Complete Transcript: Democrats Participate in Calif. Debate
This president has gone from a promise of creating 4 million jobs to
about 3 million jobs net lost. That's a 7 million swing.
KERRY: I mean, there's one basic rule: When you're digging
yourself a hole, stop digging.
(APPLAUSE)
This guy wants to make his tax cuts permanent now.
I think the real -- no, the real issue in front of this country -- this
is not the biggest issue in front of the country, that we were just
talking about. The biggest issue...
KING: It's the biggest story today.
KERRY: It's not even the biggest story. The biggest story
today, Larry, are 43 million Americans who have no health care. The
biggest story today is the people...
(APPLAUSE)
The biggest story are the workers that I met with out in front of
Vons supermarket, the UFCW workers who have been out there walking
for five months. A husband and a wife who haven't worked in five
months because they can't get health care.
And you've got companies like Wal-Mart that are stripping underneath
them, that hire part-time people, that have actually advertised to come
and work, so they won't do their health care.
(APPLAUSE)
That's what this race is about.
BROWNSTEIN: The economic issues are very real...
KING: We're going to get to them.
BROWNSTEIN: ... in a great deal of depth. But I want to ask
Senator Edwards a question.
Do you think that answer is sufficient for a general election,
especially in your part of the country? Can you tell people in the
South that values issues are secondary and that we should be talking about
health care and the economy, education? Or do you have to convince
them that, whether the issue is the death penalty or gay marriage or
whatever, that you do share their values?
EDWARDS: Of course you've got to do both. You don't get to
tell people what to think in any part of the country. You don't get
to say to voters, "This is what you can consider and this is what you
should not consider." They're going to consider everything.
Now, it is absolutely true that the economy is a huge issue. I
think jobs is actually the most important component of that. Health
care is a huge issue. What's happening overseas and our image around
the world is a huge issue. No doubt about any of that.
But people are going to consider these other things. And for us to
assume that that's not true is just a fantasy. It's not
true.
We need a candidate at the top of this ticket who can connect with
voters everywhere in America. And if we don't have that, we're going
to be in trouble.
BROWNSTEIN: Well, let me ask you directly, given the views that
Senator Kerry has expressed over the years and the votes he's cast on
issues like the death penalty, the Defense of Marriage Act, his argument
that he would have, in effect, a litmus test for Supreme Court justices,
they would have to be pro-choice, given that record, do you think he can
meet your test and connect with voters in the South and in the border
states in the general election?
EDWARDS: I think that's his test to meet, that's his...
KING: Well, do you think he can?
BROWNSTEIN: Do you think he can?
EDWARDS: I think it depends on what's happening in the country at
the moment. What I know is that I can.
I mean, if you step back from this for just a minute. I mean, in
order for us to win this election, number one, we're going to have to have
a candidate who can appeal outside the Democratic Party. We have to
motivate our party and our party base. And all of us believe in the
core Democratic values, everybody sitting at this table. But the
question becomes: What do we do to attract independent voters?
Because we have to get these people.
KING: And you're saying you could do that better?
EDWARDS: I know I can do it. If you look at the primaries
that have been conducted so far, I mean, I've got a significant lead...
KING: But he's won most of them.
EDWARDS: Yes, but if you look at the independent...
(LAUGHTER)
He has. He has. That's a fair statement. But remember,
it's Democrats who are voting in these primaries largely, but there are
also independents voting in these primaries. And the independents
have been voting for me.
Some of them vote for Senator Kerry, but I have a lead among these
people between the two of us. And the other...
KERRY: Can I speak to that?
EDWARDS: You need to let me finish first. But the point I'm
trying to make here is I have actually won one. This is not something
we have to guess about. I've won in a part of the country that's a
very difficult place for a Democrat to win.
I won against the Jesse Helms political machine in North
Carolina. I mean, it's a powerful, powerful presence. Actually I
saw a poll today that shows in North Carolina, my state, admittedly, I'm
leading President Bush, Senator Kerry's behind me.
But we have to be able to compete in all these parts of the
country. If you step back from this for just a minute and you think
about the states where we have to be able to be successful, places like
Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Ohio, which Senator Kerry just made
reference to, New Hampshire, which will probably be a swing state this
fall, when I go through those states one-by-one, all states that we need
to win and we need to do well with, I would concede that Senator Kerry may
have an advantage in New Hampshire.
