Candidates Address Issues

Qualifications

Question: The other day, you said that you can inspire this nation. Do you mean then Sen. Kerry cannot?

Edwards: No. What I mean is that somebody who comes from the same place that most Americans come from. I grew up the son of a millworker, in a family like most families in this country. I’ve seen the problems that people face every day in their lives.

Q: And now you’re saying Sen. Kerry doesn’t see that?

Edwards: I’m saying he comes from a different background. I mean, he’s a good man. He’s a good candidate. He’d make a good president. And I’d be the first to say that. But we come from different places, and we present different choices.

Kerry: ...I think John has a run a terrific campaign. He and I are friends, and I don’t take offense at that.

And I respect completely where John comes from and the story of his life. It’s an American story. But there are many other American stories, Larry. I’ve had experiences that John hasn’t had and others here haven’t had. And we all bring to the table our life....

Q: You’re saying you’re just different?

Kerry: Well, of course we’re different. But I think what’s important is, all my life, all my life, from the time that I fought in a war alongside many of the people who had a very different life experience from me -- I mean, the kids I fought with were kids out of the barrios of Los Angeles, and the kids from South-Central of Los Angeles, and from the South Side of Chicago and South Boston and a lot of other places, because they couldn’t get out of the draft. They didn’t know how to make those phone calls. They didn’t have the ability to have a choice.

And when I came back from Vietnam, I spent a lot of my years fighting for those people to be able to get ahead. And I’ve spent all my life doing that, and I intend to do that as president of the United States.

Q: Rev. Sharpton, why are you in this race?

Sharpton: Well, let me say this. First of all, I do not think that it is fair to say that there are two Americas. There are many Americas. Our only problem in America is not just class. Many of us have problems that have succumbed to class barriers but still have the race barriers, or the barriers of language if you are Latino, or the barriers of sexual discrimination if you are, one, a woman or gay and lesbian.

So I think it’s very simplistic to just say that it’s two Americas, one for the wealthy, one for the poor.

Earl Graves, who supports my campaign, very wealthy man, but still faces discrimination. Gays and lesbians, they may make a lot of money, they still face discrimination. Latinos that have problems because of language discrimination. So I don’t think that it’s as simple as class....

Q: Congressman Kucinich, why are you here?

Kucinich: I’m here to provide the people of this country with a real choice in this election. Some of the differences that are here are stylistic. I’m offering some substantive change in this country.

Q: But logically, it appears like you’re up against it. Why stay in?

Kucinich: Well, because I’m the voice for getting out of Iraq, for universal single-payer healthcare, for getting out of NAFTA and the WTO ... for having our children go to college tuition-free, for saving Social Security from privatization....

Q: You’re here to make statements then?

Kucinich: Oh, no, no. I’m here to be the next president of the United States....

*

Social issues

Q: Sen. Kerry ... I wanted to ask you, is this all that Americans have to look forward to: perpetually polarized administrations, loved by half of the country and loathed by the other half?

Kerry: ... I don’t think John or any of us here are offering a polarizing campaign. What I’m proud of is that in Iowa, in New Hampshire, in Missouri, all the states that followed, I’ve offered a positive vision of what we ought to be doing in America.... The country is polarized because we have a president who is polarizing. I mean, look at what he did the other day with a constitutional amendment. He’s trying to divide America.

Q: You say you oppose gay marriage. You also oppose the ... federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Do you think Georgia and Ohio, or any other state, should have to recognize a gay marriage performed in California or Massachusetts? And if not, why did you vote against the Defense of Marriage Act, designed to prevent that, in 1996?

Kerry: I said very clearly -- I could not have been more clear on the floor of the United States Senate. My speech starts out expressing my personal opinion that ... I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

But notwithstanding that belief, there was no issue in front of the country when that was put before the United States Senate. And I went to the floor of the Senate and said ... “I will not take part in gay bashing on the floor of the United States Senate. I will not allow the Senate to be used for that kind of rhetoric.”

... For 200 years, we have left marriage up to the states. There is no showing whatsoever today that any state in the country, including my own -- which is now dealing with its own constitutional amendment -- is incapable of dealing with what they would like to do.

Q: Sen. Edwards, you also oppose gay marriage?

Edwards: Here is my belief. I believe that this is an issue that ought to be decided in the states. I think the federal government should honor whatever decision is made by the states.

... I would not support the Defense of Marriage Act today, if there were a vote today.... The Defense of Marriage Act specifically said that the federal government is not required to recognize gay marriage even if a state chooses to do so. I disagree with that. I think states should be allowed to make that decision. And the federal government shouldn’t do it.

Sharpton: This is an issue of human rights. And I think it is dangerous to give states the right to deal with human rights questions. That’s how we ended up with slavery and segregation going forward a long time.

