Mr. Mcgovern is down to campaigning in only one state, massachusetts. And if he doesnt do well there, he may withdraw. Plchl h m mr. Glenn has yet to get a victory. Mr. Mondales hopes for a quick and decisive lead in all of this hasnt been fulfilled. I believe i heard him use the word clobbered to describe one of his defeats. Mr. Hart has done well. Hes presented himself as a man with ideas for the future, but his opponents say thats justin sell. Glamour but no substance. Well, on to the substance, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. Jackson, youve got a lot of frontline combat experience in civil rights. Now that youre campaigning in the south where there are a lot of black vote, youve been hitting that civil rights theme very hard, saying in effect youre better than your opponents on that issue. Does this tend, do you think to narrow your candidacy. Theres a lot of white voters who didnt rally to your rainbow coalition. Have you reached the point where your support will come almost exclusively from blacks . Number one in New Hampshire, i got 6 of the vote, which is better than four of my opponents, three of whom have subsequently dropped out. In vermont, we got 8 of the vote so we had voting support in New Hampshire. Since weve come south, weve focused on the question of farmers, theyll have 90 parity or 100 charity. Secondly, unless they cut the military budget and use those resources to help end the deficit and revitalize america, they represent a new present, but not a new direction. Unless mr. Hart an mondale have a plan to enforce the Voting Rights act they know our party deserve the votes. Thank you. Mr. Mcgovern youve been critical of gary hart. He was your Campaign Manager in 1972. Is his talk about the future must different than what you were saying in 1972 . First of all, i think i probably trained gary too well. Ive been rethinking that whole business of 72. Let me just say as one who has affection for gary hart and wh will certainly support him if he was the nominee, i do think legitimate questions have to be asked when the issue is posed, as gary has, he says the election is a contest between the past and the future. Im not sure what the past means in those terms. Im sensitive about these, as gary know, because im an old history teacher. I revered the past. But does the past include George Washington and Thomas Jefferson . Does it include Franklin Roosevelt and john kennedy . Does it include the human rights policy of president carter . If it does, im glad to come here today and claim the past and defend it as a good guide to the future. Thank you. In the south this last week, you seem to be describing yourself as a hero astronaut and a tough marine. Youve been all of these things, but can you really decide what shorts of person youll be in different parts of the country . I dont think ive changed my views in any way, shaip or form. What youre talking about is the experience factor, which i have pointed out. I know how washington operates . But in addition to that, who is going to provide the jobs in this country . Who knows the best from the white house . Someone who has been in business, started four Small Businesses of my own, was president of an international corporation, 1 3 of our Agricultural Production gets sent overseas normally. One out of every six american jobs depends on that. Its so important for the future. Ive been working in the future all my life. I have experience in that area. I have experience in the arms control area. I have experience in the business area. Those are valuable editions in addition to just being solely life long political entities. So i think i add that extra dimension to it that would give a good dimension to the white house in making the decisions you have to make. Thank you. Your new theme is what you see in mondale is what you get. No hair spray. Youre saying i am what i am. You say youve resisted suggestions to change your image. That approach, it seems to me, may be short on actual issue, yet you accuse some of your opponents of running issueless campaigns. Thats the point of the comment, that i think substance is all that matters here. Are we right on the arms control issue . Do we see that as the central issue of our time . Do we have a strong and sensitive plan to get those deficits down . Restore americas competitiveness . Do we have the agricultures an commitments backled up by the experience to get it done . Thats what im trying to say. We dont elect momentum, we dont elect images, we eelect a human being. And we better pick someone who knows what hes doing, whos committed to the strongest and most important elements, directed to our future and one who is seasoned and experienced and knows what hes doing. Thank you. And finally, mr. Hart, one thing that i hear people say is i dont know much about gary hart. I like his style, i like his looks. Isnt there some truth to your opponents charges that your campaign is more impressionistic than theirs, that youre spending more and more time just being gary hart than outlying specific things you would do if you were elected . Well, thats a very good question at this stage of this race. When George Mcgovern says he doesnt know what these new ideas are, i remind hem last fall, i sent him a copy of a book i wrote and a stack of position papers about that high. As i think i have the qualm campaigns of all these other people. The other thing is, these primaries are happening awfully fast now, and i oppose the way this calendar was set up. Ologied on the record, i told the Opportunity Commission not to do this. I wish i had three weeks to campaign in florida and three weeks to campaign in georgia and three weeks to campaign