargoes of 1973, 1974, end 1975 - embargoes that were
totally unprovoked and were taken against some of our most trusted
friends. They also fail to mention that these Republican
Administrations never did a thing to protect our own farmers
against the price depressing effects of those embargoes. Indeed,
the reason for the embargoes was to drive down domestic farm prices.
3.
Carter
o
I am convinced of the correctness of my decision to suspend the ship-
ment of grain to the Soviets.
0
There are only two circumstances that would lead me to lift the
suspension, neither of which currently prevail: (1) convincing
evidence that the embargo is no longer effective or (2) a belief
on my part that the Soviet threat to the rest of the world was
being alleviated and that there was progress being made in the
Soviets' withdrawal of their occupying troops from Afghanistan.
0
The future of the Soviet grain agreement, which expires September 30,
1981, has not been determined and will be considered later next year.
NOTE:
The Soviets have nearly completed their purchases for shipment during
the fifth year of the agreement (beginning October 1), with contracts
now signed for 4.8 million tons of corn and 3.0 million tons of wheat.
Although the International Longshoremen are once again threatening not
to load the Soviet grain, we anticipate that the courts will keep the
grain flowing with minimal delay.
-2-
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reacan
It is difficult to know what my opponents' view of farm policy
really is. Earlier this year, he said he was not familiar
with parity. He once said about farm price supports, "You
subsidize the inefficient when you put a floor under the price."
About dairy farmers, he said, "My view on dairy subsidies is
that we are subsidizing those who could not compete at the
expense of those who could possibly bring the price down in
the market place."
Despite his life-long opposition to traditional farm programs,
Governor Reagan's campaign statements imply that he would not
try to dismantle farm subsidies. However, one cannot be very
optimistic that they would receive the continuing attention
and adjustment they require, especially given the Republican
record.
Republican farm policies never have been noted for their vision.
Rather, they have been characterized by confusion and contradiction.
They have always preached free markets, but the record shows that
they practiced price controls and export embargoes. They vetoed
price support legislation, usually when it was most desperately
needed. They repeatedly raised our import quotas to allow foreign
dairy products to flood our markets. (They cut food aid to hungry
nations when it was most needed. In short, it is a sorry record.
Not only does it display a lack of respect for the functioning
of market forces, but it reveals an insensitivity to the economic
and human problems of the ordinary farm family.
3.
Carter
o
While I am pleased that my Administration has turned around the
disastrous situation we inherited and I am proud of the policy
we constructed in doing so, there is more to be done. American
agriculture is on the threshold of a whole new era -- an era of
tightening world food supplies, mounting pressures on our land
and water resources, continued strains on our transportation and
marketing system, the need to press forward on developing new
technologies and production practices, an even more pressing
need to safeguard agriculture's access to limited energy supplies
and to nurture the development of alternative sources. While
this will be an era of excitement and opportunity, it will also
be one of rapid change and adjustment.
In this era of opportunity and change, I intend to pursue policies
built on the solid foundation we have already laid, but giving
particular stress to:
-
ensuring that farm prices and support levels keep pace
with rising production costs;
-
further actions to deregulate agriculture;
-
the promotion of farm exports, including stepped-up promotion
of "value added" products like meat, poultry, breeding animals,
-3-
-
an intensive effort to ces tructure and rebuild our
agricultural transportation system.
-
the continued accelerated development of alternative
energy sources (gasohol) farm crops.
-2-
Real outlay growth in basic research will secure our
technological base for future growth and development.
--
Employment and training programs, especially for our
youth, will enhance the skills and productive capacity
of our people.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
Governor Reagan has promised massive tax cuts, higher defense spending
and a balanced budget -- but the numbers do add up.
He has recently proposed additional spending increases which make
large future deficits and inflation even more likely -- examples:
Social Security earnings test removal tuition tax credits,
inheritance tax repeal.
He has promised big spending cuts but refuses to tell us which
programs will be cut. All he can say is that waste will be
eliminated. In the current Fiscal Year he has promised cuts of
$13-$19 billion, but still has provided no details.
He presided over real expenditure growth as Governor of California
that was the highest in the State history -- 126% increase in
spending.
3.
Carter
o
Inflation is the most serious threat to our economic security.
We must not run the risk of large, inflationary budget deficits
from massive across-the-board tax cuts.
Moderate tax cuts, consistent with fiscal restraint and emphasizing
investment and industrial growth, not consumption, is the responsible
approach.
O
This approach will allow us to create a million new jobs by the end
of 1982, but still bring down inflation.
In the longer term, budgetary goals require strong, non-inflationary
economic growth. This requires savings, investment, and attention
to structural change in the economy. My program addresses these
problems. The Reagan program instead offers a massive consumption-
oriented tax cut.
Farm Policy
Question:
Haven't = your farm policies produced lower incomes and prices
for farmers in recent years? How do you propose to remedy
this without fueling inflation?
Answer:
THEME
IN ASSUMING THE PRESIDENCY, I INHERITED A FARM ECONOMY THAT WAS IN A
STATE OF SERIOUS DECLINE, MADE WORSE BY THE CONFUSED AND CONTRADICTORY
FARM POLICIES OF PRIOR REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATIONS. MY ADMINISTRATION
HAS SUCCESSFULLY TURNED THIS SITUATION AROUND. NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE
CLEAR, CONSISTENT SETS OF FARM POLICIES THAT WORK, WE HAVE THE RESULTS
TO PROVE THAT THEY WORK -- HIGHER PRICES, HIGHER INCOMES, HIGHER EXPORTS.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
When I entered office grain prices were in a tailspin, cattle
producers were licuidating their herds after four years of
heavy losses, the bottom was: dropping out of farm income,
consumers and producers were engaged in open confrontation,
and our nation' S. reputation as a reliable exporter of farm
products had been seriously tarnished.
We immediately began to correct this. I began by appointing a
farmer as Secretary of Agriculture. We then took a number of
steps to eliminate governmental interference in those decisions
that were better left to the individual farmer. We established
this nation's first farmer-owned grain reserve. We brought farm
price supports in line with rising production costs. We re-
established our reputation within the world market and negotiated
across-the-board reductions in foreign trade barriers.
The results speak for themselves. By every meaningful measure --
total gross farm income, total net farm income, total production,
total consumption, total farm exports -- the record of the first
four years of this Administration top any previous four-year
period in history.
NOTE:
Reagan is likely to point to the drop in net farm income
between 1979 and 1980 (we now estimate a 24 percent drop).
Counter-points, if he does are:
(1) since farm income varies significantly year-to-year,
the only meaningful comparisons are across periods of
at least 3-4 years,
(2) even with the decline, it will be over 25% above the
last year of the Republican Administration, and
(3) thanks to very strong markets, here and abroad, it is
already on the rise and will be significantly higher
-2-
If the ITC finds injury, I will ask my Trade Representative to
initiate high-level contacts with the Japanese government immediately.
I will seriously consider all possible options, including measures to
restrict imports.
Whatever the ITC recommends, however, I am confident that we will
lick the problem of Japanese imports.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
My opponent has not given us any cohesive policy for addressing the
problems of the automobile. He has blamed almost all of the problems
of the industry on government regulations.
O
After first saying he was against any steps to restrict imports
Governor Reagan stated in Michigan that something must be done to
stem the flow of Japanese imports but has not specifically advocated
restraining Japanese imports.
3.
Carter
C
I see a bright future for the U.S. auto industry - one that's already
starting. We will increas make the most fuel-efficient, safest,
soundest cars in the world.
C
The key to the revitalization of our auto industry is the industry's
effort to produce more small, fuel-efficient cars in this country.
With the new 1981 models, we are well on our way to achieving this
goal.
To ensure that government is doing everything possible to help the
auto industry put American auto workers back on the job, I have
established an Auto Industry Committee. On this Committee, business,
labor and government will work together to help restore the auto
industry to full health.