Kucinich: There’s a question of civil marriage, and there’s a question of marriage as performed by the church. We’re talking about civil law here.... What we have here is an example of what happens when you have a president who looks at the world with polarized thinking, of us versus them.

The same kind of thinking that led to a war in Iraq, an unnecessary war, is leading to an unnecessary cultural war here, because it should be widely assumed by all Americans that equal protection of the law ought to made available, regardless of race, color, creed or sexual orientation.

Q: Sen. Edwards ... can you tell people in the South that values issues are secondary and that we should be talking about healthcare and the economy, education? Or do you have to convince them that, whether the issue is the death penalty or gay marriage or whatever, that you do share their values?

Edwards: Of course you’ve got to do both. You don’t get to tell people what to think in any part of the country. You don’t get to say to voters, “This is what you can consider and this is what you should not consider.” They’re going to consider everything.

Now, it is absolutely true that the economy is a huge issue. I think jobs is actually the most important component of that. Healthcare is a huge issue. What’s happening overseas and our image around the world is a huge issue. No doubt about any of that.

But people are going to consider these other things. And for us to assume that that’s not true is just a fantasy. It’s not true. We need a candidate at the top of this ticket who can connect with voters everywhere in America. And if we don’t have that, we’re going to be in trouble.

Q: The candidates were asked their stands on capital punishment.

Kerry: ... We have 111 people who have been now released from death row -- death row, let alone the rest of the prison system -- because of DNA evidence that showed they didn’t commit the crime of which they were convicted.

Now, our system has made mistakes, and it’s been applied in a way that I think is wrong. Secondly, I don’t believe that, in the end, you advance the, sort of, level of your justice and the system of your civility as a nation -- and many other nations in the world, most of the other nations in the world, have adopted that idea, that the state should not engage in killing.

Edwards: ... I think there are some crimes -- those men who dragged James Byrd behind that truck in Texas -- they deserve the death penalty. And I think there are some crimes that deserve the ultimate punishment.

*

Campaign money

Q: Both [Edwards and Kerry] have raised millions of dollars in special interests -- from special-interest people. How, then, would you say they’re able to counter Ralph Nader’s argument that both parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, are beholden to what he calls “corporate paymasters”?

Sharpton: ...I think that in terms of Ralph Nader, the best way to answer Ralph Nader is how we’ve done tonight. We’re all onstage. Many of us have said what Nader said in 2000; some of it had validity. But all of that is being said now in the primaries. There’s nothing that I know of that Nader is saying that Kucinich and I are not saying in the primaries. So what does he need to say it in November for if it’s being debated now?

Kerry: ... I think the question was asked about the influence of money in the Democratic Party about John and myself, and I’d really like to make a statement about that.

I teamed up with Paul Wellstone, and we fought and created the most far-reaching campaign finance reform law in the history of this country, called Clean Money, Clean Elections. It would have gotten the money out of politics....

The only people who’ve contributed to me are, yes, some people who lobby. The total amount, in lifetime, amounts to about 1% of all the money that I’ve ever raised.

But what’s important is I’ve stood up for the important fights over the course of time, and so has John Edwards. We both stand up and fight -- he fought for the patients’ bill of rights. I fought against the clean water, clean air destruction by [former House Speaker Newt] Gingrich. I led the fight to stop the drilling in the Arctic [National] Wildlife Refuge against big oil companies.

Q: Do you view Sen. Kerry as part of the solution or part of the problem in the way Washington works?

Edwards: I think we have to change what’s happening there. And Washington lobbyists who -- which you just asked about -- Sen. Kerry made this point about himself. I’ve never taken money from a special interest PAC, myself. But I also don’t take any money, not a dime, from Washington lobbyists.

And I think we have to go further than that. I think we ought to ban the contribution of Washington lobbyists. Those people shouldn’t be able to make contributions to the very people that they’re lobbying....

Q: Is there a difference in your commitment to this cause and what you see from Sen. Kerry, based on both what he’s said and what he’s done?

Edwards: Yes. The answer is there are two differences. I commend Sen. Kerry for the work he’s done on public financing of political campaigns, which I know he believes in deeply. So do I. That’s the ultimate solution for this.

But there are two differences. One is, if we’re going to change the way Washington operates, my belief is we need somebody who comes from outside that system. That’s No. 1.

No. 2, I also think we need to change the influence of Washington lobbyists. And that is a distinction. It’s an important distinction, because I think these Washington lobbyists have entirely too much influence on what happens every day.

The best example is this recent prescription drug Medicare reform bill, you know, where everything that could’ve been done to bring down the cost of prescription drugs for the American people, the drug companies and their lobbyists were against, so it all came out....