in alabama because im convinced the ideas that i have to put forward would sell down here exactly the way they have the rest of the country. Thank you very much. I would like to go on to specific questions now. The figures on the American Economy shows the country right now is having one of the best recoveries from a recession since the 1950s. The country is in better shape now than it was four years ago economically when the democrats were in the white house. Todayed mystery index is down to 13. Im egoing to ask each of you in random order, well kip around, why should somebody vote for the democrats if things are getting better. I think its now clear the reagan policies are about 206 give a mystery index that we havent seen in a long, long time. We see the stock market going down dramatically. Now we see a resurgence of inflation. Theyre now predicting maybe 8 by the end of yeert. More than that, we have the worst trade year in american history, about 120 billion commercial trade imbalance. 3 million to 4 million jobs lost as a result of that. Were loading our kids with a bill they have to play with interest. . Two points, mr. Chancellor. As fritz very accurately said, weve done something we havent done in 200 years. And that is steal from our childrens future to satisfy a ray dan Election Year recovery and a handful of people in this country. Are children are desperately afraid of a nuclear holocaust. A woman in alabama wrote ne saying she fully supported our effort to get our marines out of lebanon and her son was one that didnt come back. Or the Unemployed People that Ronald Reagan has no plan whatsoever to put back to work. Mr. Glenn, would you address the question that i posed. Whthe democrats if things are doing well . The misery index of our children. I would like to know what that is going to be. Were driving down Interest Rates, were cutting out jobs in this country of ours. Were increasing the misery index for our children. Anyone can live on borrowed money for a little bit. The misery index caused by cutbacks in education. The opportunity for our young people to go on to high school and beyond high school, get a decent education. Were talking about cutbacks in research. The japanese germans, french, increasing their research while were cutting ours back. Mr. Reagan has bought us an artificial recovery for some people by spending 200 billion a year more than he takes in im sure some of the viewers feel were making partisan judgments about the president , but the chairman of the council of economic advisers has said that this 200 billion feoff sit is a time bomb thats going to go off after the election. Its going to drive Interest Rates right through the ceiling and thats the end of the recovery. Itsen inefficient and unjust tax law thats permitting billions of dollars to go through the loopholes for the highest income corporations in the country. My concern is that we feel the tragic pain of the misery index rising under reagan, but then democrats will not make a difference if we go the same direction, but a little slower. They then add to the misery of women who need to become empowered. Would you go over that again . I got kind of lost. Our convention is not 50 female. Women are seeking to become empowered. All of us lived in a house run by women. Secondly, if they maintain a commitment to raise the military budget, they can do nothing about reagans deficit. Theyre going the same direction, just a little slower. Were cutting aid to American Education and extending aid to el salvador, we are extending the misery. The misery index is on the rise. 34 Million People now are in poverty. 41 million by the end of this year. The wall street down things may be looking better, but the boat stuck at the bottom, things are much worse. Now we go to free wheeling where youre at liberty to attack one another. Arent you most for increased defense spending . Im not. Im for a 25 cut in the president s budget. And i think it can be done without touching anything. I would not advocate anything that touches the essential defense of this country. But some of most thoughtful people that look at the military budget say its just loaded with waste and cost overruns and noncompetitive bidding. If we had someone as lee iacocca as secretary of defense, we could have a good, lean, tough Defense Force for at least 20 or 25 less money. Then you would have money to do some of these other things. I sense that Jesse Jackson isnt out of phase with that sentiment. Cost overruns have some kind of Congressional Oversight Committee that allows it to become managed. The noed by contracts and sole source contracts. I support the need of troops in europe and japan. Theyre better able to share some of the that burden now. That can be cut. Weve got two cutters. As i understand, the position taken by the other three, by mondale, by glenn and by hart, its for cutting what the president has requested, in addition. But you still would favor a certain increase in the Defense Budget, am i right, all three of you . I think his hand was up first. I am for reducing the reagan military buildup in the next four to five years. And i spelled out in great detail, as i think the only group member of this group who has ten years of experience on the Armed Services committee, where those cuts must come. We have to increase even over above Ronald Reagan what we are paying our military personal to retain the most skilled personnel among other things to avoid going back to a very divisive vietnamstyle draft. Even vf spending money under this administration, the pentagon itself admits we have fewer combat ready divisions than we had in 1980 under the Carter Mondale administration. And that means even Ronald Reagan is bunderring the readiness accounts of our conventional forces for a procurement buildup which is going to make us bigger. Isnt the president asking for allocations in defense, allowing for inflation . What about real terms. 