This Committee will address the full range of issues affecting the
auto industry, including imports, regulations, tax policy and other
critical issues. There is no question in my mind that, working
together, we can lick the problems of the auto industry and Japanese
imports.
BUDGET QUESTIONS: GENERAL APPROACH
THEME
I HAVE A SOLID RECORD OF CUTTING THE REAL GROWTH IN THE BUDGET BELOW THAT
OF PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS. I ALSO HAVE FOUR YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN
ESTABLISHING NATIONAL PRIORITIES AND MAKING THE TOUGH BUDGETARY DECISIONS
TO MEET THEM. MY POLICY OF FISCAL RESTRAINT IS ESSENTIAL TO REDUCING
INFLATION AND BUILDING A SECURE ECONOMIC FUTURE.
MY OPPONENT HAS NO EXPERIENCE IN MAKING THESE HARD CHOICES AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL. HE APPARENTLY DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THAT TOUGH CHOICES EXIST. SO,
HE PROMISES HUGE TAX CUTS, MASSIVE INCREASES IN DEFENSE SPENDING, MAIN-
TAINING ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS AND BALANCING THE BUDGET AT THE SAME TIME.
THE RESULT WOULD BE HUGE BUDGET DEFICITS, AND WORSE INFLATION, IN THE 1980s.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
The budget must be viewed in terms of real program expenditures in
relation to the size of the economy
The record shows budgetary
restraint.
:
In my four budgets real outlays have grown at an average
rate of 1.6%. In the two previous Republican Administrations
the rate was 2-1/2%.
:
Real defense outlays have Trown by nearly 3-1/2% each year;
in the Nixon-Ford Adminis rations they fell by nearly
3-1/2% per year.
--
The budget deficit for the current fiscal year is projected
to be 1 to 1-1/2% of GNP. When I ran for office the deficit
was over 4% of GNP.
Within this overall context of restraint, I have directed budget
expenditures to programs of highest national priority.
I
Real defense spending has increased by almost 3-1/2% per year
after a steady eight-year decline under two Republican
Administrations.
--
Major new initiatives in energy conservation and supply,
funded by the windfall profit tax, have established a
long-overdue energy policy to reduce our dependence on
oil imported from insecure foreign sources.
-2-
In my first two years I concentrated on ending the recession and
restoring solid growth. Since then I have placed primary emphasis on
fighting inflation.
Finally, experience has taught me to be even more aware than I was
four years ago how stubborn and persistent inflation is. Because of
that heightened awareness, I have been especially vigilant in the
past year to prevent actions that might lead to renewed inflation.
I successfully opposed a quickie election year tax cut. I have
proposed to the Congress for enactment next year a very careful and
prudent economic recovery program that is in sharp contrast to the
massive and inflationary across-the-board tax cuts that are the center-
piece of Governor Reagan's economic policy. I wish he had learned as
much as I have over the past four years about the strength of inflation.
If he had, he would not be proposing a tax cut that will cost $1 trillion
over the next seven years.
COPY
AUTO IMPORTS
Question:
Do you favor restrictions on the number of Japanese autos
imported into the U.S.?
Answer:
THEME
WE HAVE A GOOD SOUND RECORD OF WORKING TO REVITALIZE THE AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE
INDUSTRY. I AM COMMITTED TO A POLICY OF CONTINUING TO HELP THE INDUSTRY
REGAIN ITS STRENGTH AND TECHNOLOGICAL LEAD. I WILL AWAIT THE DECISION OF
THE ITC BEFORE MAKING A FINAL DECISION. BUT I WILL BE PREPARED IF THEY
FIND INJURY TO OUR INDUSTRY FROM IMPORTS. BUT I HAVE ASKED THE JAPANESE
NOT TO EXPAND THEIR PRODUCTION CAPACITY TO SELL MORE CARS TO THE U.S. AND
TO BE SENSITIVE TO AMERICAN JOBS IN THEIR EXPORT POLICY.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
COPY
In 1977, I strongly urged the leaders of the U.S. auto industry in
the Cabinet Room to begin building fuel-efficient cars. My warnings
went unheeded.
JUN 27 1983
I worked with the Congress to pass tough fuel economy standards.
This got the industry to start making fuel-efficient cars earlier
than they would have otherwise done.
My Administration has done a great deal to revitalize our domestic
automobile industry. We have reduced the regulatory burden on the
automobile industry by more than $600 million; we have accelerated
the government's purchases of autos and trucks and taken steps to
ensure that every car and truck the government buys is made in
America; we have proposed new tax incentives to help the industry
retool for the future; and we have provided substantial new aid to
the workers and communities most affected by the rapid changes in
the automobile industry.
We also are working to open the Japanese markets to American made cars
and parts, and to encourage Japanese automakers to make additional
investments in this country.
I am extremely concerned about the level of Japanese auto imports and
their effect on the U.S. auto industry and its workers.
I already have asked the U.S. International Trade Commission to
accelerate its investigation of the auto industry. The ITC will
report to me on November 10 whether the auto industry has been
injured by imports. If the ITC finds injury, they will submit
their recommendations for relief to me on November 24.
In anticipation of the ITC's decision, I have asked my Special
Trade Representative to complete the necessary staff work so that
T can respond immediately to the ITC's reports.
-3-
My economic program for the eighties, in contrast, is restrained,
responsible and designed to promote the long-term growth of the
economy. It devotes 50 percent of the tax cuts to investment
incentives and another 1/3 to offset increased Social Security
costs on business, compared to Reagan's 10 percent. I would
simplify and accelerate depreciation to promote investment. I
would make the investment tax credit partially refundable SO that
firms which have no earnings but still have substantial investment
needs, can benefit from the investment tax credit at the time when
it will be most helpful to their cash flow.
= would expand public investment as well in long-term investments
in our Nation's highways, ports and railroads. I have also proposed
an expansion in human resources programs; no investment has a higher
payoff than an investment in workers' skills and experience. I have
proposed an expansion in support for research and development which
underlies industrial innovation and productivity growth. And I have
proposed public investments in conservation and weatherization that
will increase our economic and national security.
I believe that the complex economic problems that will COPY
Nation in the 80's require not a retreat by the Federal government,
but rather a new partnership among the government and the private
sector. To foster the cooperation necessary to master|the economic
challenges of the 80's I will establish a new advisory body, comprised
of representatives of business, labor and the public; the President's
Economic Revitalization Board, and will continue to work with our
labor-business-government boards for steel, autos and coal.
I recognize that economic policy must also address the immediate dif-
ficulties faced by workers and their families in changing economic
circumstances. I have proposed a new, temporary Federal Supplemental
Benefits program to provide an additional 13 weeks of unemployment
assistance. For the longer term, a 10 percent tax credit for investments
in areas suffering from a declining industrial base will be proposed.
Passage of my Economic Development Proposal now before the Congress will
provide productive employment for those in distressed areas, and passage
of my youth bill will provide training and employment for 450,000 young
people when fully implemented.
Finally, to reduce personal tax burdens on those most afflicted by
inflation and the rise in social security taxes for 1981 I have proposed
an 8 percent tax credit to offset the rise in social security taxes in
1981, an expansion of the earned income tax credit for those families
who pay social security taxes yet earn too little to pay income taxes,
and a special tax deduction will be offered to help offset the
"marriage penalty.'
This program will enable us to meet our underlying economic problems,
to re-industrialize, and to avoid fueling inflationary pressures.
CHANGES IN ECONOMIC POLICY
Question:
Hasn't your economic policy been one of continuous new policies,
new budget directions, new anti-inflation initiatives? Why
haven't you been able to stick with a single economic policy?
Answer:
The press has exaggerated the number of policies. I'm required to
submit a new budget for each fiscal year to deal with the expected
economic circumstances. This does not mean we had a new economic
policy each year. Even minor changes in my voluntary wage-price
guidelines were counted by some as a new policy.
