US Presidential Debate BBC News Special

it. Thank you fortune. Welcome to Denver Colorado in this

special edition of World News. The first of three presidential debates.

In a few moments, Governor Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama

will take the stage to have their first debate, focusing on the

The thank you candidates have been preparing for this moment for weeks.

They are ready in the hall behind me to have the first of their three

presidentiaon domestic issues. They will be

watched by up to 100 million Americans one month before the US

presidentia When the candidates take to the

stage tonight, they convince people they speak their

language. Sometimes, that is more of a stretch. (SPEAKS SPANISH) They

will not be speaking Spanish tonight. But well in America's

fastest growing economic -- ethnic group will become ever more

important. Canvassing in Colorado - a swing state where the Latino vote

Barack Obama four years ago. Some are disappointed he has not done

more to help the millions of the border. This woman find -- says

many find the selection a hard choice. We know there is only one

candidate who supports any kind of emigration reform of

That is Barack Obama. Many Republicans see the Hispanic vote

as a huge prize. What has gone wrong? When Ronald Reagan said that

he knows when actually Republicans, he meant they were aspirational and

socially conservative. That Mitt of.

of. Some said he was racially profiling. He called for a hi-tech

fence along the Mexican border and struck a harsh note talking about

illegal immigrants. The answer is self deportation. People decide

they can't do -- they can do better if they return home because they

can't find work here. In the last few months, the run the campaign

has put on a burst of speed, targeting what he knows in swing

states like Colorado. No wonder the latest poll gives Barack Obama the

70% but the Hispanic vote. Mitt Romney has back-pedalled and bought

a softer focus on illegal immigrationtoric

and the language that turns people off and talk about it in a real

intense preip way. As night falls, the The candida

The candidates will soon face each up

up the race for the White House. There are commentators say in this

debate is not as important as some in the past because there are few

undecided voters. But there are several percentage points up for

grabs. It is interesting, over the course of the last two decades, the

number of Americans who are has shrunk during the era of Ronald

Reagan, for example. They were 20% of Americans who could go either

way. Now, most people will tell you there are really only four -6 % of

the elector though they will be up to 100

million people watching the debate tonight, you have to think that

many will go in the already rooting What about that you can lose an

election in a TV debate but not win one? So much is about not making

mistakes. That is very true. The onus tonight

is on Barack Obama, not to lose the debate. Challenges conventionally

do pretty well out of these debates. Mitt Romney's campaign, he stands

are behind the podium on that stage next to the President. He therefore

appears presidential and puts them on an equal playing field. So

usually the challenges get a bump see

see some of that in the next few days, unless Mitt Romney messes

this up. I have spoken to several Republicans over the last few days

and most say it will be awash, barring some major mess up by one

of the candidates. The chances are they will both do well. Mitt Romney

has had much practice and he i good debate are. Barack Obama can

be long-winded but he is extremely disciplined. -- debater. So unless

one of them makes a mistake, which I believe is unlikely, that is how

we expect it to go. Tell us a bit... Is this a hite

House has been very specific about how it wants it set-up. I spoke to

the debate chairman yesterday who said the White House said the

President wanted a podium. He wanted to stand in one of the

subsequent debate at the town hall meeting andnge

the whole set because the President wants people standing behind him.

He has been quite particular about the stage setting of this debate.

There is the veteran American news anchor who will be the one the

fielding the questions. He has some ability during the course of this

and President Obama on the specifics of their policies. And he

has come out of retirement to do it? He wanted to do it that much?

He said he would not to read again but the debate -- debate Commission

bit bit more pushy with the candidates,

give give him more latitude if he

thought thee question. That is apparently what

swayed him. And tell me a bit about the format. It will last 90 minutes,

615 minute segments? Yes. -- six 15 minute. The host can interrupt them.

They can also interrupt and talk to each other. The commission wants

them to do that. They are hoping there will be interaction between

the candidates. I have heard from expect him

expect him to be aggressive. They DDT is an opportunity for him to

get under Mitt Romney's scheme. -- they say it is. Here are the two

candidates for their first (APPLAUSE). Welcome. Let's start on

the economy. Segment one. Let's begin with jobs. What are the major

differences between the two of new creating new jobs? Each of you have

two minutes to start. The coin toss will determine. I want to thank

Governor Romney and the University of Denver. There are many points I

want to make. The most important is that 20 years ago, I became the

luckiest man on earth because Michelle Obama agreed to marry me.

