men do not die and that is a patriotic act. those are the keys to the future, and who can be a leader for the future? when walter mondale was attorney general in minnesota, he let the fight for a man who could not afford to get justice because he cannot afford a lawyer. when he was in the senate, he fought for child nutrition programs, he wrote the fair housing act, he even investigated the abuses of migrant workers. those were not popular causes. no one ever heard about the man without a lawyer. children do not vote. workers -- migrant workers and not a powerful lobby. mondale has said he would rather lose a battle for decency then when one for self-interest. i agree with him. his campaign is not over.

for our country, for the future, for the principles we believe in, walter mondale and i have just begun to fight. [applause] >> thank you very much. i would like to thank vice president bush, congresswoman ferrero, the members of our panel for joining us in this league of women voters debate. i would like to join you in taking them him at the city of philadelphia, and the league of women voters. the next debate, the presidential debate will take in kansas city on october 21. the subject will be for affairs and will begin at 8:00 eastern time. we hope you will join us on the 21st. thank you.

[applause] >> ahead of tuesday's five presidential debate, we will take a look back at the candidate virginia senator tim kaine in indiana governor mike pence using the c-span video library. >> i've seen the story before in seen the bad news of a shooting or a weather emergency or famine. there will be more stories. there were something in the store yesterday that was different and it was you. your spirit of even a dark day, of optimism and hope. >> the presidency is the most visible threat in the tapestry of the american government.

for good or ill come it sets the tone for the other branches and spurs the expectations of the people. its powers are vast and consequential. its requirements from the outset and by definition are impossible for mortals to the fill without attentionnd insistent to the constitution. >> a look at tim kaine and mike pence ahead of the vice presidential debate, monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. watch anytime on c-span.org and listen at 8:00 eastern on the c-span radio app. busur c-span campaign 2016 is traveling throughout new york this week asking voters what is the most important issue to you in the selection and why? >> my name is mark, i am a master student at the university of albany and i am the president

of the student assembly. thisld like to see campaign address higher education. that includes mental health, student loans and campus safety. what will you do to address the -- to see that these issues are not fully addressed but that the student voices are at the table? important issue in theelection for me, candidates plan for economic growth and for america's place in the world. the united states is the most generous government in the world and i think these are the kinds of issues we need to discuss in a debate forum. studentjonathan, i'm a at the university of albany. my biggest concern is who is going to take care of foreign policy. i believe both of our candidates

have opposing views on our allies and the issues going on in syria and i want to see a strong leader. >> voices from the road on c-span. >> our look at past vice president's continues now with the 1988 campaign. it was at this debate that senator quayle compared himself to jfk, drawing a quick rebuke. this is just over 1.5 hours. >> good evening, i'm pleased to welcome you to this vice presidential debate. i am judy woodruff. my colleagues are john margolis of the chicago tribune. tom brokaw of nbc news.

britt hume of abc news. the importance of the debate is underscored her to fax -- two facts. based on history since world war ii, there is almost a 50-50 chance that one of the two men here tonight will become the candidates are sintered dan quayle, the republican nominee. and senator lloyd bentsen, democratic nominee. [applause] judy: for the next 90 minutes, we will question the candidates following a format designed and

agreed to by representatives from the campaigns. however, there are no restrictions on the campaigns that my colleagues and i may ask this evening. by prior agreement between the candidates, the first question goes to senator quayle. and you have two minutes to respond. senator donnelly 11 criticize as we all know for your decision to stay out of vietnam coming report academic record, more troubling to some are some of the comments that have been made by people in your own party. just last week, former secretary of state said your pick was the dumbest call george bush could have made. [applause] your leader in the senate, bob dole, said a better qualified person could have been chosen. other republicans have been far more critical in private. why do you think that you have not made a more substantial impression on some of these people, who have been able to observe you up close?

sen. quayle: the question goes to whether i'm qualified to be vice president, and in the case of a tragedy, whether i'm qualified to be president. qualifications for the office of vice president and president are not age alone. you must look at compliments, and he must look at experience. i have more experience than others that have sought the office of vice president. let us look at qualifications, and let us look at the three biggest issues that are going to be confronting america in the next presidency. those three issues our national security and arms control, jobs and education, and the federal budget deficit. on each one of those issues, i have more experience than does the governor of massachusetts. in national security and arms control, you have to understand

the relationship between a ballistic missile, a warhead, and you better understand about encryption, and you better understand you have to negotiate from a position of strength. these are important issues because we want to have more arms control and arms reduction. in the area of jobs and education i wrote the jobs partnership, act, the bipartisan bill, a bill that has trained and employed over more than 300 million economically disadvantaged youth and adults in this country. in the area of federal budget deficit, i have worked eight years on the senate budget committee. and i wish that the congress would give us a line item veto, to help deal with that. and the qualifications alone, going to be the issue in this campaign, george bush has more qualifications than michael dukakis and lloyd bentsen combined. [applause]

judy: senator benson, i'm going to interrupt at this point and say once again, the audience please keep the responses as quiet as possible. we know that many of you are for one candidate or another, but we know you are taking time away from your candidate, and more likely enough causing the partisans for the other candidate to react when their candidate speaks. , senator bentsen? sen. bentsen: the debate is whether or not dan quayle and lloyd bentsen are qualified to be president of the united states, because judy, just as you have said, that has happened too often in the past. and if that creditor should occur, we have to step in without any margin of error without time for preparation,s, to take over the responsibility

for the biggest job in the world, that of running this great country of ours. to take over the awesome responsibility for commending the nuclear weaponry that this country has. in the debate tonight, it is a debate about the presidency itself, and a presidential decision that has to be made by you.the stakes could not be higher. judy: a question for you, you also have two minutes to respond, what bothers people are not so much her qualifications but your policy, with governor dukakis. he has said he does not want a clone of himself, but you disagree with him on some major issues, aid to the nicaraguan s,ntras, the gun death penalty. whose policy would you pursue? sen. bentsen: i am delighted to

respond to that. because we agree on so many things. we agree on the fact that we have to cut this deficit. and governor dukakis has been able to cut that budget deficit row lowering the tax budget from one of the highest, to one of the lowest in the u.s. that is a major sense of achievement. and i admire that. and i am delighted to be on the ticket with him. governor dukakis and i agree we need a trade policy for this country. that we have seen this administration more than double the national debt. that they moved this country from the number one lending to the number one debtor nation under there and ministration. but they have not had a trade policy, that they have let trade be a handmaiden for the foreign-policy objectives of the country. that this country has exported to many jobs and not enough products. and as a work to pass a trade bill through the united states