I would not believe he has an advantage over me any place else. I think
I have the advantage in these other places.
KING: I want to...
KERRY: Can I to speak to that?
BROWNSTEIN: Please.
KERRY: Because there's nothing, nothing in the returns in 18 out
of 20 primaries and caucuses so far that documents what John Edwards has
just said.
KERRY: I won Independents and Republicans in Iowa.
KING: You mean he's not telling the truth?
KERRY: There's nothing that documents what he just said. I'm
just telling you that I won Independents, and many Republicans crossed
over and registered as Democrats for the first time to say, "I'm voting
for you in this race."
BROWNSTEIN: It is also true, though, that your vote share among
Independents...
KERRY: Let me just finish.
BROWNSTEIN: ... was lower than among Democrats in virtually
every state there's been an exist poll.
KERRY: Let me just finish.
I won in Tennessee, and I won in Virginia.
And the test of this -- I've heard John Edwards himself say this. John
has said many times, "We got to stop stereotyping the people in the
South." The people in the South believe the same things as people in
the rest of the country.
Now, I believe that's true.
EDWARDS: It is true.
KERRY: And I also know that I have been -- when I went to the
United States Senate in 1985, I was one of the first people to fight for
deficit reduction. They care about balancing the budget in the South.
I've been a prosecutor. I've sent people to jail for the rest of
their life. They care about law and order in the South.
I'm a gun owner and a hunter, though I've never contemplated going
hunting with an AK-47. And I believe I can speak to that
culture.
I'm a veteran. I've served in a war. They care about that.
And I believe when it comes to jobs, health care, education, protection
the environment, breathing clean air, drinking clean water, the people of
the South care about the same things. And we can win in the South.
KING: We're going to get to that area. One quick question
before we do, though...
(APPLAUSE)
... before Janet asks a question.
You are against capital punishment, except in the case of terrorism.
KERRY: Correct.
KING: I've done a lot of shows recently dealing with the death of
little children. A person who kills a 5-year-old should live?
KERRY: Larry, my instinct is to want to strangle that person with
my own hands. I understand the instincts, I really do. I
prosecuted people. I know what the feeling of the families is and
everybody else.
But we have 111 people who have been now released from death row --
death row, let alone the rest of the prison system -- because of DNA
evidence that showed they didn't commit the crime of which they were
convicted.
After spending -- I myself worked to get a person out of jail who had
been there for 15 years for a murder that person did not commit.
Now, our system has made mistakes, and it's been applied in a way that
I think is wrong.
Secondly, I don't believe that, in the end, you advance the, sort of,
level of your justice and the system of your civility as a nation -- and
many other nations in the world, most of the other nations in the world,
have adopted that idea, that the state should not engage in killing.
(APPLAUSE)
Because they have very bad memories of what happens when the state
engages in killing.
(APPLAUSE)
KING: Before Janet asks a question, Senator Edwards, I know you
agree with capital punishment.
EDWARDS: Yes.
KING: What about this case of -- that means the United States
nearly executed over 100 people who didn't do it.
EDWARDS: Right. Very serious issue, and it means we need to
take lots of serious steps to deal with it, which means using DNA testing,
which John just spoke about.
It means making all of the most modern technologies
available.
It means making the court system work, not just for those who can hire
the best lawyers money can buy, but for folks who have to have indigent
counsel. I mean, I've seen what happens in court rooms. I know
how important it is to have a lawyer representing an indigent defendant
who...
KING: Why do you favor...
EDWARDS: ... knows what they're doing.
KING: ... why do you favor capital?
EDWARDS: Because I think there are some crimes -- those men who
dragged James Byrd behind that truck in Texas, they deserve the death
penalty. And I think there...
(APPLAUSE)
... are some crimes that deserve the ultimate punishment.
(APPLAUSE)
KING: Janet?
CLAYTON: I actually had a question for Reverend Sharpton and
Congressman Kucinich.
(APPLAUSE)
Both of these two guys here have raised millions of dollars in special
interests -- from special-interest people. How, then, would you say
they're able to counter Ralph Nader's argument that both parties, the
Democrats and the Republicans, are beholden to what he calls "corporate
paymasters"?
