YTread Logo
YTread Logo

TNC:172 Kennedy-Nixon First Presidential Debate, 1960

May 29, 2021
Good evening, United States radio and television stations and their affiliated stations are proud to provide facilities for a discussion of issues in the current political campaign by the two leading

presidential

candidates. Candidates need no introduction. Republican Vice Presidential candidate Richard M. Nixon and Democratic candidate Senator John F. Kennedy, in accordance with rules established by the candidates themselves, each man will make an opening statement approximately eight minutes in length and a closing statement approximately three minutes in length. among the candidates will answer or comment on the answers to the questions. put by a correspondence panel in this the

first

discussion in a series of four joint appearances, it has been agreed that the topic will be restricted to internal or domestic American affairs and now for Senator John F Kennedy Nixon's

first

opening statement in the election of 1860 abraham lincoln said the question was whether this nation could exist without slaves or half free in the elections of

1960

and with the world around us the question is whether the world will exist half slave or half free if it moves in the direction of freedom in the direction of the path we are taking or whether it will move in the direction of slavery, I think will largely depend on what we do here in the United States, ready to build on the kind of strength that we maintain.
tnc 172 kennedy nixon first presidential debate 1960
We will discuss internal issues tonight, but I would not like that to have any implications, since this does not directly involve our struggle with Mr. Khrushchev for survival. Mr. Khrushchev is in New York and maintains the communist offensive throughout the world due to productive power. of the soviet union itself the chinese communists have always had a large population but now they are important and dangerous because they are organizing a great effort within their own country the type of country we have here the type of society we have the type of force we have build in the united states will be the defense of freedom if we do well here if we fulfill our obligations if we move forward then I believe freedom will be secure around the world if we fail then freedom fails therefore I believe the question before the American people is: Are we doing everything we can?
tnc 172 kennedy nixon first presidential debate 1960

More Interesting Facts About,

tnc 172 kennedy nixon first presidential debate 1960...

Are we as strong as we should be? Are we as strong as we should be? If we are going to maintain our independence and if we are going to maintain and extend our hand. of friendship to those who come to us for help to those who come to us to survive I must make it very clear that I do not believe we are doing enough and that I am not satisfied as an American with the progress we are making this is a great country but I believe which could be a bigger country and this is a powerful country but I think it could be a more powerful country I'm not satisfied with having 50 of our steel mill capacity unused I'm not satisfied when the United States last year had the lowest rate of economic growth of any major industrialized society in the world because economic growth means strength and vitality, it means we can sustain our defenses, it means we can meet our commitments abroad.
tnc 172 kennedy nixon first presidential debate 1960
I'm not satisfied when we have over nine billion dollars worth of food, some of it rotting even though there is a hungry world and even though four million Americans weigh in each month to receive a government food package that costs a average five cents a day per person I saw. Cases in West Virginia here in the United States where children took home part of their school lunch to feed their families because I don't think we are fulfilling our obligations to these Americans. I am not satisfied when the Soviet Union is changing. We produce twice as many scientists and engineers as we do.
tnc 172 kennedy nixon first presidential debate 1960
I am not satisfied when many of our teachers are underpaid or when our children go to school on part-time shifts. I think we should have an education system that is second to none. I am not satisfied. When I see men like Jimmy. Hoffa in charge of the largest union in the still free United States, I am not satisfied when we fail to develop the natural resources of the United States to the fullest here in the United States that developed the Tennessee Valley. and who built the great coulee on the other dams in the northwestern United States at the current rate of hydroelectric production and that is the hallmark of an industrialized society the soviet union by 1975 will produce more energy than us these are all things that I believe that in this country that can strengthen our society or it can mean that it stays still.
I am not satisfied until every American enjoys the full constitutional rights of him if a black baby is born, and this also applies to Puerto Ricans and Mexicans in some of our countries. cities has about half the chance of finishing high school that a white baby has about one-third the chance of finishing college that a white student has about one-third the chance of being a professional man about half the chance of owning a home , is approximately four times more likely to be unemployed in his lifetime than the white baby. I think we can do better. I don't want any American's talents to be wasted, I know that.
There are those who say we want to turn everything over to the government. I don't want it at all. I want individuals to fulfill their responsibilities and I want states to fulfill their responsibilities. But I think there is also a national responsibility. The argument has been used against every piece of legislation. social in the last 25 years the people of the united states individually could not have developed the tennessee valley collectively they could have a cotton producer in georgia or a peanut producer or a dairy producer in wisconsin or minnesota, cannot protect themselves against forces of supply and demand in the market, but working together on effective government programs can do it. 17 million Americans living over 65 with an average Social Security check of about 78 per month are not able to support themselves individually. but they can be supported through the social security system.
I don't believe in big government, but I do believe in effective government action and I think that's the only way America is going to maintain its freedom, the only way we're going. To move forward I think we can do a better job I think we are going to have to do a better job if we are to fulfill the responsibilities that time and events have imposed on us we cannot leave the job to anyone else if the United States fails then the entire cause of freedom fails and I think it depends largely on what we do here in this country the reason why franklin roosevelt was a good neighbor in latin america was because he was a good neighbor in the united states because they felt that american society was becoming was moving again.
I want us to recover that image. I want people in Latin America, Africa and Asia to start looking at the United States to see how we are doing things and wonder who the president of the United States is. do and not look at kusha or look at the Chinese communists that is the obligation of our generation in 1933 franklin roosevelt said at his inauguration that this generation of Americans has a date with destiny I think our generation of Americans has the same quote the question Now, can freedom be maintained under the severest attack it has ever known?
I think it can be done and I think that in the final analysis it depends on what we do here. I think it's time for America to start moving again and now the Vice President's opening statement. president richard m