My basic economic philosophy and my approach to economic policy have
been quite consistent over the past four years. My aim is:
-
to encourage healthy economic growth;
--
to do SO carefully and prudently so as not
COPY
government itself an engine of inflation;
to meet quickly and decisively any new inflationary threats
from abroad -- like last year's massive oil price increase;
to restrain the growth of Federal spending SO as to be able
to provide responsible and noninflationary tax reduction for.
the American people;
and to make our country less dependent on foreign oil.
My basic policy goals have not changed. But economic circumstances at
home and abroad do change, sometimes very swiftly and unpredictably.
And specific budgetary, monetary and other economic measures have to
be promptly set in motion to deal with those changes. Consistent
economic policy does not mean sticking one's head in the sand. It
would be the height of irresponsibility to stand idly by while infla-
tionary or recessionary forces run unchecked. All Presidents have
recognized this and changed their economic policies accordingly.
Let me give an example. In March of this year, as the last surge
of oil price hikes was underway, inflation threatened to get out of
hand. Even though I had just sent a new budget to the Congress, I
convened Congressional leaders to work with me on cutting additional
amounts of Federal spending, in order to deal with the intensified
inflation. The medicine worked. While inflation is still too high,
it has receded sharply from that in the early months of this year.
In all of this, I did not change my basic approach. But I did move quickly
with specific new policies to meet a new threat to our country's economy.
F.D.R. said he would continue to experiment in dealing with an intolerable
problem until he found the right solution. He wasn't accused of
inconsistency.
ECONOMIC PROPOSAL COMPARISON AND OVERVIEW
Question:
How would you compare your economic revitalization program with
Governor Reagan's tax cut proposal? How does your economic
revitalization program help the average working person or
family? Won't the additional Federal spending be inflationary?
Answer:
MY RECORD IN ECONOMIC POLICY IS NOT AS GOOD AS I WOULD LIKE, BUT THE
ECONOMY IS IMPROVING IN MANY AREAS. EMPLOYMENT GROWTH DURING MY TERM
HAS BEEN FASTER THAN IN ANY PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION. = HAVE PUT INTO
PLACE A SERIES OF POLICIES WHICH WILL LEAD TO A MORE PRODUCTIVE AND
LESS INFLATIONARY AMERICAN ECONOMY IN THE FUTURE. MY ECONOMIC
REVITALIZATION PROGRAM IS PRUDENT, RESTRAINED, AND CAREFULLY DESIGNED
TO INCREASE INVESTMENT, PRODUCTIVITY AND EMPLOYMENT, AND TO REDUCE
INFLATION. MY OPPONENT, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS PROPOSED A SINGLE,
SIMPLISTIC ANSWER TO THE COMPLEX ECONOMIC PROBLEMS WHICH FACE OUR
NATION -- A MASSIVE, ACROSS-THE-BOARD INDIVIDUAL TAX CUT WHICH WOULD
BE REGRESSIVE, INFLATIONARY, AND COMPLETELY UNRESPONSIVE TO THE
CRITICAL NEED TO INCREASE INVESTMENT AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
TO SPUR FASTER PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE 80'S.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
We have had a difficult year but the COPY trends are favorable. I
have led this Nation out of one recession which I inherited and
we are coming out of one which hit during my Administration.
Inflation, while still too high, has come ) down and has
averaged
% over the last
months.
During the first three years of my Administration, 8.8 million
new jobs were created -- more jobs than were created in any
other Administration in history and twice as many as during
the previous Republican Administration.
Against formidable political opposition, I have put into place
a comprehensive and coherent National Energy Program, and its
effects are now evident: we have cut our foreign oil consumption
by two million barrels since I took office and no other nation
on earth can match that record.
I have put into place policies to increase the productivity of
our economy. From 1976 to 1979 investment has increased 25%.
Perhaps even more important has been my success in reducing
inefficient, productivity-reducing regulations: we have
deregulated the airlines, the railroads, trucking and the
banking industries. These actions have already saved consumers
billions of dollars as they increase competition and the
efficiency of the American economy.
-2-
0
= have implemented a prudent and responsible fiscal policy, and after
decades during which other administrations only talked about spending
restraint, I have achieved it: the growth in real Federal budget out-
lays has been cut in half compared to the rate of the previous
Republican Administration. And, in 1981 the Federal deficit as a
percent of GNP will be less than half what it was in 1976.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
C
= have learned the bitter lessons of inflation. I will not over-inflate
the economy but Governor Reagan's Kemp-Roth tax cut would do SO.
In contrast to my balanced, moderate approach to economic policy,
Governor Reagan has proposed one single, simplistic proposal to
deal with all of the complex economic problems of our country --
a massive, across-the-board, 30% individual income tax cut -- a rich
man's tax cut which would flood the Nation with excess dollars. There
is no recognition of the crucial need to reduce our vulnerability to
OPEC oil price increases.
O
There is no emphasis in his program of the critical need to encourage
private investment in plant and equipment. I believe that the tax
code must provide investment incentives SO that our workers will be
equipped with the most modern and efficient capital in the world.
That is apparently less important to Governor Reagan, since he devotes
only 10 percent of his tax cut to investment incentives.
()
Further, Governor Reagan's tax cuts would benefit the rich at the
expense of the rest of us. A person earning $200,000 would receive
35 times as large a tax cut under the Reagan proposal as a person
earning $20,000 a year.
0
Most importantly, Governor Reagan has not learned the lessons of
the past few years about inflation. We cannot afford to fuel in-
flation. Yet, his proposal is extremely inflationary -- his own
running mate said it would bring 30% inflation. That is not unlikely
when you cut taxes by $1 trillion over the next years, and
remain committed to massive defense spending, protecting entitlement
programs, and promise new spending programs.
3.
Carter
COPY
0
I, too, am committed to reducing personal tax burdens, but spending
restraint is an essential prerequisite. Massive tax cuts which
primarily benefit the rich and which pick the packets. of the rest
of Americans by generating huge, inflationary pressures cannot be
tolerated.
-2-
My program of budgetary firmness has meant a decline in the rate
of growth of federal spending I inherited.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
COPY
0
The key is I have learned from hard experience the difficulty of
fighting inflation and the dangers of over-stimulation. Mr. Reagan
would repeat the errors of the past by a highly stimulative,
consumption-oriented tax cut for the wealthy. Governor Regan's
proposals stand in sharp contrast to mine. Instead of a targeted
program of investment incentives, about 85% of his program would
be Reagan-Kemp-Roth notion of a single across-the-board personal
income tax cut. This proposal is so poor an idea that the
Governor's own running mate opposed it. So did many of his own
economic advisers. So did former President Ford. When Republicans
refuse to support the economic program of their own nominee, you
can bet they have good reasons. And they do.
I
It would be inflationary. Unless accompanied by enormous
budget cuts -- cuts that the Governor keeps promising but
never spells out -- his plans would cause budget deficits
of $100 billion or more, and increase inflation. His own
running mate called the proposal "economic vocdoo" and
said it would raise the inflation rate to 30 percent.
1
It would be regressive. In 1983, his proposal would give
$175 to a family making $12,000, but $15,000 to a family
making $200,000.
--
It provides the vast majority of its tax relief for
consumption, not investment and productivity. Although
his program does include a proposal for accelerated depreciation,
most of his tax relief is not tied to the investment we need
for productivity.
My opponent also claims that he will cut spending enough for the
nation to afford this enormous tax cut and still balance the budget.
But somehow he can't come up with any programs to cut. In fact, in
the past few weeks, he's been promising more wherever he travels.
At our last count, he was at $140 billion in 1983 and still spending.
B.
Carter
I am committed that ours remain the most productive economy on earth.
C
: have proposed an economic renewal program for prompt enactment
next year that would help increase productivity and create jobs
(1 million within 2 years) without increasing inflation as well.