I want to wish you happy anniversaryhat

one year from now, we will not be millio

million people. Four years ago, we went through the worst financial

crisis since the Great Depression. automobile

automobile industry was on the system

system had frozen up. Because of the resilience and the

determination of the American people, we began to fight our way

back. Over the last few months, we public

public sector created. The water industry has come back. And housing

has begun to rise. -- the automobile industry. But we have a

lot of work to do. The question tonight is not where we have been

but where we are going. Governor Romney has perspective that says if

we cut taxes, skewed towards the wealthy, and roll back regulations,

different view. I think we have to It is impor

It is important for us to develop new sources of energy. That which

range out tax to make sure we are helping small businesses and

That we take some of the money we are saving, as we wind down and try

to will -- rebuild America. And that we reduce debt has it that

allows us to make investments. Ultimately, it will be up to voters.

Are we going to double down on the top economic policies to get us --

that got us into this mess? Or do we embrace a new economic

patriotism that says America does best when the middle class does

best. I am looking forward to having that debate. It is an

honoured to be here. I am pleased to be at the University of Denver

and I appreciate their welcome. And the presidential commission.

Congratulations, Mr President, on your anniversary. I am sure this is

the most romantic place you can imagine, here with me.

Congratulations. This is obviously a tender topic. I have had occasion

over the last few years at meeting people around the country. I was in

Ohio and a woman grabbed my arm and says, I have been out of work

May. Can you help me? Yesterday there was a rally in Denver. A

woman came y in her arms. She said her husband had

four part-time jobs in three years and lost his most recent jobs and

we have just lost our home. Can you help us? The answer is yes. We can

help. But it will take a different part. Not the one we have been on,

not the one the President describes as a top-down, cut taxes for the

rich, Mike Rann has five basic parts. One, get us in a jeep and

dependent. That creates about 4 million jobs. Secondly, open up

more trade, especially in Latin people

people have the skills they need to succeed and the best schools in the

world, we are far away from that now. Get us to a balanced budget.

Champion small business. Small- business create the jobs in America.

In the last four years, small business people decided America may

not be the place to open a new business because new businesses are

down to a 30 below. I know what it takes to get them going again, to

hire people. I am concerned the part we have been on has been

unsuccessful. The President's view is similar to that which she had

four years ago. That a bigger government, Thaksin Moore, spending

more, regulating all. That that would work. -- Thaksin war. I will

restore the vitality that gets please respond directly to what the

Governor said about trickling down. Let me talk specifically about what

we think we need to do. First, we have got to improve our education

system. We have made enormous progress drawing on ideas both from

Democrats and Republicans, that are already showing gains in some of

the toughest to deal with schools. We have a programme called Brace to

the top which has prompted reforms in 46 states around the country.

race to the top. I want to hire more teachers and create more spot

in our community colleges so people can get trained for jobs that are

there. And I want to make sure we keep tuition low for our young

people. When it comes to our taxes, Governor Romney and I believe the

corporate tax rate is too high. I want to know it, particularly for

manufacturing. Take it down to 25%. And I want to close those loopholes

that are giving incentives for companies that are shipping jobs

overseas. I want to provide tax breaks for companies in the US. On

energy, Governor rummy and I agree that we have to boost American

energy production. -- Governor Romney. Add oil and natural gas

production are higher than they have been in years. But I also

believe we have to get the energy sources of the future, like wind,

solar and so on, and make those investments. That is possible but

we need to close the deficit. One of the things I am sure we will

discuss his how to deal with taxes and make sure that we are reducing

spending in a responsible way and revenue

revenue to make those investments. This is where there is a difference.

Governor Romney's central plan calls for a five trillion dollars

tax cut. On top of the extension to the other taxes. And two trillion

dollars in military spending, that the military has not asked for.

