Why don't you emphasize that now, Senator Clinton?
CLINTON: Well, Charlie, on Friday, I was with Mayor Nutter, who is here, in west Philadelphia, at the YMCA there, to talk about what we could do together to bring down the crime rate that has ravaged Philadelphia.
You know, more than one person, on average, a day is murdered in Philadelphia. And Mayor Nutter is very committed, as the mayor of this great city, to try to do what he can to stem the violence.
And what I said then is what I have been saying, that I will be a good partner for cities like Philadelphia as president, because I will bring back the COPS program, the so-called COPS program, where we had 100,000 police on the streets, which really helped drive down the crime rate and also helped create better community relations.
I will also work to reinstate the assault weapons ban. We had it during the 1990s. It really was an aid to our police officers, who are now, once again, because it has lapsed and the Republicans will not reinstate it, are being outgunned on our streets by these military-style weapons.
I will also work to make sure that police departments in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, across America, get access to the federal information that will enable them to track illegal guns. Because the numbers are astounding. Probably 80 percent of the guns used in gun crimes are in the hands of that criminal, that gang member, unfortunately people who are sometimes, you know, mentally challenged, because it got there illegally. And under the Republicans, that information was kept from local law enforcement.
So I believe that we can balance what I think is the right equation. I respect the Second Amendment. I respect the rights of lawful gun owners to own guns, to use their guns. But I also believe that most lawful gun owners, whom I have spoken with for many years across our country, also want to be sure that we keep those guns out of the wrong hands.
And as president, I will work to try to bridge this divide, which I think has been polarizing and, frankly, doesn't reflect the common sense of the American people.
So we will strike the right balance to protect the constitutional right but to give people the feeling and the reality that they will be protected from guns in the wrong hands.
GIBSON: Senator Obama, the District of Columbia has a law -- it's had a law since 1976; it's now before the United States Supreme Court -- that prohibits ownership of handguns, a sawed-off shotgun, a machine gun or a short-barrelled rifle.
Is that a law consistent with an individual's right to bear arms?
OBAMA: Well, Charlie, I confess I obviously haven't listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence.
As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right, and, you know, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.
And I think that it is going to be important for us to reconcile what are two realities in this country.
There's the reality of gun ownership and the tradition of gun ownership that's passed on from generation to generation. You know, when you listen to people who have hunted, and they talk about the fact that they went hunting with their fathers or their mothers, then that is something that is deeply important to them and, culturally, they care about deeply.
But you also have the reality of what's happening here in Philadelphia and what's happening in Chicago.
And...
GIBSON: But do you still favor the registration of guns? Do you still favor the licensing of guns?
And in 1996, your campaign issued a questionnaire, and your writing was on the questionnaire that said you favored a ban on handguns.
OBAMA: No, my writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire, Charlie. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns.
What I think we can provide is common-sense approaches to the issue of illegal guns that are ending up on the streets. We can make sure that criminals don't have guns in their hands. We can make certain that those who are mentally deranged are not getting a hold of handguns.
We can trace guns that have been used in crimes to unscrupulous gun dealers that may be selling to straw purchasers and dumping them on the streets.
The point is, is that what we have to do is get beyond the politics of this issue and figure out what, in fact, is working.
Look, in my hometown of Chicago, on the south side of Chicago, we've had 34 gun deaths last year of Chicago public school children.
And I think that most law-abiding gun owners all across America would recognize that it is perfectly appropriate for local communities and states and the federal government to try to figure out, how do we stop that kind of killing?
STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Clinton, you have a home in D.C. Do you support the D.C. ban?
CLINTON: You know, George, I want to give local communities the opportunity to have some authority over determining how to keep their citizens safe.
This case you're referring to before the Supreme Court is apparently dividing the Bush administration. You know, the Bush administration basically said, "We don't have enough facts to know whether or not it is appropriate."