nixon

smith senator

kennedy

the things that senator

kennedy

has said that many of us can agree with there is no doubt that we cannot discuss our internal affairs in the united states without recognizing that they have an enormous influence on our position international. There is no doubt that this nation cannot stand still because we are in a deadly competition, a competition not only with the Kremlin's men but also with P King's men.
We are ahead in this race as Senator Kennedy, I think that is implied, but when we are in a race, the only way to stay ahead is to keep going and I completely subscribe to the spirit that Senator Kennedy has expressed tonight, the spirit that The United States must move forward, where then do we disagree? I think we disagree on the implications of his comments tonight and on the statements that he has made on many occasions during his campaign that the United States has stood still, we heard tonight, for example, the statement made that our growth in domestic products last year was the lowest of any industrial nation.
In the world now last year, of course, was 1958, which turned out to be a year of recession, but when we look at the growth of GNP this year, a year of recovery, we find that it is six and nine tenths of a percent and one of the highest in the world today. More on that later, looking at the issue of how the United States should move forward and where it is moving. I think it's good that we follow the advice of a very famous activist. Let's look at the record: America stands still. Is it true that this administration that Senator Kennedy has accused has been an administration of retreat, of defeat, of stagnation?
Is it true that when it comes to this country in the field of electric power, in all the fields that he has mentioned we have not been making good progress, we have a comparison we can make: we have the record of the Truman administration of seven years and a half and the seven and a half years of the Eisenhower administration when we compare these two records in the areas that Senator Kennedy has discussed tonight, I think we find that the United States has been moving forward, take the schools, we have built more schools in these last seven and a half years than those we built in the previous seven and a half, in fact, in the previous 20 years, let's take hydroelectric energy. energy, we have developed more hydroelectric energy in these seven and a half years than was developed in any previous administration in history.
Let's take hospitals, we find that in this administration more have been built than in the previous administration. The same thing happens with roads. Let's put in terms that we can all understand, we often hear about the gross national product and in that sense, I can say that when we compare the growth in this administration with that of the previous administration, there was a total growth of 11 percent in seven years in this administration There has been a total growth of 19 percent in seven years, which shows that there has been more growth in this administration than its predecessors, but let's not put it there, let's put it in terms of the average family, what has happened to it? that their salaries have increased five times more in the Eisenhower administration than in the Truman administration.
What about the prices you pay? We find that the prices you pay rose five times more in the Truman administration than in the Eisenhower administration. administration what is the net result of this? This means that median household income increased 15 percent in the Eisenhower years compared to two percent in the Truman year. Now this is not stopped, but as good as this record is, I must emphasize that it is not enough. A record is never something to build on, it is something to build on and by building on this record, I believe we have the secret to progress, we know the path to progress and I believe that, first of all, our own record shows We know the way, senator.
Kennedy has suggested that he thinks he knows how I respect the sincerity with him that he makes that suggestion but, on the other hand, when we look at the various programs that he offers, they don't appear to be new, they appear to be simply retreads of Truman administration programs. that preceded it and would suggest that during the course of the evening you could indicate those areas in which your programs are new and where they will mean more progress than we have had. What type of programs are we? For programs that expand educational opportunities that provide all Americans with equal educational opportunities for all the things that are needed and dear to the hearts of our people, we are for programs that also ensure that our health care for the age This is handled much better than right now.
Let me point out that Senator Kennedy and I do not disagree on the objective. We both want to help older people. We want to make sure they have proper medical care. Be careful, the question is the means, I believe that the means that I defend will achieve that objective better than the means that he defended. He could give better examples, but whatever, whether it's housing, health, healthcare, or schools. or the development of electric power, we have programs that we believe will advance America and take advantage of the wonderful historythat we have achieved during these last seven and a half years.
When we look at these programs, may I suggest that when evaluating them? We often tend to say that the test of a program is how much you spend. I will admit that in all the areas I touched on, Senator Kennedy would make this federal government spend more than I would spend. The cost of a democratic platform is a minimum of 13 and 2 10 billion dollars a year more than we are currently spending to a maximum of 18 billion dollars a year more than we are currently spending. The Republican platform will also cost more. It will cost a minimum of four billion dollars a year plus a maximum of four or nine-tenths billion dollars a year more than we are currently spending.
Does this mean that your program is better than ours at all because it is not a question ? How much the federal government spends is not a question of which government does more, but of which administration does the right thing, and in our case I believe our programs will stimulate the creative energies of 180 million free Americans. The program believes that Senator Kennedy's defenders will have a tendency to stifle that creative energy. In other words, I believe his program would lead to stagnation of the driving force we need in this country to achieve progress. The last point I would like to raise is the following.
Senator Kennedy has suggested in his speeches that we lack compassion for the poor, the old, and the other unfortunate. Let us understand throughout this campaign that his motives and mine are sincere. I know what it means to be poor. I know what it means to be poor. See people who are unemployed. I know Senator Kennedy feels these issues as deeply as I do, but our disagreement is not about goals for America, but only about the means to achieve those goals. Thank you, Mr. Nixon, who completes the opening statements and now the candidates. will answer questions or comment on each other's responses to questions posed by network correspondence the correspondence I am sandra van ocker nbc news I am charles warren mutual news I am stuart novin cbs news bob fleming abc news senator kennedy's first question from mr fleming senator the vice president in his campaign has said that you are naive and at times immature he has raised the question of leadership on this issue why do you think people should vote for you instead of the vice president the vice president and me?
We came to Congress together in 1946. We both served on the labor committee. I've been there for 14 years, the same length of time as him, so our experience in government is comparable. Secondly, I think the question is what programs are we on? I defend what the history of the party we lead is. I come from the Democratic party that in this century has produced Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and that supported and sustained these programs that I have discussed tonight. Mr. Nixon leaves the Republican Party. party was nominated by him and it is the fact that for most of these last 25 years the Republican leadership has opposed federal aid for education, health care for the development of the Tennessee Valley, the development of our resources Naturally, I believe that Mr.
Nixon is an effective candidate. leader of his party I hope you will grant me the same the question before us is what point of view and what party do we want to leave the United States Mr. Nixon would you like to comment on that statement? I don't have coverage for the next question Mr. Nobody, Mr. Vice President, his campaign emphasizes the value of his eight years of experience. The question arises as to whether that experience was as an observer, as a participant, or as an initiator of policy formulation. Could you please tell us specifically what important proposals he has?
It would be quite difficult to cover them in Ayton in two and a half minutes over the last eight years and which have been adopted by the administration. I would suggest that these proposals be mentioned first after each of my trips abroad. I have made recommendations that have been adopted by the administration. adopted, for example, after my first trip abroad, I strongly recommended that we increase our exchange programs, especially regarding the people exchange of leaders in the labor field and in the information field after my trip to South America, I recommended that an Inter-American lending agency be created that the South American nations would like much more than a land to participate in the lending agencies that treated all countries in the world equally.
I have made other recommendations after each of the other trips, for example after During my trip abroad, to Hungary, I made some recommendations regarding the situation of Hungarian refugees that were adopted not only by the president, but some of They were signed into law by Congress within the administration as chairman of the