It includes:
:
vastly accelerated depreciation schedules for plant and equip-
ment to encourage modernization (40%) ;
-3-
:
targeted tax programs for investment;
--
aid to workers and communities;
--
public investment in our transportation system. and
IN
the scientific research that maintains our economic
leadership;
--
a new partnership between government and industry, to
solve problems cooperatively through an Economic
Revitalization Board;
--
a reduction in Social Security taxes by an income tax credit
that reduces inflation and leaves the Social Security
Trust Fund secure.
Furthermore, we have begun to find new ways to fight inflation.
My proposal to offset social security tax increases will reduce
inflation in the immediate future. I am also exploring other
ways to use the tax system to help moderate wage and price
behavior.
-4-
Second, we must continue to control the growth of Federal
spending, and reduce the burden of regulation and taxation.
I have already proven that we can do this, by cutting the
rate of spending growth to half that of my Republican
predecessor. My proposal to offset social security taxes
will help reduce inflation in the immediate future. We will
continue to deregulate the economy as I have done with
airlines, rails, trucking and banks.
:
I am strongly opposed, however, to committing the government
to hundreds of billions in tax cuts with no specific plan
to reduce spending. Here again I differ sharply from
Governor Reagan, whose Kemp-Roth tax cut would be highly
inflationary.
I
Third, I believe that in the years immediately ahead America
is going to have to invest heavily in its own future
both to modernize its industry, create jobs, and
to build the new facilities we need to make our energy
future secure.
That is why the Economic Revitalization Plan I have proposed the
Congress enact next year is carefully targeted to increase
business investment. It is a program that will put people - one
million new jobs within two years - to work and increase productivity
to maintain our economic strength without rekindling inflation.
And here again I differ from Governor Reagan: almost 90 percent
of his massive tax cuts are for consumption-oriented tax relief
and only 10 percent go to promote investment incentives.
Ours is the most productive economy on earth. Working togheter,
it will remain SO.
COPY
HANDLING OF ECONOMY
Question:
Given our problems with unemployment, recession and inflation,
why do you believe your handling of the economy merits another
four years?
Answer:
COPY
THEME
THE PAST TWO YEARS HAVE BEEN HARD FOR OUR NATION, BUT RECESSION IS
OVER AND INFLATION HAS ABATED. WE HAVE HAD MANY SUCCESSES AS WELL AS
DISAPPOINTMENTS. I HAVE PROPOSED AND BEGUN AN ECONOMIC RENEWAL
PROGRAM AND AN ENERGY PROGRAM THAT WILL CREATE JOBS AND STRENGTHEN
OUR NATION'S INDUSTRY. I HAVE ALREADY TAKEN STEPS TO FIGHT INF ATION
AND I HAVE PROPOSED NEW PROGRAMS TO CONTINUE THIS FIGHT. MY OPPONENT,
BY CONTRAST, PROMISES TO SOLVE ALL THE PROBLEMS OF THE ECONOMY PRIMARILY
BY ONE SINGLE, SIMPLE AND WRONG IDEA: A LARGE ACROSS-THE-BOARD TAX CUT
THAT EVEN HIS OWN RUNNING MATE ADMITTED WOULD BE INFLATIONARY AND A
MISTAKE.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
Our nation's economy has suffered from rising inflation for fifteen
years due to the costs of the Vietnam War, the Soviet grain sale
of 1972, OPEC price shocks in 1974 and 1979, and declining
productivity. In the last two years, the nation's oil bill has
more than doubled, making the problem worse. We have learned
through hard experience the tenacity of inflationary forces and
the importance of opposing them continually, intelligently and
well.
In the past four years, I proposed and began the nation's first
real energy program to help meet this challenge. And we are
beginning to do so. Today, we buy two million barrels a day less
oil from OPEC than we did in 1977. This means our nation's economy
will be more stable and have lover inflation in the future.
TO increase productivity in our basic industries, I have brought
together business and labor to meet with government and solve
problems cooperatively. In the coal industry, working together
for the first time, we reached agreement on ways to make mining
better and more efficient. And we have begun to do this in the
automobile and steel industries.
: have worked to reduce paperwork (15% reduction) and cut red tape
that can frustrate our natural enterprise. My programs for
dereculation of the trucking, airline, railroad and banking industries
mark the most important restructuring of relations between government
andiindustry since the New Deal. For the first time, I have set
strict limits on agency paperwork requirements.
-2-
We have put in place the Nation's first energy program.
It includes a conservation and solar bank, a synthetic
fuels corporation, and an end to the dangerous practice of
keeping oil and gas prices artificially low.
--
As a result, we import abcut 25 percent less oil than we
did when I took office. More oil and gas wells are being
drilled. And we use energy more efficiently than ever
before.
I have cut the growth of Federal spending in half, while increasing
support for our Nation's defense as well as other critical needs
such as energy conservation and youth unemployment.
The dollar is now strong. And the United States -- unlike all
other oil importing nations -- has been reducing its balance of
payments deficit.
We have eliminated regulations which stifled free enterprise in
airline, trucking, and railroad industries and in the banking and
financial institutions.
Obviously, I am not pleased with the record on inflation nor with
the current rate of unemployment. But the trends are in the right
direction. We were not able to absorb completely the shock of
doubled OPEC prices. And I would have to admit that, early in
my Administration, we underestimated the strength of inflationary
forces which had been building for the previous ten years. Inflation
has been reduced sharply. The consumer price index has averaged
percent over the last months. Unemployment has dropped
the past several months and should continue to do SO. Auto sales,
industrial production and homebuilding are up.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
COPY
I have learned a great deal from my experience. Most importantly,
I have learned the dangers, of over stimulating the economy. That's
why I opposed an election year tax cut and it's why I so strongly
oppose the Reagan Kemp-Roth massive tax cut. Governor Reagan's
proposals stand in sharp contrast to mine. He clearly has not
learned the lessons of the past few years on inflation. Instead
of a targeted program of investment incentives, about 90% of his
program is the Kemp-Roth notion of a single across-the-board
personal income tax cut. It is a rich man's tax cut which would
flood America with excess dollars. This proposal is SO poor an
idea that the Governor's own running mate opposed it. So did many
of his own economic advisers. So did former President Ford. When
Republicans refuse to support the economic program of their own
nominee, you can bet they have good reasons. And they do.
-3-
It would be inflationary. Unless accompanied by enormous
budget cuts -- cuts that the Governor keeps promising but
never spells out -- his plans would cause budget deficits
of over $100 billion and increase inflation. His own
running mate called the proposal "economic voodoo" and
said it would raise the inflation rate to 30 percent.
Inflation is SO difficult to root out of our system
that we cannot afford to gamble on an economic program
that so many knowledgeable people believe to be very
inflationary.
--
It would be unfair. His proposal would give $175 to a
teacher making $12,000, but the corporate officer making
$200,000 would receive $15,000. It is, simply stated,
a rich man's tax bill.
--
It provides tax relief for consumption, not investment and
productivity. Only 10 percent of his tax program is
devoted to stimulating the investment we need for productivity.
My opponent also claims that he will cut spending enough for the
nation to afford this enormous tax cut and still balance the
budget. But for some reason he cannot name a single cut. That
will make it pretty hard to balance the budget. And in the past
few weeks, he's been promising new programs that will make it
even harder. At last count he was at $140 billion in 1983 and
still promising.
My opponent seems to believe that government should play almost
no role in the economy at all. While I worked with the steel
industry to help solve the problems of this vital industry, he
seems to think government should keep hands off. I suppose that's
why he thinks we can solve our energy problem by giving it all to
the oil companies.
I don't think a person who believes that the minimum wage is one of
the principal causes of unemployment - as Mr. Reagan said - can
develop answers to reduce unemployment.
B.