And Vice President Cheney, who you know is a fourth, special branch of government all unto himself, has actually filed a brief, saying, "Oh, no, we have to -- you know, he have to prevent D.C. from doing this."
STEPHANOPOULOS: But what do you think? Do you support it or not?
CLINTON: What I support is sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arms.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Is the D.C. ban consistent with that right?
CLINTON: Well, I think a total ban with no exceptions under any circumstances might be found by the court not to be, but I don't know the facts.
But I don't think that should blow open a hole that says that D.C. or Philadelphia or anybody else cannot come up with sensible regulations to protect their people and keep, you know, machine guns and assault weapons out of the hands of folks who shouldn't have them.
GIBSON: Well, with all due respect, I'm not sure I got an answer from Senator Obama, but do you still favor licensing and registration of handguns?
CLINTON: What I favor is what works in New York. You know, we have a set of rules in New York City, and we have a totally different set of rules in the rest of the state. What might work in New York City is certainly not going to work in Montana.
So for the federal government to be having any kind of, you know, blanket rules that they're going to try to impose I think doesn't make sense.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But, Senator, you were for that when you ran for Senate in New York.
CLINTON: I was for the New York rules; that's right. I was for the New York rules, because they have worked over time. And there isn't a lot uproar in New York about changing them, because I go to upstate New York, where we have a lot of hunters and people who are collectors and people who are sport shooters. They have every reason to believe that their rights are being respected.
You walk down the street with a police officer in Manhattan, he wants to be sure that there is some way of protecting him and protecting the people that are in his charge.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Obama, last May we talked about affirmative action, and you said at the time that affluent African- Americans, like your daughters, should probably be treated as pretty advantaged when they apply to college and that poor, white children, kids, should get special consideration, affirmative action.
So as president, how specifically would you recommend changing affirmative action policies so that affluent African-Americans are not given advantages and poor, less affluent whites are?
OBAMA: Well, I think that the basic principle that should guide discussions not just of affirmative action, but how we are admitting young people to college generally, is how do we make sure that we're providing ladders of opportunity for people? How do we make sure that every child in America has a decent shot in pursuing their dreams?
And race is still a factor in our society. And I think that for universities and other institutions to say, "You know, we're going to take into account the hardships that somebody has experienced because they're black or Latino or because they're a woman"...
STEPHANOPOULOS: Even if they're wealthy?
OBAMA: ... I think that's something that they can take into account, but it can only be in the context of looking at the whole situation of the young person.
So if they look at my child, and they say, "You know, Malia and Sasha, they've had a pretty good deal," then that shouldn't be factored in.
On the other hand, if there's a young white person, who has been working hard, struggling, and has overcome great odds, that's something that should be taken into account.
So I still believe in affirmative action as a means of overcoming both historic and potentially current discrimination, but I think that it can't be a quota system and it can't be something that is simply applied without looking at the whole person, whether that person is black, or white, or Hispanic, male or female.
What we want to do is make sure that people who've been locked out of opportunity are going to be able to walk through those doors of opportunity in the future.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Clinton, would you agree to that kind of change?
CLINTON: Well, here's the way I'd prefer to think about it. I think we've got to have affirmative action generally to try to give more opportunities to young people from disadvantaged backgrounds, whoever they are.
That's why I'm a strong supporter of early childhood education and universal pre-kindergarten.
That's why I'm against No Child Left Behind as it is currently operating, and I would end it, because we can do so much better to have an education system that really focuses in on kids who need extra help.
That's why I'm in favor of much more college aid, not these outrageous predatory student loan rates that are charging people I've met across Pennsylvania, 20, 25, 28 percent interest rates.
Let's make college affordable again. See I think we have to look at what we're trying to achieve here somewhat differently. We do have a real gap. We have a gap in achievement. We have a gap in income. But we don't have a potential gap. I think our job should be to try to create the conditions that enable people to live up to their god- given potential. That means health care for everyone, no exceptions. Nobody left out.