presidential

committee on price stability and the economy. growth I have had the opportunity to make recommendations that have been adopted within the administration and that I believe have been reasonably effective. I know that Senator Kennedy suggested yesterday in a speech in Cleveland that that committee had not been particularly effective.
I would just suggest that while I don't take credit for it, I wouldn't presume that since that committee was formed, the price line has held up very well within the United States, well, I would say in the latter and that's what I found something unsatisfactory about the figures uh Mr. Nixon that you used in your previous speech when you talked about the Truman administration, you Mr. Truman came to power in 1944 and at the end of the war and the difficulties that the United States faced during that transition period of 1946 when price controls were lifted, so it's quite difficult to use a general figure that takes those seven and a half years and compares them to the last eight years.
I would rather take the overall percentage record of the last 20 years of the Democrats and the eight years of the Republicans to show an overall period of growth with respect to price stability. I am not aware of that committee having produced recommendations that were certainly ever before Congress from the standpoint of legislation with respect to price controls with respect to the Union Student Exchange I am chairman of the subcommittee on Africa and I believe that One of the most unfortunate phases of our policy toward that country was the minuscule number of exchanges we had. I think we also did it in Latin America. present a student program for the Congo of over 300, which was more than the federal government had for all of Africa the year before, so I don't think we will have moved forward in at least those two areas with enough vigor next Question to Senator Kennedy from Mr.
Warren. Senator Kennedy during his brief speech a few minutes ago mentioned agricultural surpluses. I would like to ask this. It is a fact. I think presidential candidates traditionally make promises to farmers. Many people. I don't think so. I understand why the government pays farmers for not producing certain crops or pays farmers if they overproduce. Now let me ask you, sir, why the farmer cannot operate like the businessman who operates a factory if a car company overproduces a certain model of car. Sam doesn't intervene and buy the surplus, why this constant courting of the farmer? Because I believe that if the federal government exited the program and withdrew its support, then I believe that the economic chaos that the farmer creates would have been completed. in the spring and they harvest in the fall there are hundreds of thousands of them they really can't control their market very well they bring in their crops or their livestock in many of them almost at the same time they only have a few buyers who buy their milk or their pigs a few large companies in many cases and therefore the farmer is not in a position to negotiate very effectively in the market.
I think the experience of the 1920s has shown what a free market could do to agriculture. and if the agricultural economy collapses then the economy of the rest of the united states will sooner or later collapse farmers are the number one market for the united states automobile industry the automobile industry is the number one market for steel so if the farmer's economy If the economy continues to decline as sharply as it has in recent years, then I think there would be a recession in the rest of the country, so I think there is a good case for government intervention.
Secondly, my objection to the current agricultural policy is that there are no effective controls to better balance supply and demand the drop in the support price to limit production does not work and now we have the largest surpluses worth nine billion of dollars we have had a greater tax burden from the treasury for the farmer in recent years with the lowest agricultural income in many years, I believe that this agricultural policy has failed and, in my opinion, the only policy that will work will be that the supply and The effective claims are invalid and that can only be achieved through government action.
Therefore, we suggest that in those commodities that are supported, the federal government, after support from farmers, try to balance supply and demand, try to effective controls on production because we will not have that five or six percent surplus that breaks the price. fifteen or twenty percent i think mr benson's program has failed and i must say that after reading the vice president's speech to the farmers while he read mine, i don't think it's much different from mr. benson's, i don't think he provides a program effective government controls I believe support prices are tied to the average market price for the past three years, which was Mr.