senate, they put roadblocks in the way every step of the way. we passed a trade bill that has that any country that has full access to our markets, we are entitled to full access to their markets. now, that means we're going to stand tough for america. and we are going to protect those jobs and we're going to push american products,. going to open up markets around the world, we will show leadership and that respect, and turn this deficit and trade around. that is the sort of vague that michael dukakis and i will do to bring about a better america for all of our people. judy: senator quayle, a minute to respond. sen. quayle: as you noticed, he did not tell you a lot about what governor dukakis would do. one of the most liberal governors in the united states of america, the one thing he tried to point out about the governor that he cut taxes. senator,of the matter,

he has raised taxes five times, just as last year. that is why a lot of people refer to him as tax hike mike, why they refer to the state of xachusetts.ts as tas i do not blame the senator for not talking about governor michael dukakis. if i had to defend the liberal policies of governor michael dukakis, i would not talk about it either. judy: john margolis, a question for center bentsen. john: you once voted for and spoke for a six-month delay on

cost-of-living adjustment increases for social security. senator, are you and governor dukakis using this issue politically rather than dealing with it responsibly? sen. bentsen: i hate to disappoint my good friend bob strauss, but we have a contract with the american people on social security. and social security is an issue where senator quayle voted eight times to cut the benefits on social security. inn this administration came and try to cut the benefits, the minimum benefits, $122 a month for windows or retirees, 62-year-old retirees by 40%, an end run on social security when they first came in, after promising not to cut it, they cut it by some $20 billion. and while we were working together to reform the social security system and to be certain that that money was

going to be there for people when they retire, at that point with a tried a $40 billion and run to cut social security. the record is clear. we saw vice president bush fly back from the west coast to break a tie in the u.s. senate. he does not get to vote very often in the senate but he made a special trip, to come back and vote against a cost-of-living increase. when you talk about social security, the people that are going to protect it are the democrats, that brought forth that program. and i think it is very important that we see these kinds of end runs by this administration, when they talk about continuing to cut this budget, i know too well what the track record is. and we should be concerned about that kind of effort, once again after the election is over. judy: senator quayle, your response? you know i did notayle:

cut a time. what we have voted for is to delay the cost-of-living adjustments. twotor bentsen, voted times to delay the cost-of-living adjustment, supporting a resolution to delay the cost-of-living adjustments. right.n, you are they use this for political advantage. what they try to do time and again is to scare the old people in this country. that is politics of the past. in 1983, republicans and democrats dropped the political swords and in a bipartisan effort, saved the social security system. republicans and democrats banded together because we know that this program is not a republican program, not a democrat program, it is a program for older americans. and that program is actuarially sound. john, a question for

senator quayle. you have voted against environmental protection legislation, including votes against pesticide control, toxic waste superfund and, nuclear waste protection. senator, do you consider yourself an environmentalist? and if you do, how do you reconcile that with your voting record? sen. quayle: i'm a very strong record on the environment and the u.s. senate. [laughter] i have a record where i voted for the superfund legislation. i have a record where i voted against my president on the override of the clean water act. for the major pieces of environmental legislation that have come down in the u.s. senate. this administration, i support this administration and the environmental efforts, has moved in the area for the first time to deal with the ozone problem. we now have an international

treaty, a treaty that is commonly referred to as the montreal treaty.for the first time , we're talking about the impacts of co2 in the ozone layer. that is progress for the environment. we are committed to the environment. i take my children hiking, fishing, walking in the woods and the wilderness. believe me, we have a commitment to preserving the environment. bringing up the environment, you cannot help but think about the environmental policy of the governor of massachusetts. he talks about being an environmentalists. let me tell you about his environmental policy. harbor,arbor, boston which is the dirtiest waterway in america, tons of raw sewage go in each and every day. what does the governor of massachusetts do? virtually nothing. then, he has the audacity to go down to new jersey tell people

in new jersey is against ocean dumping. ,this is the same governor that applied for licenses to dump massachusetts sewage, waste off the coast of new jersey. who has the environmental record, who has the interest, george bush and i do. judy: senator bentsen. sen. bentsen: this late conversion is interesting to me. i must say. [laughter] [applause] talking about boston harbor, the facts are he has the $6 billion program underway on waste treatment. and it was this administration, their administration, that made it impossible to move forward on boston harbor. the democratic party is of clean water, clean air, the superfund. i played a very major role in the superfund legislation, and every environmental organization that i know, every major one, has now endorsed dukakis-bentsen

ticket. and i am one just received the environmental award in texas for the work i have done to clean up the bay and waterways off the coast of texas. now, i think we know well who was what helped clean up his record. history is there. and dukakis, bentsen are committed to that. tom: there has been a lot of talk in this campaign about family, the principal theme in your acceptance speech in new orleans. i would to ask you about the 65 million american children who live with their families in poverty. i would like for you to describe the audience the last time that you may have visited with one of those families personally, and how you explain that family were votes against the school breakfast program, school lunch program, the expansion of the child immunization program. [applause] sen. quayle: i have met with those people. i met with them in fort wayne,

indiana at a food bank. theyay be surprised, tom, do ask the questions on the votes. they were glad because i took time out of my schedule to go down, talk about how we're going to get a food bank, going and making sure the food bank to fort wayne, indiana. and i have a very good record and commitment to the poor. family,at do not have a want to have a family. this administration, and a george bush administration, will be committed to eradicating poverty. poverty has not gone up and this administration. and has not gone down much either, and that means we have a challenge ahead of us. let me tell you something. what we have done for the poor, what we have done for the poor is that we in fact pass the homeless bill, the mckinney act,

the major piece of legislation that deals with the homeless. congress has cut the funding the administration recommended for poverty. the biggest thing we have done for poverty in america is a tax syndication act of 1986, 6 million working poor families got off payroll. 6 million people are off the taxpaying payroll because of that tax reform, and they are keeping the tax money there. to help the poor, we have a commitment to the programs that will go on, and we are spending more on poverty programs today than we were in 1981. that is a fact. are going toams we concentrate on our greeting jobs and opportunities, so that everyone will have the opportunities that they want. judy: senator bentsen, your response. sen. bentsen: i find that very

interesting, because he has been no help at all when passing most major welfare reform bills in our country. one we are working very hard to see that people can get off welfare, break that cycle, take a step up in life, learn the kinds of things we did to help them have medicaid for a year. that is a positive thing that has been done. thealso frustrating me, kind of report i just heard here is that the kind of, votes he has cast against child nutrition programs. the fact he has voted against money that we needed for further immunization. wereenial of polio shots, the parents cannot afford to get them. now, i do not really believe that is identified with the concerns of people in poverty. tom, a question for senator bentsen. tom: your differences with michael dukakis, contra aid, one