Carter
COPY
My economic renewal program concentrates on investment and productivity
incentives to create jobs -- so we grow without rekindling inflation
by a massive stimulus to consumers. I have founded IIIV44 economic
program on three principles:
JUN 6
--
First, that we must achieve energy security through the
comprehensive energy program now in place. This has reversed
the decades of growing dependence on foreign cil. Every year
of my Presidency we have imported less foreign oil than the
year before. Here I differ strongly with Governor Reagan, who
has said repeatedly that all we need to do to solve our energy
problem is to leave it in the hands of the oil companies.
SECONDARY QUESTIONS
8861 $20 your
ECONOMY
Wage and Price Policv
Question:
Are you planning to continue your wage and price guideline
program next year and beyond? Would you consider any
tightening of the guidelines? Wouldn't you concede that
they have not been very successful in restraining inflation?
Answer:
The voluntary wage and price standards have been an important
part of my program.
The voluntary wage and price standards did work. Quantitative
estimates show that the rate of wage inflation in 1979 was 1-14
percentage points less than it would have been.
The wage and price standards program was critical in our ability
to prevent the 125% increase-in OPEC oil prices in 1979 from
driving us to a permanent underlying inflation rate of over
10 percent. Policies to encourage wage and price restraint are
important in our fight to bring downithe underlying rate of
inflation.
When I announced the Economic Revitalization Program on August 28
I explicitly noted that my advisors would be examining ways =
extend the voluntary program for private wage and price restraint.
In addition, I said that as there is room for further tax reductions
in the coming years we must look for ways to use those tax reductions
to encourage wage and price moderation. There will be some voluntary
incomes policy for next year.
By contrast Governor Reagan has absolutely no proposal for slowing
the underlying rate of inflation. Indeed, he proposes massive tax
cuts which would only create huge deficits and rekindle inflation.
ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
ENERGY: CONSERVATION
Question:
You are putting a lot of Federal money into energy
conservation programs. What are you really getting
for your investment?
Answer:
THEME
I HAVE PUT IN PLACE OUR FIRST ENERGY PROGRAM. GCVERNOR REAGAN HAS
NO REAL ENERGY PROGRAM EXCEPT LETTING THE BIG OIL COMPANIES "LOOSE".
CONSERVATION IS THE QUICKEST, CHEAPEST WAY TO DECREASE OUR DANGEROUS
DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL. MY CONSERVATION PROGRAMS HAVE SHOWN
DRAMATIC RESULTS AND I WILL BE PROUD TO CONTINUE THEM.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
we are consuming almost 2 million barrels per day less than when
I took office (from 18.4 mmb/d in 1976 to 185 mmb/d in 1980).
Two-thirds of the savings comes from conservation and only a small
part is due to the recession. We are consuming 3% less gasoline
than one year ago.
These changes are in large part a result of the policies that
I have put into place in these last four years, such as:
The National Energy Conservation Policy Act which provides
grants and other incentives for energy conservation in
schools, hospitals, residences, automobiles, and major
home appliances.
--
The Energy Tax Act, which established the first tax
incentives for residential conservation. Over 10 million
Americans have used this new tax credit to insulate their
homes.
--
For low-income Americans, a Federal program is weatherizing
more than 23,000 homes every month.
--
The mandatory Building Temperature Regulations for non-
residential buildings have saved between 200,000 and 400,000
barrels of oil equivalent per day.
Domestic automakers have exceeded Federal automobile fuel
efficiency standards in 1978, 1979 and 1980. Increasingly
stringent standards will save some 500,000 b/d by 1985 and
over 1 million b/d by 1990.
The new Energy Conservation and Solar Development Bank will
encourage conservation by low interest loans.
-2-
|
the 55 mph speed limit has saved 228,000 b/d of gasoline,
and has saved 40,000 lives, according to the Department
of Transportation.
I
In Fiscal Year 1981, the Federal Government will spend more
than S2 billion to promote energy conservation, yielding more
than $5 billion in nationwide residential and industrial
conservation investments.
Some say that these decreases in consumption were actually caused
by the recession. But last year, when real GNP grew 2.3%, our total
energy consumption dropped, for the first time in a non-recessionary
year in almost 30 years. Gasoline consumption dropped 10% last
December, several months before the recession really hit.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reacan
IUN
o
Governor Reagan regards all of these programs as "government
meddling." His party's platform is against the 55 mile per hour
speed limit; against the fuel efficiency standards in cars, and
against Federal conservation programs. He places little emphasis
on conservation.
3.
Carter
I will continue to implement my programs to encourage the American
people to conserve energy. I believe conservation is an essential
ingredient of a responsible energy program. My program will lead
us to energy security.
16
The new Energy Conservation and Solar Development Bank in H.U.D.
will soon be started to speed conservation.
ENERGY: CRUDE OIL DECONTROL
Question:
Wouldn't we produce more oil if we immediately decontrolled
crude oil prices? Why do you oppose that?
Answer:
THEME
MY RECORD IN ENCOURAGING INCREASED ENERGY PRODUCTION IS VERY SOUND, OVER
HALF OF OUR DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION IS ALREADY FREE FROM PRICE CONTROLS,
AND THE REMAINING CONTROLS ARE NOT A SIGNIFICANT CONSTRAINT ON
PRODUCTION. FURTHER, I AM CERTAIN THAT IF I HAD CHOSEN "OVERNIGHT"
DECONTROL IN 1979, AS IS NOW URGED BY GOVERNOR REAGAN, IT WOULD HAVE
CAUSED A PROFOUND AND UNACCEPTABLE SHOCK IO OUR ECONOMY. I AM PHASING
OUT PRICE CONTROLS CAREFULLY, IN A PHASED-WAY, TO AVOID INFLATIONARY
SHOCK.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT (RECORD)
1983
On April 5, 1979, I directed that domestic crude oil price and
allocation controls be ended by September 30, 1981. Over half
of U.S. oil production is already free from price controls, and
the decontrol schedule is steadily releasing additional volumes.
The remaining price controls are not a serious constraint on domestic
crude oil production today. The number of operating oil and gas rigs
reached an all-time high this month (3,164) and there are more new
wells being drilled this year than any year in history. The real
constraint on production today is the availability of drilling rigs.
The Department of Energy estimates that if I had imposed the immediate
decontrol of all crude oil in April 1979, it would have caused about
a 1-1/2% increase in our Nation's inflation rate in 1980 above that
caused by phased decontrol.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
Governor Reagan has called for the immediate decontrol of all oil prices.
But he has offered no specific information on how much of an increase would
result, or at what price to our economy. Such an action now would be very
inflationary. I do not believe he fully understands the consequences of
his proposal.
2
3.
CARTER FUTURE
O
I will continue to move in a responsible manner toward complete
decontrol, taking into account effects as well as energy
policy.
O
I am convinced we will be COPY our high record of
exploration and development.
ENERGY: EMERGENCY PRICE CONTROL AUTHORITY
Question:
Would you consider reimposing oil price controls in the
event that OPEC prices began to skyrocket? Would you
seek the extension of the price control authority just
in case it were necessary to use it some time in the future?
Answer:
THEME
I HAVE PUT OUR FIRST ENERGY PROGRAM IN PLACE. GOVERNOR REAGAN HAS NC
REAL ENERGY PROGRAM EXCEPT TO TURN THE OIL COMPANIES "LOOSE". DOMESTIC
PRICE CONTROLS HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IMPACT ON SKYROCKETING OPEC PRICES;
THEY MERELY DISCOURAGE DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF CRUDE OIL. HOWEVER, IN
THE NEXT SESSION OF CONGRESS, I EXPECT TO ADDRESS THE MANY IMPACTS OF
THE END OF CRUDE OIL CONTROLS IN SEPTEMBER 1981. I EXPECT TO SEEK
CERTAIN APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY IN CASE OF A SEVERE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY
SUPPLY EMERGENCY.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
I look forward to September 1981 as the culmination of the
phased decontrol of crude oil that I announced in April 1979.
If OPEC prices were to increase today, the reimposition of
price controls would not be the answer. Domestic price
controls have no impact on OPEC prices, except that they may
hold down domestic production and so increase our dependence
on imported oil. I would consider the use of emergency
allocation measures, however, to ensure that the available
supply was fairly distributed.