Benson's theory. So I don't think this is a big enough gap with the past to give us any hope of success in the future, Mr. Nixon. comment, of course, I disagree with Senator Kennedy and as to his suggestion about what should be done with three in the farm program, he has suggested that what we need is to move in the direction of more government controls, a suggestion that It also means raising the prices consumers pay for products and imposing controls on farmers' acreage even much more than they have today. I think this is the wrong direction.
I don't think this has worked in the past. I do not think it works. work in the future the program that I have advocated departs from the current program that we have in this regard and recognizes that the government has the responsibility to get the farmer out of the problem he is currently in because the government got him into it. and that is the fundamental reason why we cannot let the farmer go alone at this time. The farmer produced these surpluses because the government asked him to do so through legislation during the war. Now that we have these surpluses, it is our responsibility to compensate the farmer. during that period we get rid of the surplus farmer until we recover the farmers' surplus, however, we should have a program like the one I announced that will ensure that agricultural income is maintained, but I would propose maintaining that income not through a type of program that senator kennedy has suggested that would raise prices but would compensate the farmer by paying him in kind for surplus produce next question to vice president

nixon

for mr van oaker uh mr vice president from the executive leadership question is a campaign issue very important.
I would like to follow up on Mr. Noven's question now. Republican campaign slogans are seen on posters in every country. Who said last week that "experience is what counts." That's because of a photo of you, sir, implying that "I've had more experience making government executive decisions than your opponent now, at his August 24 press conference, President Eisenhower was asked to give an example of an important idea of ​​his that he adopted. His response was, and I'll quote him if I may, one week I might think of one that I don't remember now, which was a month ago, sir, and the president hasn't mentioned the subject since then. and I'm wondering, sir, if you can clarify which is the correct version, the one released by the Republican campaign leaders or the one by President Eisenhower, well, I would suggest to Mr.
Van Oaker that, if you know the president, it was probably a comment I would also suggest that, as far as your statement goes, I think it would be inappropriate for the president of the United States to reveal instances in which members of his official family had made recommendations to him as I have made to him. over the years, which he has accepted or rejected, the president has always and very appropriately maintained them so that he has the right to Get whatever advice he wants from his Cabinet and his other advisors without revealing it to anyone, including in fact Congress .
Now I can only say this over the years that I have been on the National Security Council. I have been inThe gabinet. I have met with legislative leaders. I have met with the president when he made the big decisions regarding Lebanon. Kimoy Matsu. Other issues. The president has asked me for advice. Sometimes I have given it to him. Sometimes my advice has been followed. Sometimes not. I do not do it. I say I have made the decision and I would say that no president should allow anyone else to make the important decision. The president alone makes the decision.
All his advisors do is advise him when he requests it as to what experience counts. and if that's experience that counts, it's not for me to say, I can only say that my experience is there for people to consider, senator kennedy's is there for people to consider, as he pointed out, we arrived to Congress in the same way. year his experience has been different from mine mine has been in the executive branch he has been in the legislative branch I would say that now people have the opportunity to evaluate theirs against mine and I think that both he and I are going to abide by what the people decide, senator kennedy, well, I will just say that the question is one of experience and the question is also what our judgment is about the future and what our objectives outside the United States and what capacity we have to implement those objectives.
Abraham Lincoln came. to the presidency in 1860 after a rather obscure session in the House of Representatives and after being defeated for the Senate in 58 and was a distinguished president there is no sure path to the presidency there are no guarantees that if the only one is taken path or another that you will be a successful president. I've been in Congress for 14 years. I have voted for the last eight years. The vice president presided over the Senate and fulfilled its other responsibilities. I have made decisions more than 800 times. issues that affect not only the internal security of the United States but also as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the question really is which candidate and which party will confront the problems that the United States will face in the