of the cutting issues of foreign policy in the last eight years. you and michael to caucus seem to be diametrically opposed. i am told that in a close question of the senate you made a statement like speech and a half of contra aid that anyone had made during the eight years of the reagan term, that affect you alluded to the threat that the sandinista regime could pose to the state of texas. governor dukakis on the other hand has described the policy as immoral and illegal. is he wrong? governor dukakis and i have disagreed on the contra program. no question about that. but my big difference with this administration is they look at the contra aid program as the only way to resolve that program. they concentrate on that. but i really think we have to give peace a chance. that is why i have been a strong planter of the plan, a

that won the nobel prize for the present of costa rica. i believe you have to work with the leaders of those other central american countries, to try to bring about the democratization of nicaragua, a negotiation by pressure, diplomatic pressure that we also should be trying that first. that in concentrating so much just on the contra, this administration has not paid enough attention to the rest of central america. the concern i have is that we have a country with 85 million people sharing a 2000 mile border with us, with half of those people under the age of 15. a country that has had the standard of living cut 50% in the last six years. we ought to be concerned about that, and real to be involved. i was born on the mexican border. i speak their language. i spent a good part of my life down there. governor to coccus speaks spanish, too. he spent a good deal of time in central and south america. and we believe that we ought to be working together with a new

alliance, for progress bringing other countries to help. bringing and europeans, hispanics who have a real affinity for the area. whoging in the japanese, have a great surplus now and are looking for places to invest. those are the positive things i think we can do to bring about peace in the area, to help raise the standard of living and give them the kind of stability, where democracy can proceed and can prosper and bloom. those are the kinds of things that we would be committed to in a dukakis administration, to try to make this world a better place in which to live. judy:, senator quayle your response. [applause] there is no question the aid would be cut off to the democratic resistance in nicaragua. it is beyond me why it is ok for the soviet union to put in billions of dollars to prop up communist sandinistas, but somehow it is wrong for the

united states to give a few dollars to democratic resistance. there is a thing called the monroe doctrine something the governor of massachusetts, has said has been superseded. i doubt many americans agree with that. they believe in the monroe doctrine. senator bentsen talks about central america, another issue michael to caucus is wrong on. that is good not appeared he criticized our rescue mission, report, yet a upi 85% of the american people supported our rescue mission and return it, and this country into a non-communist country. and the governor of massachusetts essentially out of step with mainstream america. y: a question for senator bentsen. asked by myen colleagues to deal with any thing on stage. question, illow-up want to ask you a question about money. ,which i'm sure you are prepared

to talk about. governor dukakis has tried to make ethics a major issue in the campaign and he has you as a running mate,, a man who leads the league at last count in the receipt of pac money, the money raised by special interest organizations. that is the kind of campaign financing the governor dukakis find so distasteful that he has refused to accept any of it. do you find an embarrassing? sen. bentsen: not at all because you have her number that pac money is the result of the last campaign reform bill, one that talks about employees having greater participate. what i have done is just what my opponent in my campaign has done in his campaign. he has been raising pac money, too. you have to comply with the laws as they are, whether you are football balls or not.

i have been for campaign reform and pushed it very far. i believe we have to do some things in that regard, but i have noticed that the senator from indiana has opposed that campaign reform and would repeatedly against it. the things we have to do, i believe, are cut back on soft money for example, which i look on as frankly, one of those things we had to do because republicans have done for so long. i think it is a loophole, frankly. the campaign reform, changing the rules of the game, is something we tried repeatedly in this session of the congress, but only to have the republicans lead the charge against us and defeat us. and i wish that senator quayle would change his mind on that particular, piece of legislation and give us the kind of campaign reform law that is needed in america. judy: senator quayle, your response? sen. quayle: as a matter of fact, used to have a $10,000 breakfast club. $10,000 breakfast club, that

only cost five paid lobbyists and special interest to come have breakfast with the chairman of the senate finance committee, the one that oversee the tax loopholes in the tax code. $10,000, i'm sure there were not paid have cornflakes. [laughter] [applause] i will tell you the kind of campaign reform i am supporting senator, i think it is time we get rid of pac money, where we totally eliminate contributions by special interest groups and political action committees, and let us have the political parties and individuals contributed that is the kind of campaign reform that republican support. they want to get rid of the special interest money and rely on the individuals and also the political parties. judy: brit, your question for senator quayle? once again, let me caution the audience, keep your reactions as quiet as possible. apprehension the

people may feel about your being a heartbeat away from the presidency.let us assume for the sake of his question that you become vice president , the president is incapacitated for one reason or another and you have to take the reins of power. when that moment came, what would be the first steps you take and why? first, i would say a prayer for myself, and for the country i'm about to lead. and then, i would assemble his people and talk. and i think this question keeps going back to qualifications, and what kind of vice president and in this hypothetical situation, if i had to assume responsibilities of the president, what i would be. and as i have said, age alone, although i can tell you after the experience of the last few weeks, i have added 10 years to my age. age alone is not the only

qualification. you have got to look at experience, and you have to look at the compliments, and can you make a difference? have i made a difference in the u.s. senate where i've served for eight years? yes, i have. haven't made a difference in the congress i have served for 12 years? yes, i have. as i said before, looking at the issue of qualifications i am delighted that comes up, because on the three most important challenges facing america, arms control and national security, jobs and education, and budget deficit, i have more experience and the compliments then does the governor of massachusetts. i have been in the congress, and i have worked on these issues. and believe me, when you look at arms control and try to deal with the soviet union, you cannot come at it from a naive position. you have to understand the soviet union. you have to understand how they

will respond. sitting on that senate armed services committee for eight years has given me the experience to deal with the soviet union and how we can move forward,. that is just one of the troubling issues that are going to be facing this nation. and i am prepared. sen. bentsen: i cannot leave something on the table he has charged me with. let us get to that one. when you talk about the breakfast club, as you know, that was perfectly legal. i formed it and i close it down almost immediately, because i thought the perception was bad. ,[applause] it is the same law, the less you invite high-priced lobbyists down to williamsburg. bring them down and entertain them playing golf playing tennis,, and bring republican senators down there to have exchange for the contribution campaign. the same kind of law that lets

you have honorariums, and you have collected over a quarter of a million dollars of honorariums now, speaking to various interest groups. there is no control over what you do with that money. you can spend on anything you want to. you can spend it on golf club dues if you want to. [applause] now, that is what i have seen you do and this administration, and that is why we need campaign reform laws and why i support them. and you have voted against them time and time again. [applause] margolis, question for senator dan quayle. john: the reagan administration has scaled back the occupational safety and health and ministration, by the task force from president bush. they have been cut by 20% and the number of inspections and manufacturing plants has been reduced by 33%. this has had a special effect in this area were many people work in the meatpacking industry, which has, a far higher rate of