That is eight trillion dollars. We can only paper that by reducing

debt of it and making payments, without dumping those costs on

middle class Americans. That is a big central question. Both of you

have spoken about many different things and we will try to get

through them in as specific a way as possible. First, Governor Romney,

do you have a question you would like to ask President Obama about

what he said? First of all, I do not have a five trillion dollars

off off the scale you spoke about. I

believe we should provide tax High income people are doing fine

in this economy. They will do fine weather you a present or I am. The

people having a hard time our middle income Americans. They have

been very... They have been crushed under your policy. They have seen

their income come down by $4,300. This is a tax in and others - tax

in itself. It has been crashing. And gasoline prices have doubled.

are are up. Healthcare costs have gone

up by $2,500 a family. The question is, how do you get them going

again? Energy, trade, the right training programmes, balancing our

budget. Those are the cornerstones of my plan. But the President

Richard a c First, education. That is key. --

mentioned. Our training programmes now, 47 of them, report to eight

different agencies. Overhead is dollars

dollars back to the States and go to the workers so they can create

their own part ways to get the training they need. The second area,

taxation. We have to bring them down. Both for corporations and

individuals. But so that we do not lose revenue, I also know what

deductions in credits and exemptions so that we keep taking

in the same money when you account for growth.nergy

is critical. The President pointed out that production of oil and gas

in the US is up. But not due to his policies. In spite of his policies.

Mr President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened

on private land, not government. On government line, your

administration has cut the number of permits and licences in half. If

I am President, I will double them and get the oil from offshore and a

Lasker and bring that pipeline in from Canada. And I like coal. --

Alaska's. People in the oil industry feel it is getting crushed.

-- coal industry. America should be energy independent. Finally, in

regards to the tax cut, I am not looking to cut massive taxes and

reduce revenue going to government. My number one principle is there

will be no tax cut that adds together as it. No tax cut that

adds to the deficit. But I want to reduce the burden paid by middle

income Americans. And to do that, that means I can't reduce the

burden paid by a high income Americans. Any language to the

contrary is something not accurate. Let's talk about taxes. It is

obstructed. Four years ago when I stood on this stage, I said that I

would cut taxes for middle class families. That is exactly what I

did. We cut taxes for middle class families by about $3,600. The

reason is, because I believe that we do best when the middle class is

doing well. By giving them those tax cuts, they had more money in

their pockets. Maybe they can buy a new car. They are certainly a

better position to weather the through. They can buy a computer

for the child going to college. That means they are spending more

money, business has more customers and hire more workers. Governor

Romney's proposal, that he has been promoting for 18 months, calls for

top of two trillion dollars additional

military. He says that he is going to pay for it by closing loopholes

has has been asked over 100 times how

you would close those deductions and loopholes. He has not been able

to identify them for a start I will make an important point. When you

add up the loopholes and deductions that upper income individuals can...

Are currently taking advantage of, you take those all the way, you do

not come close to paying for five additional

additional military spending. That is why independent studies are

looking at this. They say the only way to meet Governor Romney's

pledge of not producing deficit, or burgeoning

burgeoning middle class families. They would pay about $2,000 more.

That is not my analysis, that is the analysis of the economists who

down down Economics where those at the

top are doing well, so the average person is getting a $250,000 tax

break, while middle class families are burdened further, that is not

what I believe is a recipe for 5th leads stay on taxes. What is

the differesaid about my tax plan is inaccurate. I

am not looking for a five trillion place a tax cut that would add to

the deficit. No economist can say it my tax plan adds five trillion

if I say I would not add to the deficit with my tax plan. I would

not reduce the share paid by high income individuals. I know it is a

popular thing to say. I have five boys. I am used to people saying

something that is not always true and hoping I will believe it. That

is not the case. I would not reduce the taxes paid by high income

circumstances, raise taxes for what

what taxes. He cites a study. There are six other studies that it did a

study and say it is completely wrong. I saw a study that said he

would raise taxes. There are many bottom

bottom line. I want to bring down rates. I want to know what

deductions, exemptions and credits and so forth so we keep getting the

revenue when he. Then why not the rates? The reason is because small

business pays their individual rate. 54% of American workers work in

businesses that are not taxed at individual

individual tax rate. It's we know hire

hire more people. This is about jobs. This is about jobs for the

American people. Do you challenge his

on this tax Five weeks before the election, he

is saying his big bold idea is never mind. The fact is, if you are

lowering the rates the way you describe, it is not possible to

come up with it enough deductions and loopholes that only affect high

income individuals to avoid either raising the death has said all

burden in the middle class. -- deficit. It is naff. We do share a

deep interest in encouraging interest - Maxwell business growth.