1960

s: Mr. freshman Senator Kennedy to Senator Kennedy regarding these future issues that you're talking about and the program that you laid out earlier in your direct address calls for expanding some of the wellness programs for schools for teacher salaries. health care and so on, but you also call for reducing the federal debt and I wonder how you, if you were president in January, would pay the bill for all of this, it doesn't mean that's the case, I didn't advocate reducing the federal debt because I don't think we're going to be able to reduce the federal debt much in 1961 two or three I think we have heavy obligations that affect our security that we're going to have to meet and therefore I never suggested that we should be able to cancel the debt substantially or even at all. in 1961, senator, I think in one of your speeches you suggested that reducing the interest rate would help not, no, not reduce interest, reduce the interest rate.
In my opinion, this administration's restrictive monetary policy has contributed to the slowdown of our economy, which helped cause the '54 recession, which made the '58 recession quite intense, and which slowed our economic activity somewhat in 1960. I have talked, however, the type of programs I talk about, in my opinion, are fiscally sound health care for the agent. I would put the vice president under social security and I do not agree with this. The program that would have cost the Javits Nixon or Nixon Javits program. If the government had used $600 million a year and $600 million for the state, the program that I advocated and that failed by five votes in the United States Senate would have put the agent's medical care on social security and he would have been paid because through the social security system and the social security tax, secondly, I support federal aid to education and federal aid to teacher salaries.
I think it's a good investment. I think we are going to have to do it and I think we will increase the burden in the future. We will provide the property tax that is already under strain in many of our communities. In my opinion, we will ensure that many of our children do not receive an adequate education and that many of our teachers do not compensate adequately. There is no greater return to an economy. or to a society that an educational system second to none in the issue of natural resource development, would pay as they go in the sense that they would be balanced and energy revenues would bring in enough money to finance the projects in the same Just like the Valley of Tennessee, I believe in balanced budget and the only conditions under which I would unbalance the budget would be if there was a serious national emergency or a serious recession, otherwise with a constant rate of economic growth and Mr.
Nixon and Mr. Rockefeller in their meeting it was said that an economic growth of 5 would bring an additional 10 billion in tax revenue by 1962, regardless of what is received. I believe we can fund essential programs within a balanced budget if business remains normal. Yes, I think what Mr. Nobody was referring to was not the senator. In Kennedy's speeches with the democratic platform in which the reduction of the national debt was mentioned, I also think it must be noted that, of course, it is not possible, especially with the proposals that Senator Kennedy has defended, nor to cut the national debt or reducing taxes as a measure In fact, it will be necessary to increase taxes, as Senator Kennedy points out that when it comes to his only proposal, that of health care for aging, it would be funded by social security , but is nevertheless increasing taxes for those who pay. social security, points out that he would make pay as you go the basis for our natural resource development, where our natural resource development, which I also support by the way, however, as long as you, and allocates money for one of these projects, you have to pay now and allocate the money and even if they are finally paid, it does not mean that the government will not have to disburse the money this year, so I would say that in all these proposals that Senator Kennedy has made they will result in a There are two things: either you have to increase taxes or you have to unbalance the budget, if you unbalance the budget that means there is inflation and that, of course, will be a very cruel blow for the same people, the elderly, that we have been talking.
As far as school construction aid goes, I'm in favor of that, as Senator Kennedy did in January of this year when he said he was in favor of that, instead of helping teacher salaries, I am in favor of it because I believe it is the best way to help our schools without taking any risks. from the federal government telling our teachers what to teach next question to Vice President Nixon from Mr. Warren Mr. Vice President you mentioned schools it was yesterday I believe you called for an intensive program to raise educational standards and this afternoon you spoke about advances in Education, Mr.
Vice President, You said it was 1957, but the salaries paid to school teachers were nothing short of a national disgrace. Higher salaries for teachers, you added, were important and if the situation was not corrected, it would lead to a national disaster. I refused to vote in the Senate to break a Thai vote when that single vote, if yes, would have given pay raises to teachers. I wonder if you can explain that sir, very glad I got that question because you know I got into at the end of my other question I couldn't complete the argument. I think the reason I voted against the federal government paying teachers' salaries was probably the same reason that worried Senator Kennedy when in January of this year at his initial press conference he said he was for it. of aid for school construction, but at the time I didn't think there should be aid for teacher salaries, at least that's why I read your comments now.
Why should there be any questions about federal government support for teacher salaries? Did Senator Kennedy take that position then why do I take it now we both took it then and I take it now for this reason we want higher salaries for teachers we need higher salaries for teachers but we also want our education to be free of federal control When the federal government has the power to pay teachers it will inevitably, in my opinion, gain the power to set standards and tell teachers what to teach. I think this would be bad for the country. I think it would be bad for the teaching profession.
There is another note that I am in favor of higher salaries for teachers, but as Senator Kennedy said in January of this year at the same press conference, the way to get higher salaries for teachers is to support the construction of schools, meaning all local school districts in Then, several states have money being released to raise teacher standards in science. I should also point out this once the federal government is given the responsibility of paying a portion of teachers' salaries, their local communities and their states are not going to take on the responsibility. as much as they should, in other words, I think we've seen the state's local communities take on more of that responsibility.