17, i think. All right, you want to say 17 then. It is 17. What would your figure be . In this concontext, 4 increase . Mine is about 3. 5 to 4 . If we can keep it to that, maybe it will make more sense to the audience. Not to argue with senator hart why not . About a year and a half ago, he wrote a dissenting opinion in which he seemed to say he wanted as much or more military spending as mr. Reagan, but let me make my point. As much as we want to bring that Defense Budget down, and i do, as much as we want to get rid of Weapons Systems that dont boy us defense, and i will, as much as we need a tough new system of bidding, of testing, of warranties, as much as we need arms control to help also bring down pressure, the inescapable fact is that the soviet union is a powerful military nation using its power irresponsibly, and the president of the United States has to do everything he can to manage that budget sensibly and wise wisely but he cannot fail to discharge the National Security interests of our country. Will you give me a percentage figure . I would be at about 4 . Im at about 6 . My two colleagues on the right here i feel, and ive been talking about this for the past week, would cut our defense establishment beyond all reality. I have prosecute opposed cutting about 15 million out. It would be on the Division Air Defense of bradley fighting vehicle and Rapid Deployment for certain parts of that. The buildup of the soviets have been relentless since the cuban missile crisis days. The former Vice President would cut the b 1, the trident, the cluz missile, the foreign troops. He would cut back, the m 1 tank, funds for the volunteer arm, i propose that would leave this country immas cue lated. The only two hes pulled back from has been the trident missile and the submarine and cruise missile. Mr. Hart opposed the f15, the f18, the b1, the nimitz carrier, the patriot heldfire. Mlrs missiles and has gone to a program of leadership in washington of small er and simpler is bet rather than stressing our technology. Im saying every single thing we put out there has to work and work properly. We cant go back to a smaller or simpler day. Keep a distance between you and the enemy with our technology. I fought in those wars. I know what its like to be up there and want the best technology because my life depended on it. I do not agree with the smaller is simpler, better, cheaper, approach. I dont think many people across the south do either. Let me just respond if i may. Now weve had four hands up out of five. It goes in this order e, the order of your requesting time. Hart, jackson, mcgovern, mondale. I may want to get back in. What senator glenn doesnt address is the need for more units of all these things. We cannot afford more aircraft carriers when each one costs 3. 5 to 4 billion. We are behind the soviets and submarines by a ratio of 31. Were malling behind in numbers. If we began to use more of our energy on talking and associating and engaging in trade and technology and agriculture and less preparing to fight, we can prepare to live. We can wipe out the soviet union with 300 warheads. We got 10,000. Theyre alive because we decide the not to kill them. We need to use our minds and not our whistle ps. Were wasting money killing people in the caribbean, in central america, in lebanon. Theres one thing thats really clear today. Theres no new idea coming from this side over here. Its the same argument, the russians are coming after us. Both of these superpowers are literally scaring each other to death. Each sidearming in the name of defense. If the military spends too much, it actually weakens the country. By depriving us of other sources of national power. These things also have to do with our national strength. And i think we need a leadership that instead of frying to get the russians to the bargaining table by 1. 5 trillion military buildoff has the common sense to say were ready to bargain right now. I agree the idea of building up arms i want to be understood as being totally committed to annual summit conferences, to arms control negotiations efforts to reduce tensions. I couldnt agree with you more. On the other hand, i dont want to misskberp rhett what you said, but the soviets are using their power in poland, in cambod cambodia, in afghanistan, in syria, in ways that are irresponsible and dangerous. How are you going to stop that with another 4 of mill tar spending or another 40 . Thats not going to change their relation to poland or afghanistan or these other areas. Its a question of balance and a sense of arms control. Im for a strong defense. Let me give you one ample kpp he singled out my opposition to the b 1. Its a grossiti distortion. I support the stealth because its a modern advanced bomber that will take us into the next century. I 578 against the administration x but im for the midge jell men. I would be for strengthing nato. It reflects the realities of the world as i see him. I emm the only one here who put forth an Arms Control Program trying to scale arms down so we dont have to be s h expenditures. Enforcing the Nuclear Nonproliferation act to prevent the spread of Nuclear Weapons around the world involve the other Nuclear Weapon states in those negotiations and overall arms control. Gary mentions the carriers. He and i had a debate two years ago on that. He talks about the cheaper carrier as a smaller one. But it shows such a lack of fundamental understanding of