My tax plan has lowered taxes for taxes for s

taxes fo18 times. What unwanted do is continue the

tax cuts we have put in place for small businesses and families. I

have said for incomes over $250,000 a year, we should go back to the

rate we had when Bill Clinton was President and we created over 20

million new jobs. When fund deficit to surplus and created more

millionaires. By doing that, we can reduce the deficit, we can

encourage job growth through small businesses, but we are also able to

make the investments that are We

We do have a difference when it comes to definitions of Small

Business. Under my plan, 97% of small businesses would not cede the

income taxes go up. Governor Romney say the top 3%, they are the job

creators. Btion, they are or a bunch of millionaires

and billionaires who are small businesses. Donald Trump is a small

business. I know he does not like to think of himself as more

believe, will not grow our economy because the only way to pay for it

without burss or blowing up a deficit is to make

drastic cuts in things like education, making sure we are

continuing in basic science and making

making American growth. That would be a mistake. So everybody

understand. We are way over our first 15 minutes. No problem. I

don't have a problem because we are still on the economy. We will come

the deficit. Mr President, you are absolutely right. 97% of the

businesses are not taxed at the Betty 5% tax rate. Those businesses

that are in the last 3% of the businesses employ half of all the

people who work in small business. Those are the businesses that

employ one quarter of all of the workers in a matter. Your plan is

to take their tax rate from Betty 5% to 40%. Idle to a guy who has a

very small business. He has for employees. He says he any summer

Cabinet how much they pay in taxes. Federal income tax, stayed in

contacts, the state property tax, plan is to take the tax rate

unsuccessful small businesses from 35% to 40%. But will cost 700,000

jobs. I don't want to cost jobs. My priority is jobs. I will bring down

the tax rates, no deductions and exemptions, the same idea to get

the rates down, lower deductions to create more jobs because there is

nothing better for getting us to a balanced budget than to have more

people working, earning more money, paying more taxes. That is the most

effective and efficient way to get this budget balanced. You may want

to move onto another topic but I want to say this to the American

people. If you believe we can cut taxes by five trillion dollars and

add to trillion dollars in additional spending that the

military is not asking for. Seven trillion dollars, just to give you

a sense, over ten years, that is more than our entire defence budget.

The bid by closing loopholes and deductions for the will to do,

somehow you were not end up picking up the tab, then governor Romney's

plan may work for you. Mathew, common sensws us

that is not a recipe for job growth. -- math. We have tried both

approaches. Mitt Romney's plans had us ended up moving from surplus to

deficit. It culminated in the West fun and a crisis since the Great

Depression. Bill Clinton had the approach I am talking about.

created created 23 million new jobs. We

went from deficit to surplus and businesses did very well. In some

ways, we have some data on which approach is more likely to create

for America for Americans. I believe the

economy works best when middle class families get tax breaks so

didn't have some money in their pockets. And those who have done

well because of this magnificent afford to do a little bit more to

make sure we are not blowing up the deficit. The President began the

word. word. Many make this comment. Let

me repeat what I said. I am not in favour of a five trillion dollars

tax cut. My plan is not to put in place anyththe

tax -- deficit. That is not my plan. Let's look at history. My plan is

not like anything that has been tried before. My plan is to bring

down rates and the set -- deductions, exemptions and credits

at the same time. We bring down rates to get more people working.

My priority is putting people back to work in America. They are

the the evidence of the last four years.

It is extraordinary. We've got for stopped

stopped looking for work in this country. -- 23 million. 40 million

are on food stamps today. Economic growth is slower than last year.

Going forward with the status quo is not going to cut for the

American people who are struggling today. We are still on the economy.

This is theoretically a second segment on the economy.