Teacher salaries, fortunately, have increased 50 percent over the past eight years, compared to just a 34 percent increase for other salaries this year. It's not enough, it should be more, but I don't think the way to get more salaries for teachers is for the federal government to come in with a massive program. My objection here is not the dollar cost. My objection here is the potential dollar cost. controls and eventual freedom for the American people by giving the federal government power over education and that is the greatest power a government can have. Senator Kennedy's comment when the Vice President quotes me in January 60.
I do not believe the federal government should directly pay teachers' salaries. but that was not the issue before the senate in February, the issue before the senate was that the money would be given to the state, the state could then determine whether the money would be spent on building schools or on teacher salaries, especially that issue, the vice president and I did not agree, I voted for that proposal and I strongly supported it because I believe that it provided assistance to our teachers with their salaries without any possibility of federal control and it was in that vote that Mr.
Nixon and I We disagreed and his tied vote was defeated. Because Breaking Tide defeated the proposal, I don't want the federal government to pay teacher salaries directly, but the money will go to the states and the states can determine whether it should go toward school construction or teacher salaries. teachers, in my opinion, you protect. the local authority over the school board and the school committee and therefore I think it was a sound proposal and that is why I supported it and I was sorry that it did not pass. Secondly, statements have been made that the democratic platform would cost a lot. money and that I am in favor of unbalancing the budget, which is totally wrong and mistake, and it is the fact that in the last eight years the democratic congress has reduced the appropriate amount of the appropriation by more than 10 billion dollars that which is not My opinion, and I think it should be very clear in the minutes.
My opinion is that these programs can be done and that they must be carefully designed within a balanced budget if our economy moves forward. Mr. Van Oaker's next question to Senator Kennedy. Senator, he has been promising voters that, if he is elected president, he will try to push bills through Congress on the medical age of seniors. A comprehensive minimum hourly wage bill. Federal aid to education. Now in the session of Congress after the August convention. when you at least held out the possibility that you could one day be president and when you had overwhelming majorities, especially in the Senate, you couldn't pass these bills now, how do you think you'll be able to pass them in January?
Well, if you couldn't get them in August, if I may take the bills that we passed in the Senate, the bill to provide a 25 cent minimum wage failed because the House didn't pass it and the House failed because 11 votes and I could say that two-thirds of House Republicans voted against a quarter minimum wage and a majority of Democrats supported it. Almost two-thirds of them voted in favor of the twenty-five dollar. We were threatened by a veto. If we pass a dollar and a quarter it is extremely difficult with the great power that the president has to pass any bill when the president objects, all the president needs to sustain his veto on any bill is one third plus one in the chamber o In the second Senate we approved a federal aid bill for education in the Senate, it did not reach the full House of Representatives, it wasmurdered in the rules committee and it is a fact that in the August session the four members of the rules committee who were Republicans united with two Democrats voted against sending the education bill h to the full house four Democrats voted yes all republicans on the rules committee voted against sending that bill to be considered by members of the house of representatives third on health care forever this is the same fight that has been going on for 25 years on social security we wanted to link it to social security we offered an amendment to do so 44 Democrats voted for it one Republican voted for it and we were informed at the time that it was voted that if it was adopted, the president of the United States would veto it.
In my opinion, a strong democratic president supported by a democratic majority in the House and Senate can win support for these programs, but if you send a Republican. president and a democratic majority and the threat of a veto looms over Congress, in my opinion, it will continue what happened in the August session, which is a clash of parties and in action, Mr. Nixon's comment, well, obviously , my views are a little different first of all. I don't see how one-third of a body like the one Republicans have in the House and Senate can stop two-thirds if those two-thirds are properly led.
I would also say that when Senator Kennedy refers to the action of the House Rules Committee there are eight Democrats on that committee and four Republicans, it seems to me again that it is very difficult to blame the four Republicans for the eight Democrats who did not get something to through that particular committee. I would also say that blaming the president and his veto power for the inability of the senator and his colleague to achieve measures in this special session is a mistake when the president exercises his veto power, he has to get the people behind him, not just a third of the population congress because let's consider it if the majority of members of congress felt that these particular proposals were good issues, the majority of those who were Democrats why didn't they pass them and send them to the president and get a veto and they had a problem with reason.
The reason these particular bills and these various fields that have been mentioned were not passed was not because the president was against them, but because the people were against them, It was because they were too extreme and I am convinced that the alternative proposals that I have that the Republicans have in the field of health in the field of education and in the field of well-being because they are not extreme because they will achieve the end without too much cost big in dollars or in freedom they could achieve through the next goals the next question to the vice president President Nixon fought against Mr.