how c power works, because you have to have a whole task force that goes with any carrier that gets out there. And the facts are youre trying to present air power at sea and combat aircraft at sea, it comes out to around 126 million per aircraft with the big carrier, including the task force expense as opposed to 249 for garys proposal. We argued this on the senate floor, debated it. I won that debate decisively about two years ago. Thats what i see as a lack of understanding when you dont have the experience in some of these areas to now exactly how these things function. I believe the charge was fundamental lakt of understanding. Mr. Hart jumped out of his chair when you said that. Everybody want to sneak in on gary. The thing about this argument, pro and con obviously the more that we talk in terms of engaging in real trade, the less we have these tensions. Reagan is vulnerable. And we keep talking in ways that i think kind of confuse the people. Hes cut breakfast prachs out for children. Hes cut back out on foot programs while he cuts away food from children, he is arguing about prayer, premeditated prayer. Heres a man that doesnt go to church arguing about prayer. Hes forgotten the structure of a pray. You dont pray for the food that just left. You pray for the food that youre about to receive. What we really should do is pray to remove the man thats removing the food. Hes vulnerable at the level of the misery index. I mean, people are hurting. They are more the people that are unemployed have fewer benefits and less food and less medical care. Lets talk about a strong defense. But our domestic tranquility is saving our nation from the inside out. Every gentleman on this platform knows that if we left fly just 10 of the Nuclear Weapons we have targeted on the soviet union, every single man, woman and child in the soviet union would die instantly. Why not a cut in this enormous escalation that the president has on the drawing board. Let me respond. As a former bomber pilot, you will agree that there are differences between strategic or Nuclear Weapons and conventional ones. I dont think think maintaining eif is threatening to russians. We can make moderate increases in training and pay scales. Why is jon glenn attacking me for all these cuts and youre saying you want more. Because john glenn is further off than you are. Last word on the subject. We have to go on. You point out very correctly jesse, or george, i guess it was, the comment about increase in nuclear. I disagree with the president that were behind in that area. What i do support very firmly is the idea of upgrading and making certain our conventional forces are adequate so we pray god never reach that Nuclear Threshold and have any temptation on either side to go to a nuclear warfare. We are now, gentlemen, going to change the subject. I know youve all thought about sleeping in the white house. Its 2 00 in the morning youre sound asleep and the phone rings. An airliner from czechoslovakia, a communist country, enters american air space on a course directly across from sac missile bases. It is headed for Colorado Springs and the north american air defense command. American fighters have done everything they can to stop it. They look in, the lights are on, its full of people. And there you are on the phone at 2 00 in the morning, what would you do . I would like to start with senator heart. If the people they looked in and saw had uniforms on, i would shoot the aircraft down. If they were civilians, i would just let it keep going. As we saw with the korean aircraft. You dont shoot down an aircraft that has a military potential unless that military potential is obvious. It seems you take every reasonable precaution to avoid the kind of crisis and the embarrassment and humiliation of the heart ache surrounding korean airlines. If in the judgment of president , this could be a potential attack, thats Something Else. What are the yods of your good question ever occurring . Do you really believe if the soviet union was after us they would fire up an old 707 and go putting across the air . I think its a wonderful hypothetical. Its ridiculous. Does anybody disagree . Theres such a lack of misunderstanding saying youre going to peek in. Thats what he said. Thats what he said. You dont go up peeking in the windows. One important element here, and that is, if we have an adequate Intelligent Service with some of the others on the platform have supported cutbacks on in the past. Ive wanted to expand our Intelligent Service. Then we know more about what the soviets are doing. If we had an adequate satellite system that tell where is that airliner came from, what information is or about what was loaded on that airplane, what was sent into the base in which it took off. Theres lot of information like that that goes into it. Its not just as simplistic as you make it. I think the answer to that question was fritzs finest hour in three weeks. Thank you for the impressivety of your response. With all due respect to you, i think its ridiculous, but what it points out as well as the korean jetliner incident fundamentalty is the necessity of Better Communications between washington and moscow. The president of the United States hasnt even talked for 60 seconds to the leader of the other superpower. Two of their leaders have died during the time president reagan was in Office Without ever meeting our president. If we had systematic regular talks between the president of the United States and his counterpart in the soviet union, its quite possible we would have avoided the korean jetliner incident and this hypothetical matter that you posed. If world war 30 comes, it will be because of a communications