serious injury than almost any other, industry a rate appears to be higher because we are not assured of because they have been allegedly falsifying reports. would you acknowledge to the hundreds of injured people in nebraska, iowa, also in the midwest that in this case, the regulation may have gone too far. and the government should reassert itself in protecting worker rights. sen. quayle: the premise of your question, john, is that somehow this administration has been lax and enforcement of the osha regulations. i disagree with that. and i will tell you why. if you want to ask some business people that i talked to periodically, they complain about tough enforcement of this administration. and furthermore, let me tell you this for the record. when we have found violations in this administration, there is not only been tough enforcement, but there have been most severe penalties, the largest penalties

in the history of the department of labor, has been levied when these violations have been found. there is a commitment, and there will always be a commitment, to the safety of our working men and women. they deserve it. we are committed to them. now, the broader question goes to the whole issue of deregulation. and has deregulation worked, has deregulation not work? in my judgment, deregulation has worked. we have a deregulated economy, and we have produced, through low taxes, not high taxes. through deregulation, the spirit of entrepreneurship, the individual going out and starting a business, the business man or woman going up to risk and investment to start up a business and hire people, 70have reduced $7 million jobs since 1982.

deregulation as a political philosophy is a good philosophy, one our opponents disagree with. they want a centralized government. we believe in the market, we believe in the people. yes, the role of government is to make sure the safety is taken care of. we will continue to do that. judy: senator bentsen. sen. bentsen: once again come a piece of democratic legislation has been passed to try to protect the working men and women of america. and you have seen an administration that came in and really did not have its heart in that kind of enforcement. a good example of that is the environmental protection laws were talking about a moment ago. this administration came in and put in a james lott, that is the bonnie and clyde of the environmental protection. [applause] that is why you have people that truly believe and represent working men and women of america.

most employers do a good job of that. but some of them put their profits before people, and that is why you have to have osha, why you have to have tough and good and fair enforcement of it. and that is what a democratic administration would do, to help make is working place a safer and better place to be employed. jyudy: john margolis? john: the government has been increasing amounts of money in an effort to protect the family farmer. most of the subsidies seem to go to the largest and richest farmers, who presumably need it least. while it is the farmers forced to sell out, sometimes to the larger neighbor who has gotten more subsidies, despite the fact that i believe you are a rather large farmer yourself, do you think it is time to uncouple the subsidy formula from the amount of land to target money to the small and medium-sized farmer? sen. bentsen: well, i supported

that. i voted for the 50,000 limitation to get away from the million-dollar contributions to farmers. of the four on this ticket, i was the only one born and reared on a farm. i am still o involved in the farm. i understand the problem. i feel very strongly we ought to be doing more for the american farmer.and what we have seen under this administration is a neglect of that farmer. we have seen 220,000 farmers off the farm. they seem to think the answer is to move into town, but we ought not to be doing that. what you have seen them do is cut the farm assistance for the rural areas by over 50% we are seeing rural hospitals. close all over the countr because of this administration. we have seen an administration that has lost much of our market abroad, because they have not had a trade policy. by someur market loss

40%. and that is one of the reason we have seen the cost of the farm program, would was only about $2.5 billion when they took office now go to about, $25 billion. now, we can bring that kind of cost down and get more to market prices if we will have a good trade policy. i was in january visiting with the new prime minister of japan. i said you are paying five times as much for beef as we pay for it in our country. six times as much for rice. $60 billion trade surplus with us you can improve the standard of living for your people, you are spending 27% of your disposable income. on food. we spend 14%. when you have that kind of barrier up against us that is not free and fair trade. ,and we do not believe that should continue. we would be pushing very hard to open up those markets and stand up for the american farmer.

,and see that we recapture those foreign markets. and i think we can do it with a dukakis administration. [applause] judy: senator quayle? sen. quayle: the senator talks about recapturing foreign markets. one way we can do that is that if in fact we have another jimmy carter grain embargo. embargo set grain the american farmer back. with the farm is interested in, interestpercent an rate increases another $1 billion. another thing the farmer is not interested in is the democratic platform. but the governor of massachusetts as a farm program. he went to the farmers of the midwest and told him not to grow corn, not to grow soybeans, but to grow belgium endive. that is what he and his harvard

buddies think of the american farmer. grow belgium endive. to comment and tell our farmers not to grow corn, soybeans, that is the kind of farm policy you get under a dukakis administration and one the american farmer will likely reject. : tom brokaw. tom: lower interest rates, lower unemployment, lower inflation, arms-control deal with the soviet union. now, two guys come through and say would like you to change without offering a lot of specifics,.why would you accept that deal ? sen. bentsen: you know, if you let me write to hundred billion dollars of checks, year i could give you the illusion of prosperity, too. [applause] administration that

has more than doubled the national debt, they have done that in less than eight years, they have taken this country from a number one lender nation in the world to the number one debtor nation in the world. and the interest on that debt next year, on this reagan-bush debt of our nation,'s want to be $640 for the man and women and child because of this credit card mentality. we go out and try to sell our securities every week, and health of the foreigners will buy them. and they do buy them, but every time they do, we lose some of our economic independence for the future. now, plant turnaround and bought 10% of the manufacturing base of this country. they have bought 20% of the banks. they own 46% of the commercial real estate in los angeles. they are buying america on the cheap. now, and we have other countries that cannot manage their economy down in central and south

america, we send down the american ambassador. we send out the international monetary fund, and we tell them what they can buy what they can sell them how to run their economy. the ultimate irony would be to have that happen to us, because foreigners finally quit buying our security. what we need in this country is someone like michael dukakis, who gave 10 balanced budgets in a row there, and was able to do that, leave that kind of commitment, set those top priorities. thated an administration will turn this trade policy around an open up markets, standup with our trading partners. to help keep the jobs at home and is in the products abroad. judy: senator quayle? sen. quayle: senator bentsen possible running of the debt, but the governor of massachusetts has run up the oft more than the history the program.