Fleming, Mr. Vice President. I understand that you believe you could work better with democratic majorities in the House and Senate and Senator Kennedy could work with democratic majorities in the House and Senate? I would say, of course, we hope to get some seats in both the House and the Senate. We would hope to control the House to get a House majority in this election, of course, we can't control the Senate. I would say that a president will be able to lead a president will be able to carry out his program in the sense that he has the support of the country, the support of the Sometimes we have the opinion that getting programs approved by the Senate House is purely a question of legislative manipulation and all that is not really that when a majority of the people are in favor of a program, the House and the Senate respond to it. and if this house and the senate in the next session are democratic or republican, if the country will have voted for the candidate for president and for the proposals that he has made, I think you will find that the president, if he were a republican, In my case he would be capable of getting his program approved in that congress.
Now I also say that when it comes to Senator Kennedy's proposals, again the issue is not simply one of a presidential veto to stop the programs. You always have to remember that a president cannot stop anything unless he has the support of the people and the reason why President Eisenhower's vetoes have been upheld, the reason why Congress does not send him bills that they believe that they will be vetoed is because the people and the congress and the majority of them know that the country is behind the president senator kennedy well now let's look at these bills that the vice president suggests were too extreme one was a bill for a dollar 25 cents an hour for anyone who works in a store or company that does a million dollars a year in business I don't think is extreme at all, and yet almost two-thirds to three-quarters of Republicans in the House of Representatives voted in against that proposal.
Second was the federal aid to education bill, it was very uh because of the defeat. of teacher salaries, in my opinion, was not a bill that met the need. The fact of the matter is that it was an inferior bill than what you recommended, Mr. Nixon, this morning in his proposal. It wasn't an extreme bill, and yet we couldn't get it. one Republican to join at least I think four of the eight Democrats voted to send it to the House floor, no Republicans and they joined Democrats who opposed it, I'm not saying Democrats are united in their support of the program, but I'm saying that a majority is and I say that a majority of Republicans oppose him;
The third is medical care for the agent, which is linked to social security and which is financed from the social security fund. It does not represent a deficit for the treasury. The proposal presented by you and Mr. Javats would have cost 600 million dollars. mr rockefeller rejected it in new york he said he did not agree at all with the funding he said it should be for social security so these are three programs that are quite moderate i think it shows the difference between the two parties one party is ready to advance these programs the other party pays lip service mr. warren's question to senator kennedy senator kennedy on another topic communism is often described as an ideology or belief that exists somewhere outside the United States, Let me ask you, sir, how serious a threat to our national security these communist subversive activities are in the United States today.
Well, I think they are serious. I think it is an issue that we must continue. uh, pay close attention and care, we should support the laws that the United States has passed to protect us from those who would destroy us from within, we should support the department of justice in its efforts at the FBI and we should be continually vigilant. I believe that if the United States maintains a strong society here in the United States, I believe that we can deal with any internal threat, the main threat is external and will continue. Comment from Mr. Nixon.
I agree with Senator Kennedy's assessment in general in this regard, the question of communism. Within the United States it has been a problem that has concerned us in the past and will continue to be a problem for years to come. We have to remember that the cold war that Mr. Khrushchev and his colleagues are fighting is being fought everywhere in the world and it is being fought here in the United States, so we have to continue to be vigilant. It is also essential to be alert to be fair, because by being fair we defend the same freedoms that the communists would destroy, we defend standards. of conduct that they would never follow and in this sense I believe that we must look to the future taking into account the fact that we fight against communism at home not only with our laws to deal with the communists, the few who become communists and the few who They become fellow travelers, but we also fight against communism as at home, acting against the various injustices that exist in our society that the communists feed on and that connection, I would say it again, while senator kennedy says that we are at favor of the status quo, I think he would agree that I am as sincere in believing that my proposals for federal aid education, my proposals for health care are as sincere as his, the question again is not about the objectives, We are in favor of those objectives, but about the means, Mr Van. oaker question for vice president nixon mister vice president uh, in one of your previous statements you said that we have moved forward, we have built more schools, we have built more hospitals now, sir, isn't it true that building more schools is a local issue for financing.
Were you claiming that the Eisenhower administration was responsible for building these schools or are local school districts not providing them at all? In fact, your question highlights a point that I'm very happy to make too often when evaluating whether we're moving forward or not. We only think about what the federal government is doing now. That is not the test of whether the United States is moving forward. The test of whether America moves forward is the federal government plus the state government. plus local government plus the largest segment of all individual business movements we have, for example, a gross national product of approximately 500 billion dollars, approximately between one hundred billion and one hundred and twenty-five billion of that is the result of the government activity, approximately four hundred billion is as a result of what individuals do now, the reason why the Eisenhower administration has moved the reason we have had the funds, for example at the local level, to build the schools and the hospitals and roads to achieve the progress that we have is because this administration has encouraged entrepreneurial individuals and has resulted in the largest expansion of the private sector of the economy that has ever been witnessed in an eight year period and that is the growth that We are looking for, it is the growth that this administration has supported and that its policies have encouraged Senator Kennedy, I have to say that I think the reason the schools were built is because the local school districts were willing to raise property taxes at a tremendously high number, in my opinion, almost to the point of diminishing returns to be able to sustain these schools second, I think we have a richer country and I think we have a powerful country.