*

The Iraq War

Q: Sen. Edwards and Sen. Kerry, you both try to portray yourself as different types of people in Washington. But you both voted for the Iraq resolution, which basically gave the president power to use any means that he deemed necessary and appropriate, including military force, to respond to the perceived threat of Saddam Hussein. How can you criticize the president on his Iraq policy when both of you handed him a blank check to do whatever he wanted?

Edwards: Well, first of all, I did what I did after giving an awful lot of thought and study to it. I was worried about it. All of us were. I took this responsibility very seriously. I also said, at the time that the resolution was voted on, that it was critical that, when we reached this stage, that this not be done by America alone, that it not be an American occupation, that it not be an American operation.... This is not internationalized. I mean, we have some help from the British, but for the most part, it’s America doing it alone, which I believe is an enormous mistake.

... We voted on a resolution. It is for the president of the United States to determine how to conduct the war. That’s his responsibility.... What this comes down to is this president has failed in his responsibility. It’s a completely legitimate criticism. Neither of us would’ve conducted this operation the way he conducted it.

Kerry: Let me make it very clear: We did not give the president any authority that the president of the United States didn’t have. Did we ratify what he was doing? Yes.

But Clinton went to Haiti without the Congress. Clinton went to Kosovo without the Congress. And the fact is, the president was determined to go, evidently. But we changed the dynamics by getting him to agree to go to the United Nations and to make a set of promises to the nation.

Promise No. 1: He would build a true global international coalition. No. 2: he would honor the U.N. inspection process. And No. 3 -- and this is most important -- it’s important to me and to any of us who served in war: He said he would go to war as a last resort. He broke every single one of those promises.

*

Domestic issues

Q: About one in five Californians lack health insurance, one of the highest ratios in the country. In the last few weeks, Sen. Kerry, Sen. Edwards has been saying your healthcare plan is too expensive, it’s unaffordable, it’s unrealistic. Does his plan cover enough people? Is it ambitious enough?

Kerry: No. Let me just say that I think John has an interesting approach, and parts of it could be parts of a larger approach. But here’s what I would do. I want to give the middle class in America a tax break, and I want to make companies more competitive.

So my program is more ambitious, because what I do is I roll back George Bush’s tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, and I take part of that money and I create a federal fund that takes all the catastrophic cases in America out of the private system, which means, effectively, every individual in every business in America will be capped at $50,000 of risk.

That will provide each American who has healthcare today with a $1,000 minimum reduction in their premium. That’s cash in the pocket. That’s a tax break. And it’ll make American companies more competitive.

Q: Sen. Edwards, that is one of the major differences between your plan. Is that idea affordable? Do you think the federal government can take on the obligation of paying out three-quarters of the cost of all catastrophic healthcare claims?

Edwards: Well, I think the issue becomes this: Whether you believe healthcare is an isolated problem -- it’s a very serious problem for the American people -- or whether you think it’s part of a bigger frame that it needs to fit in.

I, myself, believe that there are two major problems in the economy in America today. One is 35 million Americans who live in poverty. When we lift Americans out of poverty, which I believe is a moral responsibility -- and I’ve laid out new ideas about how we deal with that problem -- we actually strengthen the economy because we put them in the middle class, which is the engine of this economy.

We also have a struggling middle class, an extraordinarily struggling middle class. Over the last 20 years, we’ve had a sea change. Twenty years ago, most of our families were saving money, they had financial security; it’s all changed. Now they’re saving nothing. In fact, they’re going into debt.

And that means if one thing goes wrong -- if they have a healthcare problem, which is what we’re discussing now, if they have a financial problem or a layoff -- they go right off the cliff.

My view is that healthcare is a very important component of this problem. But it’s not the only component. You know, it’s why I mandate healthcare for all kids and cover the most vulnerable adults and take on healthcare costs in a very serious way.

Sharpton: ... We need to talk about more of an urban agenda tonight. We’re dealing on Super Tuesday with urban areas where we have not really dealt with in these early primaries. What’s going on with our child care? What is going on with foster care?

What is going on with after-school programs?

What is going on with police conduct? We’ve had problems in Ohio, in Cincinnati, in L.A., Donovan Jackson, Timothy Stansbury in New York.

I want to know our positions on what we’re going to do in the urban centers.

That’s why I’m going to be in Boston with delegates, because I don’t want people just telling me who looks nice. I want us to have an America that treats everybody right.

*

Trade

Q: Sen. Kerry, you supported free trade. Isn’t the loss of good-paying jobs to those who can do it faster and cheaper an unavoidable consequence of open international markets that you support?

Kerry: The answer is not at all. And, yes, some of those jobs are going to go overseas and I have been very honest with workers about it.