i don't believe that is the policy we want. the question went to the heart of the matter. you asked the question why would we change? well, we have changed since 1980. we have interest rates down. we have inflation down. people are working again. america is held in respect once again, around the world. we're going to build on that change. and as we made those positive change of lower interest rates lower rate of inflation, the governor of massachusetts, every step of the way. we are proud of the record of competent and hope for millions of americans, hope and opportunity that these americans is because the policy that we have had the last eight years and we want to build on that, and change it for even the better. judy: tom, a question for senator quayle. sen. quayle: you actively supported the invasion of

granada. to rescue the island from a marxist takeover. if military force was necessary in that endeavor why not use the military, to go after the south american drug cartels, and after general noriega, since drugs in the minds of most americans pose a far greater danger to many more people. sen. quayle: you're absolutely right. [applause] you're absolutely right. the drug problem is the number one issue. tom: the military aspect? sen. quayle: if i may respond, the military aspect is being addressed. as a matter of fact, we are using the department of defense in a coordinate an effort with reconnaissance. and i cannot believe we're going to turn the department of defense into a police organization. we are using our military assets in a prudent way to deal with interdiction. and we have made some success in this area, 70 tons of cocaine

have been stopped. but when you look at the drug problem, there are no easy solutions to it. it is accommodated problem. as is heading up the problem to create a drug-free america, not only will utilize national defense and the department of defense, we have to get on the demand side of the ledger. we have to get the education. an education ought to begin at home. it ought to be reinforced in our schools. and there is another thing that will be more important than the premise of this question on a hypothetical of using troops. we will use military assets, not going to -- you will use them, but we need to focus on other thing. another part of the problem. and that problem is law enforcement. and here's is where we have a major disagreement with the governor of massachusetts. he is opposed to the death penalty for drug kingpin's. we believe people convicted of a crime deserve the death penalty,

as does the legislation in the congress supported by a bipartisan group including many democrats of his party. he also proposed a mandatory drug sentencing for drug dealers in the state of massachusetts. you cannot have a war on drugs, you cannot beat up on drugs, weak on crime. judy: senator bentsen? sen. bentsen: it is interesting to see that the senator from indiana, when we had a resolution on the floor sponsored by senator dole, that this government would make no deal with noriega. and the senator from indiana was one of a dozen who voted against it. interesting to see that one of his campaign managers, trying to help them with his image was also hired by noriega, to help him with his image. [applause] what we have seen under this administration, we have seen them using eight cabinet

officers, 28 different agencies, all fighting over turf. and that is one thing we correct under the caucus administration. we put one person, in charge and we commit the resources to get that job done. now, michael dukakis has been able to do that in the state of massachusetts by cutting drug use in high school, while it is going up across the country by putting in drug education the drug that enforcement agency said was a model for the country. we would be doing around the country. that is a positive attack against drugs. judy: brit hume? brit: what would happen if you were to take over in an emergency, and wider usage was a prayer, something about meeting. what would you do next? [laughter] sen. quayle: i don't believe it is proper for me to get into the

specifics of a hypothetical situation like that. the responsibilities of the president of this country, would i be capable and qualified to do that? and i have tried to list the qualifications of 12 years in the united states congress. i have served in the congress for 12 years. i have served in the congress, eight years on the senate armed services committee. i have traveled a number of times. i have been to geneva many times, to meet with our negotiators as we were hammering out the imf treaty. i have met with western political leaders, margaret thatcher, i know them, they know me. to leadhat it takes

this country forward. and if that situation arises, i , i will be prepared. repair to lead this country. if that happens. judy: senator bentsen? sen. bentsen: once again, i think what we're looking at here is some of you can step into the presidency, if that tragedy would occur, then you have to look at maturity of judgment. you have to see what kind of leadership roles that person has made in his life before the crisis struck. and if you do that type of thing, you will arrive at the judgment that i think would be a wise one. and i think that would mean you're are going to vote for michael dukakis and lloyd bentsen. udy: brit?

firstthe breakfast club, revealed you had $10,000 a plate, you handled with charming candor. you said it was a mistake. you called the whole idea off. the question i have, if the washington post had not broken -- and other media picked up on it, what can you tell us tonight as to why we should not believe that you would still be having those breakfasts to this day?

[scattered laughter] sen. bentsen: i really must say, brit, i don't make many mistakes, but that one was a real doozy. and i agree with that. and, as you know, i immediately disbanded it. it was perfectly legal. and you have all kinds of such clubs on the hill and you know that. but i still believe that the better way to go is to have a campaign reform law that takes care of that kind of a situation. even though it's legal, the perception is bad. so i would push very strong to see that we reform the entire situation. i'd work for that end, and that's what my friend from indiana has opposed repeatedly, vote after vote. ms. woodruff: senator quayle. sen. quayle: he disbanded the club, but he's still got the money. he is the number one, he is the number one receiver of political action committee money. now, senator bentsen has talked about reform. well, let me tell you about the reform that we're pushing. let's eliminate political action committees, the special interest money. there's legislation before the congress to do that. that way, we won't have to worry about breakfast clubs, or who's the number one pac raiser. we can go back and get the contributions from the working men and women and the individuals of america.

we can also strengthen our two party system and it needs strengthening and rely more on the political parties than we have in the past. that's the kind of campaign reform that i'm for, and i hope the senator will join me. ms. woodruff: john margolis, a question for senator bentsen. margolis: senator, we've all just finished most america has just finished one of the hottest summers it can remember. and apparently this year will be the fifth out of the last nine that are among the hottest on record. no one knows, but most scientists think, that something we're doing, human beings are doing, are exacerbating this problem, and that this could, in a couple of generations, threaten our descendants comfort and health and perhaps even their existence. as vice president what would you urge our government to do to deal with this problem? and specifically as a texan, could you support a substantial reduction in the use of fossil fuels which might be necessary down the road? sen. bentsen: well, i think what you can do in that one, and which would be very helpful, is to use a lot more natural gas, which burns a lot cleaner. and what mike dukakis has said

is that he'll try to break down those regulatory roadblocks that you have in the regulatory agency that denies much of the passage of that natural gas to the northeast, a way, in turn, can fight against acid rain which is another threat, because it's sterilizing our lakes, it's killing our fish. and it's interesting to me to see in the resume of senator quayle that he brags on the fact that he's been able to fight the acid rain legislation. i don't think that that's a proper objective in trying to clean up this environment. but the greenhouse effect is one that has to be a threat to all of us, and we have to look for alternative sources of fuel. and i've supported that very strongly. the department of energy is one that has cut back substantially on the study of those alternative sources of fuels. we can use other things that'll help the farmer. we can convert corn to ethanol, and i would push for that very strong. so absolutely.