And it means taking a hard look at what we need to do to compete and win in the global economy. So that's how I prefer to think about it. Let's affirmatively invest in our young people and make it possible for them to have a good, middle-class life, in today's much more competitive economy.
GIBSON: We're running short on time. Let me just give some quick questions here and let me give you a minute each to answer. What are going to do about gas prices? It's getting to $4 a gallon. It is killing truckers. People are in trouble, yet the whole world pays a whole lot more for gas than we do. What are you going to do about it?
CLINTON: I met with a group of truckers in Harrisburg about a week and a half ago and here's what I told them. No. 1, we are going to investigate these gas prices. The federal government has certain tools that this administration will not use. And the Federal Trade Commission, and other ways, through the Justice Department.
Because I believe there is market manipulation going on, particularly among energy traders. We've seen this movie before, in Enron, and we've got to get to the bottom to make sure we're not being taken advantage of.
Number two, I would quit putting oil into the strategic petroleum reserve. And I would release some to help drive down the price globally. And thirdly, if there is any kind of gas tax moratorium, as some people are now proposing --
GIBSON: Like John McCain.
CLINTON: Like John McCain and some Democrats, frankly. I think Senator Menendez and others have said that we may have to do something because when you get to $4 a gallon gas, people are not going to be able to afford to drive to work.
And what I would like to see us do is say, if we have that, then we should have a windfall profits tax on these outrageous profits of the oil companies, and put that money back into the highway trust funds so that we don't lose out on repair and construction and rebuilding.
But ultimately Charlie, we've got to have a long-term energy strategy. We are so much more dependent on foreign oil today than we were on 9/11. That is a real indictment of our leadership. I've laid out a comprehensive plan to move us toward energy independence that I hope I will have the opportunity to implement as president.
GIBSON: Very quickly, Senator Obama, same thing, but we've heard from politicians for a long time, we're going to end dependence on foreign oil. I just have a quote, "the generation-long growth and our dependence of foreign oil will be stopped dead in its tracks right now." That was Jimmy Carter in 1979. And it's gotten a whole lot worse since then.
OBAMA: You're right and that's why people are cynical because decade after decade, we talk about energy policy. We talk about health care policy. And through Democratic and Republican administrations, nothing gets done.
I think many of the steps that Senator Clinton outlined are similar to the plans that we've talked about. It is absolutely true that we've got to investigate potential price gouging or market manipulation. I have strongly called for a windfall profits tax that can provide both consumers relief and also invest in renewable energies.
I think that long-term, we are going to have to raise fuel efficiency standards on cars because the only way that we're going to be able to reduce gas prices if we reduce demand. You've still got a billion people in China and maybe 700 million in India who still want cars.
And so, the long-term trajectory is that we're going to have to get serious about increasing our fuel efficiency standards and investing in new technologies. That's something I'm committed to doing. I've talked about spending $150 billion over 10 years in a Manhattan project to create the alternative energy strategies that will work, not only for this generation, but for the next.
STEPHANOPOULOS: We're running out of time for this segment. Quickly, for each of you, 30 seconds. Senator Clinton, you've said that you believe in using former presidents. How would you use George W. Bush if you were president?
CLINTON: I'm going to have to give some serious thought to that. I do believe that it's a way to unify our country. I thought that President Bush was right when he asked his father and Bill to represent us during the aftermath of the tsunami. I thought it sent a great message here at home and around the world. And I'm sure there will be opportunities to ask all the former presidents to work on behalf of our nation. You know, we've got to come together and the former presidents really exemplify that, whether one agrees with them politically or not. When they're all together representing our country, that sends a strong message. And I would look for a way to use all of our former presidents. But that will take some careful thought on my part.
GIBSON: Senator Obama?
OBAMA: Well, you know, I think that having the advice and counsel of all former presidents is important. I'm probably more likely to ask advice of the current president's father than the president himself, because I think that when you look back at George H.W. Bush's foreign policy, it was a wise foreign policy.