Specifically on what to do about the federal deficit. And the

question, you each have two minutes on this, Governor Mitt Romney you

go first because the President went first on Sepp Blatter one. What are

the on how you will go about tackling the deficit problem in

this country? I am glad you raised that. It is a critical issue. Not

just an economic issue. It is a moral issue. It is not moral for my

generation to keep spending more than we taking. Knowing those

burdens will be passed onto the next generation. There will be

paying the interest and the principal or their allies. And the

amount of debt we're adding, one trillion a year, is not moral. How

do we deal with it? There are three ways you can cut a deficit. One is

to raise taxes. Number two is to cut spending. Number three is to

grow the economy. More people work, fare paying taxes and the job gets

done that way. The President would prefer it raising taxes. The

problem with raising taxes is that it slows down the rate of growth.

You can never quite get the job done. I want to know were spending

and encourage economic growth at the same time. What will I cut? I

would elimi by this test if they do not pass it.

Is the programme so critical it is pay for it? If not, and get rid of

it. Obamacare is on my list. I will get rid of that. I. Subsidy to PBS.

I like PBS. I like you to. But I am not going to keep spending money on

to pay for that are cu

that are currently good programmes but I think there will be run more

efficiently on the state level and send them to stay. I'll make the

government more efficient. I will cut down employees, combined

agencies. This is the approach we have to take to get America to a

balanced budget. The President said he will cut the deficit in half.

Unfortunately, he doubled it. Trillion dollar deficits for the

last four years. He has put as much debt held by the public as all

prior Presi is the President, two minutes. When I

walked into the Oval Office, I had gratingly. You know where that came

from. Two was paid for by a credit card. Two touts cuts that were not

paid for. And a lot of programmes that were not cut -- paid for. And

a massive e that, what we have so, yes, we have

had to take initial emergency measures to make sure we do not

sleep -- slip into a depression. Let's make sure we are cutting out

those things that are not helping us grow. 77 a government programmes,

anything from aircrafts that the air force had ordered but were not

working very well, 18 government programmes for Education that were

well-intentioned but when I helping kids learn. We went after a medical

- in Medicare and Medicaid. His work with Democrats and Republicans

to cut $1 trillion out of Ralph domestic budget. That is the

largest car of in the Budget since Dwight Eisenhower. We know we have

to do more. I put forward a specific four trillion dollars

deficit reduction plan. It is on the website, you can look at all

the numbers, would cut the make and what revenue we raised. The way we

duet is $2.50 for every Cup, we asked for a dollar of additional

revenue. Paid for by asking those of us to have done very well to go

should be a little bit more to reduce the deficit. That is how the

it. This is a major difference between us. Many just finished his

point. You are looking for contrast. When Ronnie stood on the stage with

nomination, he was asked, would you take $10 of spending cuts for just

$1 of revenue? And he said no. If he takes such an unbalanced

getting out investments in schools and education, it means governor

Romney talked about Medicaid and how we could send it back to the

30% cut in the primary programme right

Will you support Simpson dolls? Bowles. I have my own plans. The

President should have granted, fight for it. That is what

done. done. We are putting it before

Congress now. You have present -- been President four years. If you

are re-elected, we will get to a one trillion dollars debt. You said

before you would cut it in half. I love what you said about four

trillion dollars worth of cuts. We still show trillion dollar deficit

every year. That does not get the job done. Why is it that I don't

want to raise taxes? Actually, you said that in 2010, I will extend

the tax policies that we have. When when we are

when we are in recession, you should not raise taxes on anybody.

-- slow. It is still going slow. Slower than when you made that

statement. If you believe the same thing, you just don't want to raise

taxes on people. The reality is, it is not just Donald Trump you are

Thaksin. It is all of the businesses that up very small. --

taxing. That is why your plan will kill 700,000 jobs. I don't want to

to the taxes. We have had this that

that in order to reduce the deficit, they have to the rope -- revenue in

addition to cut. Governor Romney has ruled out revenue. Absolutely.