i'll do those things that are necessary to put the environment of our country number one. because if we don't protect that, we'll destroy the future of our children. and we must be committed to trying to clean up the water, clean up the air, and do everything we can, not only from a research standpoint, but also in the applied legislation to see that that's carried out. ms. woodruff: senator quayle? sen. quayle: vice president george bush has said that he will take on the environmental problem. he has said further that he will deal with the acid rain legislation and reduce millions of tons of the s02 content. that legislation won't get through the congress this year. but it will get through in a george bush administration, a george bush administration that is committed to the environment. now the greenhouse effect is an important environmental issue. it is important for us to get

the data in, to see what alternatives we might have to the fossil fuels, and make sure we know what we're doing. and there are some explorations and things that we can consider in this area. the drought highlighted the problem that we have, and therefore, we need to get on with it, and in a george bush administration, you can bet that we will. ms. woodruff: john, a question for senator quayle. margolis: senator, as vice president your most important contribution would be the advice you gave the president. one of the most troubling facts that's going to face the new administration is the fact that the united states has now become the world's largest debtor nation. in 1987 foreigners underwrote our debts to the tune of about $138 billion. last week a top official of the japanese economic planning agency bragged that japan now is in a position to influence the value of the dollar, of our interest rates, and even our stock prices. and he warned that one day maybe they'd do just that.

if you were vice president of the united states and japan did that, what would you tell the president to do? sen. quayle: when you look at dealing with this total problem it's not just with the japanese, but the underlying question on this total world debt problem you have got to see, why are we a debtor, and what is attracting the foreign investment into our country today, whether it's japanese or others. i would rather have people come over here and to make investments in this country, rather than going elsewhere. because by coming over here, and making investments in this country, we are seeing jobs. do you realize that today we are producing hondas and exporting hondas to japan?

we are the envy of the world. the united states [laughter] sen. quayle: some of senator bentsen's supporters laugh at that. they laugh at that because they don't believe that the united states of america is the envy of the world. well, i can tell you, the american people think the united states of america is the envy of the world. [applause] ms. woodruff: senator oh, i'm sorry, go ahead. sen. quayle: we are the greatest nation in this world, and the greatest economic power. now, there's been some talk in congress about forgiveness of debt. forgiveness of debt is wrong. forgiveness of international debt would be counterproductive. and i would like to see those that talk about forgiving debt, senator bentsen, go out and talk

about a farmer that's in debt that doesn't have his forgiven. that's not the kind of policy george bush will have. ms. woodruff: senator bentsen. ? sen. bentsen: well, i've told you what i'd do about trade and trying to help turn that situation around. but what we also should do is get them to give us more burden sharing when it comes to national defense. we have a situation today where, on a per capita basis, people in western europe are spending about one-third as much as we are in our country. and then when you go to japan, where we are spending 6.5% on defense of the democracies, they are spending 1%. i met with some of the japanese business leaders, talking to them about it. and i said, you know, we have 50,000 troops here in japan, protecting the democracies of asia. and it costs $3.5 billion a year. you're the number two economic power in the world. you ought to measure up to that responsibility and carry some of that cost. i said, if we were not doing what we're doing, we'd have a big budget surplus.

and i said, you'd have chaos, because you get 55% of your oil from the persian gulf, and you wouldn't have the u.s. navy down there to take care of that. now, the senator from indiana, when we passed a resolution in the united states senate to ask for burden sharing on that cost to keep those sea lanes open from the japanese, he votes against that. i don't understand that. ms. woodruff: tom brokaw, a question for senator quayle. mr. brokaw: senator quayle, i don't mean to beat this drum until it has no more sound in it. but to follow up on brit hume's question, when you said that it was a hypothetical situation, it is, sir, after all, the reason that we're here tonight, because you are running not just for vice president. [applause] mr. brokaw: and if you cite the experience that you had in congress, surely you must have some plan in mind about what you would do if it fell to you to become president of the united states, as it has to so many vice presidents just in the last 25 years or so. sen. quayle: let me try to answer the question one more time. i think this is the fourth time that i've had this question. mr. brokaw: the third time. sen. quayle: three times that

i've had this question and i will try to answer it again for you, as clearly as i can, because the question you are asking is what kind of qualifications does dan quayle have to be president, what kind of qualifications do i have and what would i do in this kind of a situation. and what would i do in this situation? i would make sure that the people in the cabinet and the people that are advisors to the president are called in, and i would talk to them, and i will work with them. and i will know them on a firsthand basis, because as vice president i will sit on the national security council. and i will know them on a firsthand basis, because i'm going to be coordinating the drug effort. i will know them on a firsthand basis because vice president george bush is going to recreate the space council, and i will be in charge of that. i will have day-to-day activities with all the people in government. and then, if that unfortunate situation happens if that situation, which would

be very tragic, happens, i will be prepared to carry out the responsibilities of the presidency of the united states of america. and i will be prepared to do that. i will be prepared not only because of my service in the congress, but because of my ability to communicate and to lead. it is not just age, it's accomplishments, it's experience. i have far more experience than many others that sought the office of vice president of this country. i have as much experience in the congress as jack kennedy did when he sought the presidency. i will be prepared to deal with the people in the bush administration, if that unfortunate event would ever occur. ms. woodruff: senator bentsen. sen. bentsen: senator, i served with jack kennedy, i knew jack kennedy, jack kennedy was a

friend of mine. senator, you are no jack kennedy. [prolonged shouts and applause] what has to be done in a situation like that is to call in the ms. woodruff: please, please, once again you are only taking time away from your own candidate. sen. quayle: that was really uncalled for, senator. [shouts and applause] sen. bentsen: you are the one that was making the comparison, senator. and i'm one who knew him well. and frankly, i think you are so far apart in the objectives you choose for your country that i did not think the comparison was well-taken. ms. woodruff: tom, a question for senator bentsen. mr. brokaw: since you seem to be taking no hostages on the stage, let me ask you a question. [laughter]

about the american hostages, nine, still in brutal captivity in the middle east. senator bentsen, you have been critical of the iran-contra affair, but tell me, does the dukakis-bentsen ticket have any realistic plan for getting the american hostages being held in the middle east released in any due time? sen. bentsen: tom, that's one of the toughest problems that any chief executive will face, because you can't help but have sympathy for that family, and for those hostages in the cells. but the one thing we ought to know by now is that you can't go out and make secret deals with the ayatollah, you can't trade arms for hostages. when you try to do that there is no question but what you just encourage more taking of hostages. and that's been the result by this dumb idea that was cooked up in the white house basement. and i want to tell you that george bush, attending seventeen of those meetings, and having no

record of what he said if lloyd bentsen was in those meetings, no one would be asking where is lloyd. he would say, that is a dumb idea and week up all we can do is continue to push. you can do it in a way of economic pressure in addition to that hand that is what you which drive to do to release those hostages. but not encourage more taking of hostages. senator quayle: no doubt about it, arms for hostages is wrong. we learn by our mistakes. but there have been a number of

successes in foreign policy in this administration. the question is difficult, how do you do it. if anyone had the answer, they would certainly do it. keep trying. keep the doors open and iran and someday others who return those -- you control those hostages will want to can -- return to the civilized community. i can do that starting now by releasing those hostages. >> we have a question for senator benson. debatetor, much of the has

dashed you really think it's fair for you to advance nonsense full-timet serve one in the senate. just three terms in the house of corner of a center earlier. benson: what you have to look at is the -- bentsen: what you have to look at is a man who serve the country and more. built up a business. and then served in the united states senate. a man who has been able to bring about legislation. i did not do a very good job of running for the presidency and i am well aware of that. at theare looking majority of someone taking on this kind of task.