In how we executed the Gulf War, how we managed the transition out of the Cold War, I think is an example of how we can get bipartisan agreement. I don't think the Democrats have a monopoly on good ideas. I think that there are a lot of thoughtful Republicans out there.
The problem is, we've been locked in a divided politics for so long that we've stopped listening to each other. And I think that this president, in particular, has fed those divisions. That's something that we've tried to end in this campaign. And I think we're being successful.
GIBSON: All right. We're going to take one more commercial, but come back with a final question for both of you in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GIBSON: Final question now to finish what I think has been a fascinating debate. And I appreciate both of you being here, thanking you in advance.
It is hard to see how either one of you win this nomination on the basis of pledged delegates in primaries, and it could well come down to super-delegates. And I know you've been talking to them all along.
But let's say you're at the convention in Denver and you're talking to a group of 20 undecided super-delegates. How are you going to make the case to them why you're the better candidate and more electable in November? What do you say to them, minute-and-a-half each?
And by a flip of the coin, Senator Clinton goes first.
CLINTON: Well, I say to them what I've said to voters across America, that we need a fighter back in the White House. We need someone who's going to take on the special interests.
And I have a plan to take away $55 billion of the giveaways and the subsidies that the president and Congress have lavished on the drug companies, and the oil companies, and the insurance companies, and Wall Street.
And I have a plan to give that money back, give it back in tax cuts to the middle class, people who deserve it, who have been struggling under this president, who feel invisible, who feel like, you know, they're not even seen anymore.
And we're going to make everybody feel like they're part of the American family again. And we're going to tackle the problems that have been waiting for a champion back in the White House.
Now, obviously, I can't do this alone. I can only do it if I get people who believe in me, and support me, and who look at my track record and know that, you know, I've spent a lifetime trying to empower people, trying to fight for them.
And I think it's going to be challenging, but it is absolutely what we must do in order to keep faith with our country and to give our children the future that they deserve. So I will tell everyone who listens that I'm ready to be the commander-in-chief. I've 35 generals and admirals, including two former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Wesley Clark and others, who believe that I am the person to lead us out of Iraq, to take on Al Qaida, to rebuild our military.
And I will turn this economy around. We will get back to shared prosperity. And we will see, once again, that we can do this the right way so it's not just a government of the few, by the few, and for the few.
And I need your help. I need the help of the voters here in Pennsylvania, first and foremost, in order to be able to get to those conversations. And I hope that I have demonstrated not just over the last weeks or even over the last hour-and-a-half, but over a lifetime that you can count on me.
You know where I stand. You know that I will fight for you and that, together, we're going to take back our country.
GIBSON: Senator Obama?
OBAMA: Well, when we started this campaign 15 months ago, it was based on a couple of simple principles, number one, that we were in a defining moment in our history.
Our nation's at war. Our planet's in peril. Our economy is in a shambles. And, most importantly, the American people have lost trust in their government, not just Democrats, but independents and Republicans, who've been disillusioned about promises that have been made, election after election, decade after decade.
And the bet I was making was a bet on the American people, that they were tired of a politics that was about tearing each other down, but wanted a politics that was about lifting the country up, that they didn't want spin and P.R. out of their elected officials. They wanted an honest conversation.
And most importantly, I believed that change does not happen from the top down. It happens from the bottom up. And that's why we decided we weren't going to take PAC money or money from federal registered lobbyists, that we were not going to be subject to special interest influence but, instead, we're going to enlist the American people in the project of changing this country.
And during the course of these last 15 months, my bets paid off, because the American people have responded in record numbers. And not just people who are accustomed to participating, but people who haven't participated in years. I talked to a woman here in Pennsylvania, 70 years old. She whispered to me, "I've never voted before, but I'm going to vote in this election."
And so my point to the superdelegates would be that, if we're going to deliver on health care for every American, improve our schools, deliver on jobs, then it's going to be absolutely vital we form a new political coalition in this country. That's what we've been doing in this campaign, and that's what I'm going to do when I'm president of the United States of America.