I am concerned that I retain the necessary standby authority
to deal with a severe energy supply emergency, in case one
should arise after September 1981. I expect that I will seek
such authority in the next session of Congress.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
Governor Reagan claims to be absolutely opposed to all controls on crude
oil, so he would presumably not want any emergency authority to be
continued. He has never explained how he would deal with a severe
energy supply interruption.
-2-
E.
Carter
I intend to phase out all domestic crude oil controls on schedule,
but I also plan to remain equipped with the necessary authority to
respond to an energy supply emergency
This is a responsible approach it is an approach which will provide
us with needed energy security.
Energy: "Lock-Up" of Federal Lands
And Resources
Question: : If you really want to increase domestic energy production,
why do you hold back SC much Federal land with valuable
energy resources?
Answer
THEME
I HAVE PUT OUR FIRST ENERGY PROGRAM IN PLACE; GOVERNOR REAGAN HAS NO REAL
PROGRAM EXCEPT TURNING THE OIL COMPANIES "LOOSE". THE CHARGE THAT I HAVE
"LOCKED-UP" THE ENERGY RESOURCES ON PUBLIC LANDS IS SIMPLY MISTAKEN. UNDER
MY ADMINISTRATION, I HAVE OPENED UP MORE FEDERAL LANDS FOR MINERAL DEVELOPMENT
THAN WERE EVER AVAILABLE BEFORE. THERE MUST BE A PROPER BALANCE BETWEEN
MAINTAINING OUR NATIONAL PARKS AND SCENIC AREAS AND ENERGY EXPLORATION. I
HAVE PROVIDED THAT BALANCE.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
Some have charged that the Administration sponsored Alaska
Lands Bill will make that State's energy resources unavailable.
In fact, our legislation leaves Over 90% of the promising oil
and gas acreage available for development, and 100% of the Outer
Continental Shelf (where most of the oil and gas will probably
be found) is available. Further, we have submitted separate
legislation calling for private leasing of the National
Petroleum Reserve.
Onshore Oil and Gas Development:
- Of the 822 million acres of Federal mineral estate,
approximately 500 million acres are available for oil
and gas leasing.
- In addition, 100 million acres are under lease and less
than 1% of all oil, gas and geothermal leases have surface
occupancy restrictions.
Wilderness Areas:
- Of the 174 million acres of public lands reviewed for
wilderness characteristics, 124 million acres have already
been determined to be better suited for multiple-use
management.
- Ninety percent of the lands under lease have already been
released from wilderness review and are available for
mineral development.
-2- -
Outer Continental Shelf Development:
--
My new five-year leasing program offers more acreage (45 million
acres) than all acreage offered since the program began in 1954.
:
Althouth only 2% or 3% of the total Outer Continental Shelf
area has been leased, only a very small part of the OCS has any
oil and gas potential. The most promising OCS areas (Alaska,
Santa Barbara Channel, Gulf of Mexico and parts of the Atlantic)
have been leased already or are scheduled for leasing.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
O
Governor Reagan says that he would accelerate the leasing of Federal
lands. But he has no plan proposed to do that. And he has made no
provision for environmental protection
3. Carter
O
I will continue to develop all Federal mineral resources as rapidly
as possible, consistent with our environmental requirements.
ENERGY: SOLAR GOAL
Question:
Isn't your goal of 20% solar and renewable energy by the year
2000 an unrealistic one?
Answer:
THEME
AS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF MY COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY POLICY, : ESTABLISHED A
NATIONAL GOAL OF SUPPLYING 20% OF OUR ENERGY NEEDS FROM SOLAR AND RENEWABLE
RESOURCES BY THE YEAR 2000. THIS IS AN AMBITIOUS TARGET WHICH WILL REQUIRE
THE ACTIVE EFFORTS OF BOTH THE GOVERNMENT AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR, BUT =
REMAIN COMMITTED TO MEETING IT.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
There was practically no solar or gasahol program when I took office.
I have more than tripled the Federal budget for solar and renewable
resources to more than $1.5 billion For fiscal year '81. This includes
substantial investments in research and development in commercialization
I have proposed and enacted the first tax credits to encourage the use
of solar technologies in residential and commercial buildings, including
the 40% credit passed this year.
Those policies are working. Ten times as many households have solar
technology in place today as when I took office.
The Conservation and Solar Energy Development Bank that I proposed
will provide a total of $7.5 billion (1980-90) to spur conservation
and solar energy investment.
We have quadrupled gasahol capacity over the last 24 months.
o
But Federal efforts alone cannot meet the ambitious 20% solar goal.
The private sector must also commit its resources to pursuing these
important energy resources.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
I regret Governor Reagan has never shown much interest in solar and
renewable energy sources. He has offered no concrete development
proposals for these alternative resources. The Republican Platform
calls only for continued government support for research.
-2-
in
Carter
I will continue to strengthen programs now in place to encourage the
increased use of solar and renewable resources to ensure that the
Federal Government is doing everything it can to meet the 20% goal.
I will also push for new programs to. encourage such use if they are
needed. For example, I will continue to seek a tax credit for passive
solar technologies.
#
Energy: Synfuels
Question:
How can you justify spending S88 billion to produce a
few synthetic fuels?
Answer:
THEME
I HAVE PUT OUR FIRST ENERGY PROGRAM IN PLACE. GOVERNOR REAGAN HAS NO
REAL PROGRAM. THE SYNTHETIC FUELS CORPORATION IS CHARGED WITH DEVELOPING
THE SYNTHETIC FUELS INDUSTRY TO PRODUCE AT LEAST 2 MILLION BARRELS OF CIL
EQUIVALENT BY 1992. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL NOT ACTUALLY PRODUCE
ANY OF THESE FUELS ITSELF; WE WILL ACT INSTEAD AS A CATALYST FOR THE
TALENTS AND INVENTIVENESS OF AMERICAN PRIVATE INDUSTRY, ABSORBING SOME
OF THE SPECIAL RISKS OF THESE NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE THEIR
DEVELOPMENT. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL NOT SPEND THIS MUCH. THE FEDERAL
INVESTMENT IS LIMITED TO STANDING AND-PRICE GUARANTEES.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
0
Synthetic fuels will play an important role in freeing our Nation
from its dangerous dependence on imported oil. We need to have
them available on a commercial scale as soon as possible. The
private sector will develop and produce these fuels, but because
of the high business risk inherent in these new technologies,
they cannot move as rapidly as we need.
I established the Synthetic Fuels Corporation to serve as a catalyst
for the private development of synthetic fuels. The Synthetic
Fuels Corporation will provide loan guarantees and price or
purchase guarantees to selected synfuels projects in order to
decrease the risk to the companies that build them. This partner-
ship of public and private capital will bring us a commercial-scale
synthetic fuels industry much more rapidly than could the private
sector alone.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
- : think Governor Reagan's stand on synthetic fuel is very short-sighted.
Governor Reagan would "turn the oil companies loose" to develop synthetic
fuels, if they felt like doing so. He would abolish the Synthetic Fuels
Corporation and end all government investment in synfuels. This would be
be a tragedy for our energy future.
iii
Carter
- - will continue = provide risk-minimizing financial support for
synfuels projects in order to meet our goal of 2 million barrels/
equivalent per day of synthetic fuels by 1992.
The steps I am taking will provide a secure future for our country.
ENERGY: WINDFALL PROFITS TAX
Question:
Wouldn't we produce more oil if we limited or repealed the
Windfall Profits Tax? Why do you oppose that?