that is the judgment that has to be exercised. decision.esidential a very important one because we're talking money was going to lead this country into its future and it you cannot have a more important responsibility. sen. quayle: you look at accomplishes as well as experience. i amne of the experience proudest of is the authorship of the jobs act. andas trained, educated, employed over 3 million young people and adults that are economically disadvantaged a end we did it in a way that we got the private sector to involve inelf in the public sector

councils throughout america over the delivery areas. we have 51% of that counsel that are businessmen and women. we have members of unions. we have education leaders. we have been able to establish a program that is working. to work.eople back that is an accomplishment i will take with me into the white house. >> a question for senator quayle. >> it may be a little off the politics and get at the kind of person you are. can you identify any work of literature or art or even something you have seen in the last two years and has a particularly strong effect on you and tell us why. quayle: in the last six

months there are three very important books i read that of had an impact. the three books are one, richard nixon's history, senator richard lugar's letter to the next massie's and bob ," abouts and alexandra the fall of the russian empire. there's three books that i read over spring vacation and early summer had a definite impact because what former president nixon was talking about was foreign policy in the 21st century. the historical book of the down fall of the czar and the coming of leninism, combining those three books gave me a better appreciation of the challenges we have ahead of us.

lugar's book, he talks about the advancement of human rights around the world. about his leadership effort in africaine's in south where we now see human rights and advancement in the reagan agenda. former president nixon talks about what we're going to do about arms control and how we will pursue new arms control with the soviet union. talked a little bit about how we deal with the soviet union and this is one of the differences michaelgeorge bush and dukakis because george bush understands to deal with the soviet union and get progress place ofgo from eight strength and the governor of massachusetts does not understand that. i understand that and the george bush administration will pursue that policy. bentsen: i think reading

winds of war and guns of august act to back shows how we make the same mistakes too often, over and over again. it seems to me the senate from indiana -- as i look at the progress cutting back on nuclear ronald, in see what reagan has been able to do with the inf treaty, i think he deserves great credit for that. i see a situation where the senator from indiana has jumped up the reservation when we talk about building on what ronald reagan wants to do, the joint sees of staff and says let's go slow on further disarmament trying to get to the next treaty, i think that is

something we have to deal with from strength and understand there has to be a strong nuclear we shouldrent and take advantage of it. i think it is dangerous judgment. it concerns me very much because i saw him try to sabotage the imf on the floor of the senate. he is listening once again to the whims of the radical right. it judy. still on, judy: question for senator quayle. senator quayle. >> i think it is more than just how long you've been in office. can you hear me? >> i can hear you. >> i want to go back to the question of qualifications,

people are worried about just how long you've been in public life. a question of candor and consistency. some of the things you've said have raised reason for questions. each one alone might seem trivial but together they create a pattern. you have spoken a few times about the partnership act which you authored. in fact, i think you co-authored it with another senator you never name almost. you ask why you got a desk job -- in the national guard. you said you had a very strong background in journalism which was at your family-owned newspaper. been veryot forthcoming about your college record. they have agreed your record was ours, nonetheless,

these examples of overstatement and exaggeration and not being forthcoming, this is what has led a lot of people to question this part of your qualifications. not your experience at your character. would you like to send some of tos state as -- straight as what you did and your partnership in the act. senator quayle: all in two minutes? >> sure. senator quayle: let's start about the premise that i have not been straight forward. let's go to the first question. i was the author of the jobs partnership training act. co-author was senator kennedy. i was the chairman of the subcommittee. chairman of the committee. writing that legislation. the chairman of the committee

writes the legislation and get cosponsorship. when you are the chairman of the committee and use the down and write the legislation, you are the author of the. and i am proud to have done that because you know what we had? we had a program that spent $15 andion from about 1973-1982 when we concluded that program. thanloyment was higher what it began. it was a program that did not work and the job partnership training act does work. releasing all my grades, im and i stand before you tonight personmost investigated ever to seek public office.

[applause] thousands of journalists have asked every professor of had, all of my teachers, they know a hand i have never set to be anything but an average student. i never said i was anything more than that. if you are an average student, it is what are you going to do with your life. i have been committed to public service since i was 29 years of age elected to the house of representative. elected to the united states senate when i was 33 and now i have the opportunity at 41 to seek the office of the vice presidency. >> sen. bentsen? absolutelyn: i have no quarrel with sen. quayle's military record but i do strongly disagree with him on some of the issues. you make great patriotic

speeches. i enjoy them. your do not understand vote on issues. sen. quayle has one of the worst voting records in the united states senate on veterans issues. one particularly bothers me. sponsoring legislation to put a tax on combat a and disability men and womenng of america. tax on disability pay when they are in the hospital. people have sacrificed for our country. i think you want to explain that to the people of america and you are to explain it tonight. john, a question for senator vincent. an expert one fiscal matters. with everybody afraid to mention taxes, social security, restraint in defense spending,

would you list a few specific programs which would reduce or which you would reduce or eliminate to cut 50 brain dollars on the deficit which is expected to be $135 million this fiscal year. i do this as a farmer, i tried to turn the situation around where we have seen the payments go from 2.5 up to 10 times that under this administration. i would accomplish that by opening up those markets. getting this prices back up to market prices. we can do that with an aggressive trade policy. if we make trade a number one priority and not trade for some foreign policy of the moment. that means we have to stand up to american farmers and pushback on regulations for american farmers. , do some ofto that the things i think have to be done in so far as doing a better job at procurement.