SHARPTON: Let me say this before I answer that...
(APPLAUSE)
... because a lot of my career is on the criminal justice system.
Senator Edwards, are you saying, since you agree that there's a lot of
problems in the death penalty -- and no one has mentioned the racial
disparity about those on death row -- that therefore, you would suspend
your support of capital punishment until we dealt with those problems?
EDWARDS: No, I would not.
SHARPTON: So you would proceed even with the flaws?
EDWARDS: I think those changes need to be made in the system. We
need to make those changes. I've been fighting for those changes in
the United States Senate. But that does not...
SHARPTON: But you would let them continue?
EDWARDS: But that does not mean -- and I think states can -- for
example, North Carolina can evaluate whether its own system is
working. I think they vary from state-to-state. The state of
Illinois did that and came to a conclusion that their system was not
working. I think we should support that if they make that
determination.
SHARPTON: That sounds like states' rights again. I don't
agree with that.
EDWARDS: No, it is not.
SHARPTON: But anyway, I think that in terms of Ralph Nader, the
best way to answer Ralph Nader is how we've done tonight. We're all
on stage. Many of us have said what Nader said in 2000, some of it
had validity. But all of that is being said now in the primaries.
There's nothing that I know of that Nader is saying that Kucinich and I
are not saying in the primaries. So what does he need to say it in
November for if it's being debated now?
(APPLAUSE)
And we'll deal with it in the convention. And we'll come out of
the convention -- and we'll come out of the convention with a
nominee.
That's why I give credit to Senator Kerry, that the debates are not
limited, everyone is being heard.
We are saying many of the things he said he wanted said. He should
have endorsed one of us. Let's come out with a winner and beat George
Bush and not have...
(APPLAUSE)
KING: Congressman Kucinich, would you address Janet's question?
Then we'll have a question from Ron.
KUCINICH: I think the American people tonight will be well- served
if we can describe, for example, why we all aren't for a universal,
single-payer, not-for-profit health care system.
I think the American people will be well-served if we can describe why,
for example, Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards are not for canceling NAFTA
and the WTO, as I would do, because that is how you save the manufacturing
jobs.
And I think they'd be well-served if they would be able to see the
connection, as I will just explain, between the cost of the war in Iraq
and cuts in health care, education, job creation, veterans' benefits,
housing programs.
See, this debate ought to be about substantive differences which we do
have.
(APPLAUSE)
And I have the greatest respect for Senator Edwards and Senator Kerry,
but we have substantive differences along these lines that I think it
would help to explicate here tonight.
KING: All of you are pledged to support the winner of this four?
SHARPTON: And work for him. I will travel...
KING: You will work?
SHARPTON: I will travel all over this country to make Al Sharpton
president.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
KING: And stay in the best hotels.
SHARPTON: Even better hotels.
KING: Do you have a preference among Kerry and Edwards?
SHARPTON: No. Let me say something, I'd have disagreements
with both. I disagree with Kerry's vote on Iraq. I disagree with
Edwards on the Patriot Act.
But I think, on their worst day, they are better than George
Bush. I think they have integrity. I think they have
vision. And I think they can be talked to.
I think that we're dealing with a president that wants to gay-
bash. What about the other 10 Commandments? Let's make a
constitutional amendment against president's that lie. Let's deal
with the whole thing.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
KING: Congressman Kucinich, do you have a preference? Do you
have a preference of these two? Do you have a...
KUCINICH: I'd be proud to have any of these gentlemen up here as
my running-mate. And I'd also like to say...
(LAUGHTER)
I would also like to say that I think that the way we win, Larry, is to
be able to appeal to people's practical aspirations for health care for
all, for jobs for all, for education for all, for retirement security and
for peace. And that's what we need to be talking about tonight.
KING: Ron?
BROWNSTEIN: Let me turn to another...
KERRY: Do you mind? Because I think the question was asked
about the influence of money in the Democratic Party about John and
myself, and I'd really like to make a statement about that.
I teamed up with Paul Wellstone, and we fought and created the most
far-reaching campaign finance reform law in the history of this country
called Clean Money, Clean Elections. It would have gotten the money
out of politics.