breakdown. Gentlemen, youre all democrats, which means you are the political heirs of Franklin Delano roosevelt. Half a century ago when he became president , the United States began to change. The federal government took over many of the responsibilities of the states and of the cities. Weve had half a century of continued federal involvement with peoples lives. And it seems to some of us, as though its grown much in those years. If one of your wins the election, there will beless federal involvement or will it be a return to the way things were before reagan . I think its essential that the president lead us with a strong federal government to solve those problems that are essential to our future. Number two, to have a strong new assertive american trade policy. This is the worst trade year in american history, all through georgia and alabama and florida. We need a renaissance of learning and education in science and training. If this next generation is going to be able to defend themselves and compete, they simply must have the support and finally, we need a form of justice. I mean standing up for st st and medicare. This country must be fair, and the history of america is that when a president leads us, towards fairness, it can be done. I made quite an issue out of leadership. I mean those who have come out of the political life and leadership the past decade. And thats because there is a strong antigovernment feeling out there. I fundamentally disagree with Ronald Reagan when he says he loves his country and yet he hates our government. I dont b hate our government. I think we ought to have leaders that ask people what they can do for their country, using the best instruments of our government. I think there is a fundamental difference between gofr nofr mondale and myself. We can meet the basic human needs and commitments of people in this country by restoring entrepreneurship. I think the dedication shouldnt just be jobs. Whats new about coming on from entrepreneurs. There are specific ways to do that. When i hear your new ideas, im reminded of that ad, wheres the beef . Wait a minute, hes going to tell you where the beef is. Fritz, if you would listen for just a minute, i think you could hear. No, you havent. One of the other differences, by the way, is if a president goes back into office and one of us must, i think to save this country, you can not go back. Wait a minute, wait a minute. I told you what i was going to do, get the deficits down, educate the next generation. Those arent special interest groups. I said im going to stand up for against special interest and im going to support Social Security and medicare. Whats wrong with that . I would reich to move on, mr. Jackson and mr. Glern. Government is a balancing wheel between big labor and big management. The government must enforce the laws. The voting rites act, for example, is not being enforced. Democrats are reluctant because we want to reconcile the interest of the bo wefl and the wot ston. You cant have more. Georgia 30 act, 18 years off the Voting Rights act, Supreme Court zero, 159 sheriffs, zero, the government must enforce the law and not equivocate in the face of local considerations. On the other hand, we keep focusing on what will the government do. The private economy is 3 million. Thats 700 billion tax break to corporations. They must be obligated to reinvest in this economy, retrain our work force, and export our jobs to slave labor markets abroad. We have 51 of the people at or below poverty level. My dad went to work on wpa. We had a lot of programs, but fha at that time, it helped a lot of people. We estimated just a few years ago. Communism happened with good solid democratic programs. We can be very proud of those programs. Now along with that, we went a little too far in some of those programs. And we have to correct those. And now youre talking about intrusion of government. I e. R. A. , he said he would lose that. He said that e. R. A. , he would use the power of the federal government to withhold projects no, i didnt. Yes, i dyou did, ill read io you if i have enough time here. You can read it on the next turn around. I will. Fine, but he said he would withhold federal projects. Thats an intrusion as far as im concerned. I think that is flat wrong. When youre going to intrude into peoples lives on that basis with federal project, hes had an industrial policy that said you want to make choices in credit and allocate toez things. And that intrudes the federal government into business. If you continue were going to take that out of your closing statement. We havent heard from George Mcgovern on the question of the role of federal government. I think theres two types of concentration of power we have to worry about. One is the danger of too much federal concentration and the other is too much corporate concentration of power. On the federal side to my surprise, president reagan has increased the percentage of gnp now being taken up by the federal government. The reason is the dramatic increase in military spending. He has cut nutrition, education, the environment and things like that. But those cuts are less than the increase in the Interest Rate on the federal debts since he took office. I think its a real call on all of us to see what we can do to strengthen our antitrust laws. Do you democrats now think that the private sector can pick up the slack in certain federal programs going to people . This is open now, you can all talk for a few minutes. First of all, i think that a private, healthy economy is indispensable to everything. If you dont have a growing, healthy economy with entrepreneurship and Small Businesses were not going to solve