I mean, I stood in a UAW hall in Dayton the other day and a fellow asked me -- the shop steward said, “Can you promise me you’re going to stop all the jobs from being outsourced?” I said, “No, I can’t promise that.” What I can promise you is, first of all, there is a differential between the different kinds of jobs. Some jobs we can’t compete with. I understand that. But most jobs we can.

And if we provide a lower cost of healthcare in America, a lot of companies will not feel compelled to leave, No. 1....

This administration does nothing.

I will fight for labor and environment standards in our trade agreements, and we’ll enforce them. And it’s that simple

Q: You said you were critical of NAFTA. Obviously, you were not here to cast a vote on it. If you became president, what would you do about it? Would you seek to change it? And how would you seek to change it?

Edwards: I would use, for example, the Free Trade of the Americas agreement as a vehicle for renegotiating NAFTA. I don’t -- Dennis and I don’t agree about this. He wants to cancel NAFTA.

Sharpton: I want to cancel it.

Edwards: I’m not for that. I don’t think Sen. Kerry is for that either. But I think we do need to renegotiate it.

And the problem with NAFTA is these side agreements don’t work. You have to put these labor/environmental protections in the text of the agreement in order for it -- in order for the.... .

Q: Will that be enough?

Sharpton: No, I don’t think so. But see, I think that’s why we have to have a convention and delegates have to be able -- we have to keep these guys honest.... We need to cancel NAFTA unequivocally. We need to have standards that we would not deal with nations that would put laborers in those kinds of situations.

Kucinich: ... Throughout this campaign I have visited city after city where I’ve seen grass growing in parking lots where they used to make steel, they used to make cars, they used to make ships. And let me tell you something: NAFTA and the WTO must be canceled. Let me tell you why. The WTO, for example, it doesn’t permit any alterations....

Now, the World Trade Organization, as long as we belong to it, will not let us protect the jobs. This is the reason why we have outsourcing going on right now. We can’t tax it. We can’t put tariffs on it.

And that’s why I say, in order to protect jobs in this country and to be able to create a enforceable structure for trade, we need to get out of NAFTA, get out of the WTO, stop the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas, stop the Central American Free Trade....

*

Immigration

Q: Since immigration is considered a net plus for the country, why shouldn’t the federal government share in the cost of immigration for California and for New York and for the other states that bear those costs?

Kerry: Well, we do share, in some cases, for obviously Medicaid, and we share with respect to some of the health reimbursements that take place in the system. But not enough, and I understand that.

... We need immigration reform in this country. I think everybody understands that. But we ought to be paying for a healthcare plan that helps to cover -- if we funded education, the president kept the promise of No Child Left Behind, if we fully funded Title I, if we funded Head Start, if we did the things that the federal government has promised to do, a mandate on special needs education, and we’re not funding it.

When I’m president, we are going to fully fund special needs education, and that will come out of the closing of those loopholes and the rollback of the tax cuts.

Q: But that does not address the question of the states bearing the cost for illegal -- particularly illegal immigration.

Kerry: Look, one of the things we need to do is obviously have a level of immigration reform that’s not a patchwork, not a Band-Aid. The president’s plan is really a plan to exploit workers in America. It’s not a real immigration reform plan.

What I want to do is have a full immigration reform plan that involves earned legalization, involves the technology and support we need on the border, work with [Mexico’s] President [Vicente] Fox in order to have a legitimate guest-worker program. And finally, we need to crack down on those people in America who hire people illegally and exploit workers in the United States.

Edwards: I grew up in a small, rural community in North Carolina that’s now half Latino. And the families who came to my hometown came there for the same reason my family came there, because they wanted to build a better life for their kids and their families. They are making an enormous contribution to that small town and that community.

And the right thing to do for these families who are working hard, being responsible, raising their kids -- it’s really a pretty basic thing -- the right thing to do is to let them become American citizens, to have the right to earn citizenship. It’s just that simple.

*

Running mates

Q: As you’ve listened to the differences between each other tonight and through these dozen or so earlier debates, have you heard anything that either one has said that would make it impossible for you to run together as a ticket if it came to that?

Edwards: I think an Edwards-Kerry ticket would be powerful. And that’s the ticket that I think we should have.

Kerry: I want to thank him for the consideration. I appreciate it.... I take nothing for granted in this effort. I’m campaigning in every state. I’m working as hard as I can. And when I win the nomination, if I do, then I’ll sit down and think about who I ought to run with.

Q: Al, do you expect to speak at the convention?

Sharpton: I expect to accept my nomination.

For the complete transcript of the Democratic presidential debate and video clips of key answers and exchanges, go to latimes.com/debate.