Com pete the? The revenue I get is by more people working, are getting

higher pay, paying higher taxes. -- completely. The idea of taxing

people more, putting people out of balance the

balance the budget by raising taxes. Spain spends 42% of its economy on

government. We are now spending 42% of our economy on government. I

don't want to go down that path, of growth that puts Americans to work

with more money coming in because you

you say in order to get the job done, it has to be balanced? If we

are serious, we have to take a balanced ap just

individual taxes. Let's talk about corporate taxes. I have identified

areas where we can ride away make a change that I believe would

corporate corporate welfare. They get

deductions that small businesses do not get. Does anybody think that

the companies need extra money when they make money every time you go

to the pump? Why would we want to eliminate that? Why don't we

eliminate tax breaks for corporate jets? If you have a corporate jet,

you can probably afford it. When it comes to talk -- corporate taxes,

Governor Romney says he wants to be a revenue neutral way, close

loophole deductions. He has not identified which ones they are. But

rate. I wan rate. I want to do the same thing

that I have identified. Part of the way to do it is not give tax breaks

to companies that are shipping jobs overseas. You can take a deduction

right now for moving a plan overseas. I think most Americans

would say, that doesn't make sense. If we take a balanced approach,

what that then allows us to do is also to help young people, the way

we already have, make sure that they can afford to go to college.

It the is the teacher I met in Las Vegas, a wonderful young lady, who

describes to me that she has 42 kids in her class. The first two

weeks, she has some of them sitting on the floor until finally they get

reassigned. They are using text books that are ten years old. That

is not a recipe for growth. That is not how America was built. And so

Budget reflect choices. We will have to make decisions. If we are

asking for no revenue, that means we have to bunch

of stuff. The magnitude of the tax cuts you are talking about,

Governor Romney, would result in Severe hardship for people. More

importantly, it would not help us grow. Renewed talk about shifting

businesses, we are talking about potentially a 30% cut in Medicare.

-- when you talk about. That may not seem like a big deal when it is

just numbers on paper. But if we talk about a family that hastic

autistic child and his depended on that Medicaid, it's a big problem.

And governors are creative but not creative enough to make up 30%

revenue on something like Medicaid. breaks. First of all, the

Department of Energy says the tax breaks for oil companies is $2.8

billion the year. It's a treatment that has been in place for 100

years. It is time to end it. In one year, you provided $90 billion in

breaks to the green energy world. I like green energy as well but that

is about 50 years' worth of what oil and gas receives. This too $0.8

billion goes largely to small companies. But if we get that tax

rate from 35% down to 25%, that money is on the table. -- $2.8

billion. But don't forget, you put of breaks, into solar and wind. A

friend said he did not just pick the winners and losers, you pick

the losers. This is not the kind of policy we want to get America

energy Secure. A second topic. I have been in business for 25 years.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Maybe I need a new

accountant. The idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is

not the case. What we have his money coming from overseas back to

this country. Finally, Medicaid, I would like to take the Medicaid

get what you got last year plus inflation, plus 1%. And then you

will manage the care for your poor in the way you think best. I

remember as a governor when this idea was floated, the governors,

Republicans and Democrats, said police let us do that. We can care

for our own poor. -- please let us. They have the federal government

tell us how to care for our poor. What a magnificent thing, the idea

that states are the laboratories of democracy. Do not let the federal

government tell everybody what kind of training programmes they have to

have and what kind of Medicare they have to have. And if the state get

in trouble, we can step in and see if we can find a way to help them.

But the right approach is one that relies on the brilliance of our

people and state. We are still on the economy but another part of it.

This is Segment three. Entitlements. The first answer goes to you, two

minutes, Mr President. Do you see a major difference between the two of

you on social security? I suspect that on social security we have got

a somewhat similar position. Social security is structurally sound. It

will have to the Tweed, the way it was with Ronald Reagan. -- tweaked.

But I want to speak about the values behind social security and

Medicare. My grandmother helped to raise me. She died three days

before I was elected President. She was fiercely independent. Only add

a high-school education, was a secretary and ended up being the

vice-president of a local bank. She lived alone by choice. The reason

she could be independent was because of social security and

Medicare. She worked all her life, put in this money and understood

that there was a basic guarantee. That is the perspective I bring

when I think about what is called entitlements. The name itself

implies some sense of dependency on the part of these folks. Folks that

have worked hard, like my grandmother. And there are many

others like that. My approach is to say, how do we strengthen the

system over the long-term? In Medicare, what we did was we said,

we are going to have to bring down the cost if we are going to deal

with the long-term deficit. But to do that, let's look at where the

money is going. $716 billion we were able to save from the Vedic

get programmed by no longer over paying insurance companies by

making sure that we were not overpaying providers and by using

that money, we can lower prescription drugs for seniors by

$600. And we were also able to make a significant dent in providing

them the kind of preventive care that will alter that we save money

throughout the system. So, the way for us to deal with Medicare in

particular is to lower healthcare costs. -- alternately. But in

regards to social security, you do not need any major structure

changed. To follow up on this, Governor Romney you have two

minutes on social security and entitlements.