particularly when we are talking about military things we should buy. i know i find very hard to put in a independent inspector general but the senator from indiana oppose me on that. we were finally able to put that into effect and saved over order year.illion dollars this almost enough to buy a squadron of 7/16. those of the kinds of things i would work on. one of the things i learned in business is you can expect what you inspect. we would be doing a much tougher job of auditing. getting rid of these kickbacks. being much more aggressive. getting the interest rate down. try to get this trade deficit down and that would help substantially. i would try to get rid of some of these things that the

administration wants from new york to tokyo, i do not think we can afford a piece of technological elegance like that. i would strike that sort of thing from the ticket. i do not know how many people concorde,en on the not many. i said it would be a financial disaster and it has been that. >> sen. quayle? sen. quayle: to say we are going to reduce the budget deficit, it is a challenge to make sure it is reduced. redmanthe grammar targets. we have reduce the federal budget 70 billion dollars. sen. bentsen voted against it. the very tool that has been used to bring the federal budget deficit down. we are going to need all of the tools possible to bring it down. we need the tools of a line item

veto. 43 governors have that but not the president of the united states. the united states needs to have a line item veto. on requested and unnecessary's president put a line through that, send it back to the congress and let congress vote again. congress has got to help out when it comes to reducing this deficit. >> tom brokaw, last russian. sen. bentsen: i would like to ask you about your's let personality. you were running on a ticket with michael dukakis, a man opposed to the death and only, in favor of gun control, yet at the same time you're running for the united states senate in the state of texas where your position on many of those issues as well now and opposed to him. how do you explain to the people of texas had he can be a social

conservative on this cutting issues and still run with michael dukakis on the national ticket. sen. bentsen: he was not looking for a club. it is part of his character. he wants someone who will speak up and that i do. many chief executives have come into my office and said he was going to tell the president off and then they got to the office and turn into jell-o. when you are talking about something like the death penalty where michael dukakis and i disagree, what you really ought to get to is what is being done and what kind of progress is made. in the state of massachusetts, the homicide rate is down to the lowest of any industrial state. it is substantially ahead of the national effort. he has been able to do that with an educated program by having some 1500 new police officers.

he has done and in turn by the leadership i think he will bring to the ticket when he becomes president of the united states and fighting drugs. it has gone up around the rest of the nation. you would see him as president of the united states being very aggressive in this fight against crime. the reason i am delighted and proud to be on the ticket. sure we have different is but overall there are so many things we agree on. trade policy, cutting back on deficit, major issues facing our nation. >> sen. quayle? sen. quayle: one of the things they do not agree on is the national defense and how we are going to preserve the freedom in this country. michael dukakis, the most liberal national democrat to see

the office of residency since george mcgovern. he is against the mx missile. cutting to aircraft characters. he is opposed to many defense programs necessary to defend this country. that is why former defense carterry and former secretary, jim/injure, ask governor dukakis, are you anti-military. jim/injure never got an answer -- jim schlesinger never got an answer because the governor of massachusetts does not want to answer warmer secretary jim schlesinger on that very important question. >> last question for sen. quayle. all in our lifetime

encounter something that helps us shape our less of you. what experience of you had and how did it shape your list -- politicalcal -- philosophy? quayle: there are a lot of experiences that have shaped my adult philosophy but the one i keep coming back to time and time again that i talk about is what i talk about in high schools, when i talk about at job-training centers, and it is the advice that my maternal 97-years-old,o is we are a modern day four-generation family. when iice she gave me was growing up is advice that i have given my children and i

have given to a number of people. it is very simple. very common sense. do anythingu can you want to if you just set your mind to it and go to work. the dukakis supporters sneer at that because it is common sense. applause] at. quayle: they sneer common sense advice. midwestern advice. adwestern advice from grandmother to a grandson. important advice. something that we ought to talk about. because if you want to, you can make a difference. , can make a

difference. you are going to that choice in this election. everyone can make a difference if they want to. >> sen. bentsen? sen. bentsen: i think to have spent art of my life seeing some of the struggles in one of the lowest per capita incomes in the united states and that is one of the reasons i worked so hard to assist on education. when i found the bankers in that area could not handle loans details and of the expense, cannot make a profit, i went down there and helped with to buyofit organization up those lines from them in and manage them and do it in a way in which they continue to make those loans. they have. they have educated more than 20,000 of those students, learned out more than 100 thears and it has not cost

taxpayers of this country one cent. that is why worked to bring better health care to people because what i have seen in the way of poverty in that area and the lack of medical attention and trying to see that is turned around. that is why i worked so hard on the welfare reform now. to break the cycle of poverty. for the chance to step up in life. >> we have now come to the end of the questions. i would like to thank all of you for joining us. sen. quayle, yours is the first closing statement. sen. quayle: thank you. tonight has been a very important evening. you have been able to see dan quayle is a really am and how george bush and i want to lead

this country into the future. thank you america for listening. thank you for your fairness. now you will have a choice to make on election day. you will have a choice of whether america is going to choose a road with michael dukakis or the road with george bush as we march toward the 21st century. the road of michael dukakis comes down to this -- bigger government. higher taxes. they have always believed in higher taxes. i always have and they always will. cuts in national defense. back to the old economics of high interest rates, high inflation, and the old politics of high unemployment. now the road of george bush is the road to the future will stop

it comes down to this -- and america's second to none with visions of greatness. economic expansion. tough laws. tough judges. strong values. respect for the flag and our institutions. george bush will lead us to the 21st century. a century that will be of hope and peace. ronald reagan and george bush saved america from decline. we changed america, michael dukakis fought us every step of the way. it is simply that they will take america backwards. george bush has experience. the future. a future committed to family. a future committed to freedom.

thank you, good night, and god bless you. [applause] >> mr. bentsen? sen. bentsen, your closing statement. sen. bentsen: in just 34 days, america will elect new leadership for our country. it is a most important decision. because there is no more important job than governing this great country of our hands leading us into the future. michael dukakis and lloyd bentsen offer you experience, capable leadership to meet those challenges of the future. the opposition says lower your sites. mike dukakis in lloyd bentsen

think america can do better. that america can't it just coast into the future clinging to the past. this race is too close. the competition is too tough. the stakes are too high. michael did caucus lloyd bentsen think america must move into that future united in a commitment to make this country of ours the most powerful, the most prosperous nation in the world. pastericans we honor our and we should. but our children are going to live in the future and mike dukakis does the best of america is yet to come. takingt will not happen care of our economy putting in on automatic pilot. not happen by accident. it will take leadership and courage and the commitment and

contribution by all of us to do that to work for the betterment of our country both in war and peace. i worked as a bomber pilot, have been a businessman and a united states senator working to make this nation the fairest and the strongest and the most powerful in the world. help us bring america to a new era of greatness. the debate has been ours, but the decision is yours. god bless you. [applause] ms. woodruff: thank you both, thank you.

[applause] [indiscernible chatter]