anything. The key here is to make certain that the prosperity and the entrepreneurship is found in minority communities as well. Theres a lot we can do through Small Business administration, tax incentives, to make certain that more black, hispanic, women and other minorities can participate in the fullness of the profit making. Thirdly through training we can make people who are left behind a part of this process. When i was with operation push, we began to challenge corporate america. When reagan cut down on aid, we began a trade. They gaurch tee a market of 5 Million Pounds of cucumbers per year. If they do that, they ought to get a tax incentive. If a corporation puts a Day Care Center at its plant which allows mothers to come to work, that should be worth a tax incentive. If a company gets a tax investment and then uses that money to reinvest in this economy and retrain our work force rather than closing plant s the use of tax incentive as leverage for urban development is to create abuse of tax incentives and leverage. Senator hart and after senator heart, i would warn you gentlemen, we have time for one more response on this before im afraid its going terribly quickly, i have to ask you to go into your closing statements. Ill be brief. In almost ten years in the senate, i cast 5,000 or 6,000 votes. Vice president mondale has pulled out about a dozen of those to attack me showing that im not for this and not for that. Ill give you one example. One of those was a vote on osha. Vice president mondale knows full well that i am absolutely as committed to a safe work place as he is. This illustrates a point in the difference. It was to exempt from certain paperwork requirements Small Businesses in this country who had ten or fewer employees and farmers who employed fewer than five people. It was that burdensome bureaucracy and paper work that drove the democrats out of office in the 70s. No uh, i think we can have a safe work place for people on farms and in vaktryes without driving Small Business people and family farmers off their land or out of their businesses. I saw that vote but ive never mentioned it. The one i talked about, where unlike senator nun and childs. You refused to vote a wind fall profits tax which would have Given Big Oil 250 billion. There you go again. Secondly, i talked about your 10 a barrel tax. That is the worst idea in this campaign. It was a Carter Mondale initiative. Oh, no. I had nothing to do with that. Its the worst idea. Carter is not for it. Nobody except you are for it and youre not talking about it anymore because its so bad. Half a Million People. Half a Million People lose their jobs. America will become the highest cost producing area in the country. Talk about intrusion and destruction of jobs and entrepreneurship in international trade. This is a disaster and i dont think you thought it through. Let me respond. Let me rerespond. Let me just finish my point. This was a bad idea. Im terribly worried. You have a choice, and the clock is inexrabble, having a chance what you want to say at the end or squeezing it there at the very end. Senator, could you just say it in 25 words or less . Could you it in 25 words or less. I was the only one of about 15 senators that had the courage to support this administration, and the second thing is, i proposed a windfall profit stack of 100 on old oil owned by the Big Oil Companies in this country and that goes beyond the cartermondale. This is a complete distortion of what he did. Can i have 25 seconds . It is not a distortion. [ all speak at once ] when we needed you, you were wrong. No, thats not wrong. Im going to ask you now if were going to get your reasoned closing statements. Well all take a breath. Im sorry, senator mcgovern, but weve got to do that. The this was preordained, but the first one who goes is senator hart. Mr. Chancellor, i have no idea how the primaries and caucuses are going to come out next tuesday or beyond. I obviously hope they will be successful. I hope so for several reasons. George mcgovern talked about the great leaders of our past, democratic and otherwise, and my vaults are as deeply rooted in those leaders and that past and those ideals as any person on this platform, indeed in this country. But its interesting that the leaders he mentioned represented Something Else than just ideals and principles. They represented change. When this country has had to change, it came to this party, for those who had a policy and a set of ideas and a vision for this countrys future. That is what this campaign is all about, and i think thats why people are responding to it all across this country. We cannot go back. To achieve the highest ideas, values and goals of this country, we must have new leadership, and a new approach and a fresh start for this country. Thank you. If we, in fact, have new leadership, that replaces old leadership, but basically going in the same direction, not sharing parity for farmers, not sharing with the woman, increasing the military budget, resisting a real commitment tos enforce the Voting Rights act, thats a new face on an old game. We need a new direction. Our party must be the party of conscience. Under reagan, there are five million more people who are poor, now 15 of our nation, it will be 41 million by the end of this year. We must commit to lift those votes that are stuck at the bottom. We must reduce the military budget, without reducing our military defense, use that money to, in fact, create a future for our children, that they might be able to lay bricks, and not throw them. If we give our children a chance, they will give our nation a chance. We will suffer, but suffering breeds character, and character breeds