First Debate Transcript: Page 2

Oct. 3, 2000 -- LEHRER: One minute rebuttal, Vice President Gore.

GORE: Well, Jim, under my plan, all seniors will getprescription drugs under Medicare. The governor has describedMedicare as a government HMO; it’s not. And let me explain thedifference.

Under the Medicare prescription drug proposal I’m making, here’s how it works: You go to your own doctor and your doctor chooses your prescription, and no HMO or insurance company can take those choicesaway from you. Then you go to your own pharmacy, you fill theprescription and Medicare pays half the cost. If you’re in a verypoor family or you have very high costs, Medicare will pay all thecosts, a $25 premium and much better benefits than you can possiblyfind in the private sector.

Now here’s the contrast. Ninety-five percent of all seniorswould get no help whatsoever, under my opponent’s plan, for the firstfour or five years.

Now, one thing I don’t understand, Jim, is, why is it that thewealthiest 1 percent get their tax cuts the first year, but 95 percentof seniors have to wait four to five years before they get a singlepenny?

LEHRER: Governor?

BUSH: I guess my answer to that is, the man’s running on“Mediscare,” trying to frighten people in the voting booth. That’s justnot the way I think, and I that’s just not my intentions. That’s notmy plan.

I want all seniors to have prescription drugs andMedicare. We need to reform Medicare. There have been opportunity todo so, but this administration has failed to do it.

And so seniors are going to have not only a Medicare plan wherethe poor seniors will have their prescriptions paid for, but therewill be a variety of options.

The current system today has meant a lot for a lot of seniors,and I really appreciate the intentions of the current system. And asI mentioned, if you’re happy with the system, you can stay in it.

But there’s a lot of procedures that have not kept up in Medicarewith the current times. There’s no prescription drug benefits,there’s no drug therapies, there’s no preventing medicines, there’s novision care.

I mean, we need to have a modern system to help seniors. And theidea of supporting a federally controlled, 132,000-page documentbureaucracy as being a compassionate way for seniors is—and theonly compassionate source of care for seniors, is just not my vision.

I believe we ought to give seniors more options. I believe weought to make the system work better. But I know this: I know it’sgoing to require a different kind of leader to go to Washington to sayto both Republicans and Democrats, “Let’s come together.”

You’ve had your chance, Vice President. You’ve been there foreight years and nothing has been done.

And my point is is that my plan not only trusts seniors withoptions, my plan sets aside $3.4 trillion for Medicare over the next10 years. My plan also says it’s going to require a new approach inWashington, D.C.

It’s going to require somebody who can work across thepartisan divide.

GORE: If I could respond to that? Jim, under my plan, I willput Medicare in an iron-clad lockbox and prevent the money from beingused for anything other than Medicare. The governor has declined toendorse that idea, even though the Republican as well as Democraticleaders of Congress have endorsed it.

I’d be interested to see if he would this evening say that hewould put Medicare in a lockbox. I don’t think he will, because underhis plan, if you work out the numbers, $100 billion comes out ofMedicare just for the wealthiest 1 percent in the tax cut.

Now here is the difference: Some people who say the word“reform” actually mean cuts. Under the governor’s plan, if you kept the same fee-for-service that you have now under Medicare, yourpremiums would go up by between 18 and 47 percent. And that’s thestudy of the congressional plan that he’s modeled his proposal on bythe Medicare actuaries.

Let me just give you one quick example: There’s a man heretonight named George McKinney from Milwaukee. He’s 70 years old, hehas high blood pressure, his wife has heart trouble. They have incomeof $25,000 a year. They cannot pay for their prescription drugs. Andso they’re some of the ones that go to Canada regularly in order toget their prescription drugs.

Under my plan, half of their costs would be paid right away.Under Governor Bush’s plan, they would get not one penny for four tofive years, and then they would be forced to go into an HMO or to aninsurance company and ask them for coverage, but there would be nolimit on the premiums or the deductibles or any other terms andconditions.

BUSH: I cannot let this go by, the old-style Washingtonpolitics, of “We’re going to scare you in the voting booth.”

Under my plan, the man gets immediate help with prescriptiondrugs. It’s called “Immediate Helping Hand.” Instead of squabbling and finger-pointing, he gets immediate help.

Let me say something. Now, I understand — excuse me …

(CROSSTALK)

GORE: Jim, can I …

(CROSSTALK)

LEHRER: … minutes is up, but we’ll finish that.

GORE: Can I make one other point? They get $25,000 a yearincome. That makes them ineligible.

BUSH: Look, this is the man who’s got great numbers. He talksabout numbers. I’m beginning to think, not only did he invent theInternet, but he invented the calculator.

(LAUGHTER)

It’s fuzzy math. It’s to scare them, trying to scare people inthe voting booth.

Under my tax plan, that he continues to criticize, I set a third.You know, the federal government should take more of that — no morethan a third of anybody’s check. But I also dropped the bottom ratefrom 15 percent to 10 percent, because, by far, the vast majority ofthe help goes to the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder.

If you’re a family of four in Massachusetts making $50,000, youget a 50 percent cut in the federal income taxes you pay. It’s from$4,000 to about $2,000.

Now, the difference in our plans is, I want that $2,000 to go toyou.

LEHRER: All right. Let me — hold on.

BUSH: And the vice president would like to be spending the$2,000 on your behalf.

LEHRER: One quick thing, gentlemen. These are your rules. I’mdoing my best. We’re way over the three-and-a-half. I have noproblems with it, but we wanted—do you want to have a quickresponse, and we’ll move on. We’re already almost five minutes on this, alright?

GORE: Yes. It’s just clearer—you can go to the web site andlook. If you make more than $25,000 a year, you don’t get a penny ofhelp under the Bush prescription drug proposal for at least four tofive years. And then you’re pushed into a Medicare — into an HMO or an insurance company plan, and there’s no limit on the premiums or the deductibles or any of the conditions. And the insurance companies say that it won’t work and they won’t offer these plans.

LEHRER: Let me ask you both this, and we’ll move on, on thissubject. As a practical matter, both of you want to bringprescription drugs to seniors. Correct?

BUSH: Correct.

GORE: Correct, but the difference is — the difference is I wantto bring it to 100 percent, and he brings it only to 5 percent.

LEHRER: All right. All right. All right.

BUSH: That’s just — that’s just — that’s just totally false.

LEHRER: All right. What difference does it make how …

BUSH: Wait a minute. It’s just totally false for him to standup here and say that.

Let me make sure the senior hear me loud and clear. They’ve hadtheir chance to get something done. I’m going to work with bothRepublicans and Democrats to reform the system. All seniors will becovered. All poor seniors will have their prescription drugs paidfor. In the meantime — in the meantime, we’re going to have a plan to help poor seniors. And “in the meantime” could be one year or two years.

GORE: Let me — let me call your attention to the key wordthere. He said all “poor” seniors.

BUSH: No. Wait a minute, all seniors are covered underprescription drugs in my plan.

GORE: In the first year? In the first year?

BUSH: If we can get it done in the first year, you bet. Yoursis phased in eight years.

GORE: No. No. No. No. It’s a two-phased plan, Jim. And forthe first four years — it takes a year to pass it. And for the firstfour years, only the poor are covered. Middle class seniors likeGeorge McKinney and his wife are not covered for four to five years.

LEHRER: I’ve got an idea.

GORE: OK.

LEHRER: You have any more to say about this, you can say it inyour closing statement, so we’ll move on, OK?

Click here for page 3.