However, I think what we need to do is have the president and the leaders lay out before our country exactly what we must do in the next decade if we are going to maintain our security in education and economic growth and natural resource development the Soviet Union is making great progress, it is not enough to compare what could have been done eight years ago or 10 years ago or 15 years ago or 20 years ago. I want to compare what we are doing with what our adversaries are doing so that by the year 1970 the United States will be leading in education, health, housing construction and economic strength.
I think that is the great task, the great task, the great function of the federal government. Can you give me the summary time? Please, we have completed our questions and our comments and in a moment we will have summary time. This will allow three minutes and 20 seconds for each candidate's summary. Three minutes and 20 seconds. For each Vice President Nixon candidate, could you make the first introduction? thank you smith, senator kennedy, first of all, i think it's good to put into perspective what our real position is with respect to the soviet union in this whole issue of the growth that the soviet union has had.
They have been moving faster than us, but the reason is obvious: they are starting from a much lower base, although they have been advancing growth faster than us. Today we find, for example, that their total gross national product is only 44 of our total gross national product. product, that's the same percentage as 20 years ago and as far as the absolute gap goes, we find that the United States is even further ahead than it was 20 years ago. Is this any reason for complacency? Not at all, because these are determined men. They are fanatical men and we have to get the most out of our economy.
I completely agree with Senator Kennedy in that area. Where we disagree is the means we would use to get the most out of our economy. I respectfully introduce that senator. Kennedy would too often put too much trust in the federal government about what it would do to solve our problem and stimulate growth. I think that when we examine the democratic platform, when we examine the proposals that he has discussed tonight, when we compare them with the proposals that I have pointed out that these proposals that he makes would not result in greater growth for this country than it would if we followed the programs that I had defended There are many points that he has raised that I would like to comment on.
One in the health field is worth mentioning our health program, which we support Senator Javats and others.Republican senators, as well as myself, is one that gives everyone over 65 who wants health insurance the opportunity to have it if they want it. option to have government insurance or private insurance, but it does not force anyone who does not want it to have insurance. Their program under Social Security would require everyone with Social Security to take government health insurance whether they wanted it or not, and would not cover several Million people who are not covered by Social Security at all.
This is a place where I think our program does a better job than yours. The other point I would like to highlight is this degradation of how much things cost. I think a lot of our people will. They understand better when they look at what happened when during the Truman administration, when the government was spending more than it took in, we found life savings devoured by inflation. We found the people who could least afford it. People with retired income. People with fixed incomes. We find them unable to meet their bills at the end of the month, it is essential that a man who is president of this country certainly defends every program that means growth and I defend programs that mean growth and progress, but it is also essential that he does not allow a dollar is spent that could be better spent by the people themselves, Senator Kennedy, your conclusion, Mr.
Nixon pointed out that Soviet production is only 44 of ours, I must say that 44 and that Soviet country is causing us a lot of problems this night I want to make sure he stays in that relationship I don't want to see the day when it's 60 percent of us and 70 and 75 and 80 and 90 with all the strength and power that could bring to bear to cause our destruction, secondly, the vice president mentioned health care for the officer, our program was a bail amendment, the bill provided assistance to all those who were not on social security, I think that is a very clear contrast, 1935, when the social security law was written 94 of 95 republicans voted against it mr. landon ran in 1936 to repeal it in august 1960 when we tried to get it again, but this time for health care we received the support of a republican in the Senate on This time, thirdly, I think the question for the American people is: when you look at this country and the world around you, the goals are the same for all Americans, the means are an issue, the media is a problem, if one feels that all that is being done now is satisfactory that the relative power, prestige and strength of the united states is increasing in relation to that of the communists that we are gaining more security that we are achieving everything as a nation that we should achieve that we are achieving a better life for our citizens and a greater strength, then I agree, I think you should vote for Mr.
Nixon, but if you believe that we have to move forward again in the sixties and that the The function of the president is to present to the people the pending issues of our society as Franklin Roosevelt did in the 1930s, the agenda for our people, what we must do as a society to meet our needs in this country and protect our security and help the cause of freedom as I said at the beginning the question before us all faces all Republicans and all Democrats, can freedom be conquered in the next generation or will the communists succeed?
That is the big problem and if we fulfill our responsibilities, I believe that freedom will conquer if we fail, if we fail to advance, if we do not develop sufficient armed forces. and the economic and social strength here in this country, then I think the tide could begin to run against us and I don't want historians 10 years from now to say that these were the years when the tide ran out for the United States. I love. to say that these were the years when the tide rose these were the years when America began to move again that is the question before the American people and only you can decide what you want, what you want this country to be what What we want to do with the future I think we are ready to move forward and it is to that great task, if we are successful, that we will turn.
Thank you very much gentlemen, this hour has passed too quickly. Thank you very much for committing us to the present. The next president of the United StatesIn this unique program, the candidates asked me to thank the American networks and affiliate stations for providing time and facilities for this joint appearance. Other discussions in this series will be announced later and will cover different topics. This is Howard K Smith. good night from chicago

If you have any copyright issue, please Contact