Answer:
THEME
I HAVE PUT OUR FIRST ENERGY PROGRAM IN PLACE. GOVERNOR REAGAN HAS NO
REAL PROGRAM EXCEPT TO TURN THE OIL COMPANIES LOOSE". I AM PROUD THAT
WE SUCCEEDED IN ENACTING THE WINDFALL PROFITS TAX TO ENSURE THAT THE
OIL COMPANIES DID NOT PROFIT EXCESSIVELY FROM THE DECONTROL OF CRUDE
OIL AND TO FUND OUR VITAL NATURAL ENERGY POLICIES. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY
NO EVIDENCE THAT THE EXISTENCE OF THIS TAX IS CONSTRAINING THE DOMESTIC
PRODUCTION OF OIL.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
I decided to decontrol domestic crude oil in order to increase
domestic oil production. We simply could not continue discouraging
the development of American oil resources while we subsidized the
increasing imports of foreign oil.
But rather than let all of the increased profits go to the oil
companies, we enacted the Windfall Profits Tax. This tax will
bring in over $227 billion in 1980-90 to finance the development
of alternative energy sources, triple our investment in mass transit
and assist low-income households in meeting rising energy costs.
The oil companies still keep 29¢ of every $1 of income from decontrol
after all taxes are paid -- a handsome return.
There is absolutely no evidence that the Windfall Profits Tax has
held down domestic crude oil production. The number of operating
oil and gas rigs reached an all-time high this month (3,164) and
there are more new wells being drilled this year than any year in
history. The real constraint on production today is the availability
of drilling rigs.
Where specialized, marginal domestic production was more likely
to be discouraged by high taxes (tertiary, newly discovered and
heavy oil), the tax is applied at a very low rate.
We are continuing to make adjustments for unintended inequities
in the Windfall Profits Tax. For example, we will support a
$1,000 tax credit for small royalty owners.
-2-
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
Governor Reagan supports immediate, total crude oil decontrol and the
repeal or weakening of the Windfall Profits Tax. This would drain the
purchasing power of consumers through high prices, award massive profits
to the oil companies and do nothing to help low-income families cope
with the rising cost of energy or provide the revenues for an alternative
energy program for mass transit.
ii)
Carter
East
I will continue to invest the revenues from the Windfall Profits
Tax in securing our Nation's energy independence for mass transit
and in aiding our poorest citizens This will provide us with energy
security.
OVERVIEW
ANDERSON
Question:
How do you think Congressman Anderson will affect the election?
Do you think he has damaged the two party system?
Answer:
Congressman Anderson will definitely have some effect on the
election; precisely how much I do not know. But, based on all
of the data I have seen, there really is no doubt that his votes
are being drawn disproportionately from me, rather than
Governor Reagan.
That is so because many Independents and Democrats have felt that
Congressman Anderson, because of some very recent changes in
position, represented a more liberal approach to governmental
matters than I do. And those Independents and Democrats make up
the bulk of the Congressman_ aconstatuency.
I harbor no ill-feelings to John Anderson. He is a determined
campaigner, and a good man. think it is clear his positions
are infinitely closer to mine than to Mr. Reacan's. Indeed, his
positions on some issues are virtually indistinguishable from mine.
But I do not think it is healthy for the two party system to have
candidates defeated in the primary and caucus process become
candidates in the general election. The stability of the two party
system is one of our government's greatest virtues and should be
preserved.
I do not know what the future impact of the Anderson candidacy
will be on the two party system. My hope is that it will be
preserved as we have known it.
DEATH PENALTY
Ouestion:
What is your position on the death penalty?
Answer:
P
As President, I am sworn to uphold the Constitution, and the Supreme
Court has determined that, in the appropriate circumstances, the
death penalty is constitutional.
The issue, therefore is not whether we can constitutionally employ
the death penalty. The issue is determining what offenses, if
any, warrant the death penalty.
This is principally a matter for the State legislatures to determine.
My personal view, which I expressed in\my last campaign, is that
there are a very limited number of circumstances where the death
penalty might be appropriate such as the murder by an inmate
of a prison guard. That remains my position today.
FEAR OF REAGAN
Question:
Do you believe the Democratic constituencies will now be rallying
around your candidacy for any reason other than fear of your
Republican opponent? Isn't that fear becoming the critical
element of your campaign, pushing you to run an essentially
negative campaign?
Answer:
THEME
I AM A MAINSTREAM DEMOCRAT IN THE TRADITION OF ROOSEVELT, TRUMAN, KENNEDY,
AND JOHNSON. MY OPPONENT IS A VERY CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN. THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE ARE INCREASINGLY RECOGNIZING THIS FACT AND I BELIEVE THEY ARE
INCREASINGLY SUPPORTING ME BECAUSE OF THE FUTURE THAT I AM COMMITTED TO
PROVIDING THE NATION.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
27 1983
O
Over the past 4 years I have developed a record in the tradition of
Democratic Presidents - commitment to peace, to creating new jobs,
to helping the elderly, to protecting the poor and disadvantaged, to
ensuring equal rights, to helping working men and women.
O
Like my Democratic predecessors, I have not been able to accomplish
everything I wanted. And I have learned, from the experience of
being President, how difficult it is to accomplish all that I would
like.
But I believe the Democratic constituency is increasingly recognizing
what we have accomplished and it is now rallying around the Democratic
nominee for the same positive reasons that they have behind every
Democratic nominee.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
O
I cannot deny that some Democratic voters are very concerned about
Governor Reagan's positions and the direction in which he would
like to take the country.
O
They are concerned about his opposition to SALT II, to ERA, to
National Health Insurance, to the Windfall Profits Tax, to urban
aid programs, to the Department of Education, to labor law reform,
to Humphrey-Hawkins, to the minimum wage -- all of these programs
are part of the Democratic Platform and my own agenda.
-2-
3.
Carter
O
I am not trying to emphasize Governor Reagan's positions to the
exclusion of my own, or my record.
O
I have always tried to give my audiences a clear picture of the
contrasts between the two very different futures the country faces
if Governor Reagan or I am elected. In doing that I emphasize what
I am for and my opponent is against.
-- SALT II
-
Reduced Nuclear Arms Race
- ERA
- National Health Insurance
-
A strong Minimum Wage
COPY
-
Economic Revitalization - particularly of the auto and steel
industries
- Continuation of Camp David process
-
Continued Normalization of Relations with China
FLIP-FLOPS
Question:
You have accused Governor Reagan of flip-flopping during the
course of the campaign. Haven't you flip-flopped a great deal
over the past four years? What is the difference?
Answer:
THEME
= HAVE LEARNED FROM THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING PRESIDENT, AND I HAVE CHANGED
SOME THINGS I DID EARLIER IN MY TERM. BUT THOSE CHANGES WERE MADE OVER TIME,
AS THE PROCESS OF GOVERNING WENT FORWARD. GOVERNOR REAGAN HAS CHANGED HIS
POSITIONS DURING THIS CAMPAIGN ON a VARIETY OF POSITIONS HE HAS TAKEN OVER
A 20-YEAR PERIOD.
I.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
27 1982
0
As President, I have learned a creat deal. Some of what I have learned
has caused me to modify positions I had or approaches I took early in
the term. For instance, I have adopted now a tougher anti-inflation
program than I thought was necessary in the beginning. I decided to
decontrol oil because of the increased importance of reducing our
dependence on foreign energy. And I accelerated considerably our
defense spending program because of the state I found our armed forces.
0
But all of this was done after a clear examination of the facts, and a
careful, deliberate weighing of all the alternatives. In nearly every
case, the change was not likely to increase my political standing and
in fact none of them did.
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
o
By contrast, Governor Reagan has dropped, virtually overnight, positions
he has held for nearly 20 years during an election campaign.
o
Let me give some examples:
--
Aid to New York City
:
Aid to Chrysler
Two China Policy
Minimum Wage
:
OSHA Abolition
0
: think the American people should be concerned about whether these new-
found positions are the ones they would see implemented if Governor Reagan
were elected, as opposed to the positions he has held nor nearly 20 years.
-2-
B.
Carter
I do not want to claim that I will never again change a position. I
expect that I probably will at some point in a second term, as I learn
more or circumstances change.