faith, we must pursue those values. I hope that since gary and fred have both objected to being called the frontrunner that theyll let me be the peacemaker and take that label with me back to boston when i go tonight. Franklin roosevelt once said that the presidency is preeminently a place of moral leadership. I think thats true, and i think it means the next president is going to have to seek, above all else, our salvation from nuclear anileation. But second only to that, we have to learn in this great country, to quit intervening in these third world revolutions, whether its el salvador, or nicaragua or lebanon, or wherever it is, in the name of fighting communism, weve embraced virtually every scoundrel around the world, who is willing to wave an anticommunist banner and i think the time has come for the United States to assert in foreign policy, not so much what we hate and fear, but what this great country is for. And that ought to be the goal of the next president. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chancellor. I do regret something george just brought up that we had not had more of an opportunity to talk about, foreign policy. Because i think thats so important. What happens around the world. Nuclear arms wise, as i mentioned earlier. But i do not agree with gary, this is a generation gap of some kind. We go ahead as a nation as we have in the past, when we have the best interest of all of our people, of the young, of the middle age, of the elderly, and concern for everyone in our society. The south has a unique opportunity to set that course next tuesday. A unique opportunity for leadership in the Democratic Party and for leadership for our nation. I see myself as the moderate, the only moderate left here. I dont believe in this politics of momentum that seems to be abroad. Politics of stampede. Whatever you want to call it. I hope the people of the south will slow down, athink about th issues on foreign policy, and the economy and education, then vote on what we can control. We can control the destiny in this country. We can be number one again. George mcgovern said he didnt want people to throw away their conscience. Id say dont throw away your common sense either. Your vote next week, ill give you a presidency you can be proud of once again. Thank you, senator. Mr. Mondale. Here in the south, and throughout our country, were about to participate in super tuesday. The most important sing question is whether the president you want is someone who will ensure our National Security and will work for peace. That takes someone who knows what hes doing. This may well now be a twoman race between myself and senator hart. Disagree with that. [ laughter ] if you look at the records, i think something is disclosed. A few days ago, senator hart said that if Persian Gulf Oil were interrupted, that the allies would be on their own, and they couldnt look to us for help. In my opinion, that is naive. All history teaches that we must stand together as an alliance and Work Together for the security of the western world. Sometime back he was asked whether cuba was a totalitaryian state, he said no. That is wrong. Its a communist dictatorship and a president must know the difference. Hes had a record on arms control which is weak, and we need a president who will push forward and provide the leadership that this country needs for our National Security and to achieve the peace. Well, i want to thank you all. Weve come to the end of this as i think the reverend jackson said, did you not just say a minute ago, suffering breeds discipline. No, suffering breeds character. And character you all have such terrific character. Because of the suffering you have gone through. We thank you for being with us today. The next league of women voters debate is going to take place in pittsburgh on april 5th. Were not supposed to take sides in this. I suppose it would be very nice if all five of you were to join the league of women voters there, but who can say. As you say, reverend jackson, suffering breeds character, and this is a business that does it. Thank you very much. [ applause ] during campaign 2016, cspan takes you on the road to the white house as we follow the candidates on cspan, cspan radio, and cspan. Org. Each week, leading up to the 2016 election, road to the white house rewind brings you coverage of president ialuracies. Next, a 1968 Campaign Film created for republican Richard Nixon, showing him meeting voters in wisconsin and New Hampshire. He would win primaries in both of the states on his way to securing the gop nomination, then defeated Hubert Humphrey and George Wallace in the general election, winning 32 states. This half hour film is courtesy of the Richard Nixon president ial library and museum. In an age of impersonal political campaigns, New Hampshire is one of the new places where people have a chance to meet the candidates as well as read about them. The New Hampshire republican president ial primary, the start of the 1968 campaign trail. From the beginning, the candidate who really has been seen and heard by the people of New Hampshire is Richard Nixon. How did you fellas youre about to accompany Richard Nixon on the first leg of his 1968 New Hampshire campaign. Youll be with the candidate, his family, and the nixon staff. Youll hear what Richard Nixon had to say and what people said to him. I heard all those tales about the woolies and everything. How are you . Im glad to find some New Hampshire people. Well, arnold, how did you get up here . Good to see you. How are the eagles going to do next year . Were going to keep fighting. Richard nixon has talked about a new vision of americas future. Hes said that 1968 is a