When I first arrived in the Senate, I ran the first PAC-free --
political-action-committee-free -- Senate race in the nation.
KERRY: I am the only United States senator who's been elected four
times currently serving who has never accepted political action committee
money in any of my races for the United States Senate. No checks from
those interests.
The only people who've contributed me are, yes, some people who
lobby. The total amount in lifetime amounts to about 1 percent of all
the money that I've ever raised.
But what's important is I've stood up for the important fights over the
course of time, and so has John Edwards. We both stand up and fight
-- he fought for the patients' bill of rights. I fought against the
clean water, clean air destruction by Gingrich. I led the fight to
stop the drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge against big oil companies.
BROWNSTEIN: You've raised questions, though, Senator Edwards,
about whether Senator Kerry is as separated from the Washington system as
he presents it.
There was a report in The Washington Post today that, in addition to
the question about lobbying contributions, he's also raised money from
interests that are involved in setting up off-shore companies and
off-shore tax havens.
Do you view Senator Kerry as part of the solution or part of the
problem in the way Washington works?
EDWARDS: I think we have to change what's happening
there. And Washington lobbyists who -- which you just asked about --
Senator Kerry made this point about himself. I've never taken money
from a special interest PAC, myself. But I also don't take any money,
not a dime, from Washington lobbyists.
And I think we have to go further than that. I think we ought to
ban the contribution of Washington lobbyists. Those people shouldn't
be able to make contributions to the very people that they're
lobbying.
We've got people who are going through this revolving door from the
government into these high-priced lobbying firms, going back into the
government.
EDWARDS: We ought to shine a bright light on what these
lobbyists...
BROWNSTEIN: And...
EDWARDS: If I can just finish this -- what these lobbyists --
because these people are stealing the democracy of the American people.
(APPLAUSE)
They are there every single day...
BROWNSTEIN: But in the choice facing voters...
EDWARDS: The choice is...
BROWNSTEIN: Is there a difference in your commitment to this cause
and what you see from Senator Kerry, based on both what he's said and what
he's done?
KING: Fair question.
EDWARDS: Yes. The answer is there are two differences. I
commend Senator Kerry for the work he's done on public financing of
political campaigns, which I know he believes in deeply. So do I.
That's the ultimate solution for this.
But there are two differences. One is, if we're going to change
the way Washington operates, my belief is we need somebody who comes from
outside that system. That's number one.
Number two, I also think we need to change the influence of Washington
lobbyists. And that is a distinction. It's an important
distinction, because I think these Washington lobbyists have entirely too
much influence on what happens every day.
The best example is this recent prescription drug Medicare reform bill,
you know, where everything that could've been done to bring down the cost
of prescription drugs for the American people, the drug companies and
their lobbyists were against, so it all came out.
It's wrong. We need to cut off these people's influence, and stop
the...
BROWNSTEIN: He is saying many of the same things. Are you
saying that he is less committed, based on what you have seen?
EDWARDS: I'm simply saying there is a difference between the two
of us. No more than that. I don't take Washington lobbyist
money. I think we ought to ban their contributions. I don't
think the should...
KING: But, I mean, do you criticize him for doing it?
KERRY: If I can just point something out. And I don't think
there fundamentally is a difference. I mean, John has raised almost
50 percent of his money from one group of people in the United States of
America. Now I don't suggest ever...
KING: Is that the trial lawyers?
KERRY: That's correct. And I don't ever suggest that he is
beholden to them. I think he's -- because I know he stood up on the
patients' bill of rights. And he is prepared, as I am. And I
don't think there is a difference. I know he's looking for some
differences because you need them. But there's not really a
difference in this race between us in our commitment to get the lobbying
out.
And you know what I'm going to do? I'm going to issue an executive
order that prohibits anyone from going from lobbying -- from government
directly into lobbying for a period of five years. And we're going to
make every meeting of a lobbyist and a public official a matter...
KING: Dennis?
KERRY: ... of public record subject to the scrutiny of the
American people.
(APPLAUSE)
KING: And Dennis wants to say something.
Would that be the first executive order you'd issue?
© 2004 FDCH E-Media
|