But I can say that my basic philosophy will never change:
--
passion for peace
-- overriding commitment to nuclear arms reduction
--
concern for the disadvantaged
:
commitment to help the working man and woman
--
dedication to equal rights and justice
GUN CONTROL
Question:
Do you support greater gun control? If so, why have you not done
more to achieve this?
Answer:
I support increased handgun controls. I support eliminating Saturday
Night Specials -- which are so frequently used in violent crimes --
and I support improved registration requirements for handgun purchases.
I do not believe, for instance, that any individual - regardless of
previous handgun or other criminal offenses -- should be allowed to
purchase handguns. Strengthened registration requirements can
help to prevent this.
I would not support any type of increased controls over long-guns.
They are used for hunting and are not for criminal purposes. As a
hunter, I know the value and importance of allowing long-guns to be
purchased without Federal restraints
This position is the one I outlined in my 1976 campaign. It is
the position of our current Democratic Platform. It remains my
position.
I regret that progress in this direction has not been achieved, but
the lobbying pressure on Congress on this issue has been so intense
that no action has been possible. In fact, the only action that we
were able to initiate -- administrative tightening of some handgun
registration requirements - was effectively overturned by Congress.
I think the position advocated by Governor Reagan is dangerous,
particularly for those who live in high-crime areas. The Governor
believes that there should effectively be no restrictions on gun
purchases. He supports the Republican Platform's call for repeal
of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was passed after Robert
Kennedy was killed.
O
In my view, a position which does not regulate Saturday Night
Specials or handguns is not one which recognizes reality. The
ready availability of those guns to those who might not otherwise
so easily obtain them is not a sound way to protect innocent people.
INTEGRITY
Ouestion:
In light of the Bert Lance and Billy Carter affairs, how can you
honestly claim to have restored integrity to the White House?
Answer:
THEME
I HAVE WORKED LONG AND HARD TO OVERCOME THE STAIN OF WATERGATE AND ITS
AFTERMATH AND OUR RECORD INDICATES WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL. I INTEND TO
CONTINUE OUR STRONG, FORTHRIGHT RECORD IN THIS AREA DURING A SECOND TERM.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
O
When I took office, the Presidency was suffering from the problems
associated with the Vietnam War. Watergate, the CIA revelations.
There was a sense of distrust of the Presidency. There was a decline
in respect of the Presidency There was an abhorence of the secrecy
and heavy-handedness that surrounded the Oval Office.
We have changed that. We have worked to restore integrity, through
legislation now requiring full financial disclosure of Federal
officials, the appointment of Special Prosecutors in appropriate
cases, the end of the "revolving-door" syndrome in Washington.
We have put Inspectors General in each of the Departments to root
out fraud and waste.
We have established an independent Justice Department - one with
virtually no contact with the White House.
We have established blue ribbon Commissions to take politics out of
judicial appointments.
We have been open -- held 30 Town Hall Meetings (no other President
has ever done so), 60 press conferences; we have provided greater
access to the White House and Cabinet Departments for all citizens
than ever before.
When there have been problems - as with Billy Carter - I have been
honest and aboveboard about the situation.
2.
THE FUTURE
Carter
I am committed in the future to taking further steps to ensure the
integrity and openness of our government - that is among my highest
priorities.
-2-
0
I am committed to:
-
continued appointment of qualified, honest individuals to key
Federal positions;
-- passage of lobby law reform -- to provide the public with greater
information about lobbying activities;
-
preserving sunshine rules and requirements; and
-- continuing an independent Justice Department.
JUN 27
QUOTES OF REAGAN
Question:
Do you think it is fair to repeat old quotes of Governor Reagan's -
many of the quotes are from the 1960's - when he has changed his
positions since these quotes were made? Aren't you taking them
out of context as well?
Answer:
C
On a few occasions early in the campaign I was justly criticized
for trying to characterize Governor Reagan's positions. So I decided
to avoid that problem by simply quoting Governor Reagan. That way
there could be no basis for complaints of mischaracterization.
When I do quote him, I try to indicate the date, SO the audience
can judge for itself the timeliness of the Governor's statements.
But generally, I have been quoting Governor Reagan's most current
quotes, because they best represent his latest views and because
some of them trouble me the most
For instance, it was this year - 1980 - that Governor Reagan has
said:
--
"High unemployment is in large part due to the minimum wage."
--
"The minimum wage has caused more misery and unemployment
than anything since the Great Depression."
--
"Urban aid programs are one of the biggest phonies in the
system."
--
"I don't think nuclear non-proliferation is any of our business."
--
"Air pollution is substantially under control."
11
--
% of pollution comes from trees."
--
"We should use the nuclear arms race card."
These positions show a lack of understanding of the complexities
our Nation faces and that a President faces.
--
The minimum wage has helped millions of Americans and I
am wholeheartedly committed to it.
I
Urban aid programs have revitalized our urban areas and
helped our most disadvantaged citizens, and : am committed
to their growth.
-2-
-- Nuclear non-proliferation is our business - it is vital to
all of us.
-- Air pollution is not under control, though progress has been
made; but we must remain 27 1953 vigilant in this area. And it doesn't
come from trees.
-- And a nuclear arms JUN race is a reckless proposal.
GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS WITH CONGRESS
Ouestion:
Why have you had so much difficulty in dealing with Congress
and in getting your major programs adopted in the form you
propose? Why would you be any more successful during a
second term?
Answer:
THEME
MY RECORD WITH THE CONGRESS HAS BEEN GOOD
A SUBSTANTIAL MAJORITY OF MY
MAJOR PROPOSALS HAVE BEEN ENACTED. GOVERNOR REAGAN WOULD NOT DO NEARLY AS
WELL - AS A REPUBLICAN AND A NEWCOMER.
1Y EXPERIENCE SHOULD MAKE THE NEXT
FOUR YEARS EVEN BETTER.
1.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
No President has ever had a Congress approve every item of his legis-
lative program - that would make Congress a rubber-stamp; and that is
not what the Founding Fathers intended and that would not be healthy.
There certainly have been tough legislative fights - and they have
received a good deal of publicity - but the bitter feelings and
all-out war between Congress and the President which existed during
the Nixon-Ford years has never occurred.
We have probably not done a good enough job letting the public know
how successful we have been with Congress. A look at the record of
what has been passed during the past four years shows how much
progress and cooperation there has been. In fact, a substantial
majority of my major legislative programs have been enacted - and
that is a record which about equals my Democratic predecessors:
-- Energy program - there was none
-- Urban policy - there was none
-
Civil Service Reform
--
Deregulation of airlines, trucks, rail, and banks
--
Saving of Social Security System
--
Humphrey-Hawkins
--
Minimum Wage Increases
:
Department of Education
-
ERA deadline extension
-
Increased Defense Spending
:
Taiwan-U.S. Relations Act
2.
THE FUTURE
A.
Reagan
O
I do not believe Governor Reagan would be able to improve that record.
-2-
As a Republican, he will be dealing with a Democratic Congress -
producing the type of stalemate and confrontation we saw in the
Nixon-Ford years.
As a newcomer to Washington, Governor Reagan would have to go through
the same long trial and error period that I did - and as a Republican
that period would be even more difficult.
o
There are so many pressing problems now before the Congress that we
cannot afford a 1-2 year hiatus.
B.
Carter
O
I have not been able to pass all that I proposed, but I am going to
keep pursuing my legislative agenda - as I did with my energy
program - until we are successful. I now know the Congress and the
key people in it.
O
I have a clear legislative program for the future:
-
SALT II
-
National Health Insurance
-
Economic Renewal Package
--
Welfare Reform
-
Job Creation Programs
--
The last pieces of our energy program (Utility Oil Backout, EMB)
Progress toward enacting these measures has been made. The foundation
has been laid. I have the experience and know-how to get them enacted,
without undue delays and interruption. I am determined to do that.