Our seniors depend on these programmes. Offered me to talk

about entitlements. -- often. Either the President nor I are

proposing any changes for any current retirees or near retirees,

either to social security or Medicare. If you are 64 older, you

do not have to listen further. But for younger people, we have to talk

about changes. I was wrong when I said the President was not

proposing any changes. He is on Medicare. -- if you are 60 or older.

Four current retirees, he is cutting money for the programme. He

says by not overpaying providers. Just going to them and saying we

will reduce your great and everybody will get a lower rate.

That is not just going after pay -- places where there is abuse. Some

percentage of hospitals and nursing homes say they will not take any

more Medicare payments. 50% of doctors say they will not take any

more Medicare patients. We have 4 million people on Medicare

advantage that will lose it because of the $760 million worth of cuts.

How can you cut Medicare $716 billion for current recipients and

Medicare? You point out we are giving some back. That is one -- $1

for every 15 you have cut. They are smart enough to know that is not a

good trade. I want to take the money you have cut and put it back

into Medicare. We can include a prescription programme. But the

idea of cutting $716 billion from Medicare to be able to balance the

additional cost of a bummer care is a mistake. With regards to young

people, I have proposals to make sure Medicare and social security

are there without any question. -- cost of other care. The essence of

the plan is that you will turn Medicare into a programme called

Premium support. It's understood... You don't to support that? No.

If you are 54 off 55 you may want to listen. This may affect you.

original idea is that we would give a voucher to seniors and make them

go out into the private market place and by their own health

insurance. The problem is because the Thatcher would not necessarily

keep up with healthcare inflation, it would cost the average senior

about $6,000 a year. There is still a problem. Those in shares

companies are pretty clever at figure gap who are the younger and

healthier seniors. They recruit them, leaving the Olda, sicker

seniors in Medicare. Every healthcare economist who looks at

it says over time, the traditional Medicare system will collapse. Then

we have folks like my grandmother at the mercy of the private health

insurance system at the time when they are most in need of decent

healthcare. I do not think vouchers are the right way to go. This is

not only my opinion. The savings we obtained from Medicare bolster the

system, length and the trust fund by eight years, benefits were not

affected by all. Ironically, if you repeal Obamacare, and I had been

fond of this term, if the repeal it, what happens is those seen years

will be paying $600 more in prescription care. They have to pay

for basic check-ups that can keep them heavier. The primary

beneficiary of that repeal our insurance companies. It is

estimated they will gain billions of dollars back when they are not

making senior as any healthier. I do not think that is the right

approach mac comes to making sure Medicare is stronger over the long-

term. We will talk specifically about healthcare in a manner. Do

you support the voucher system, governor? I support no change for

current retirees. The President's supporters taking over $700 billion

and of that programme. That is number one. Number two is for

people becoming a long cool young. We make sure we did it Medicare in

place for them. We allow them to choose the kind Medicare programme

or a private plan. Their choice. Do we have at least two plans that

will be entirely of no cost to them. -- Day War have at least. If the

government can be as efficient as the private sector and offer

premiums as low as the private sector, people will be happy to get

tradition Medicare or get a private plan. I would rather have a private

plan. I don't want the government is to me what healthcare I can get.

But people make their own choice. The other thing we do to save

Medicare is to have to have higher benefits for lower income. But for

high income people, we have to lower some of the benefits. We have

to make sure the programme is there for the long-term. The idea came,

not even Paul Ryan, it came from Bill Clinton's chief of staff. This

is an idea there has been around for a long time. If we get

competition in the Medicare world, people can get the choice of

different plans at lower-caste and better quality. I believe in

competition. If I can just respond very quickly. Every study has shown

that many care has low administrative cost them private

companies. Private insurers have to make a profit. Nothing wrong with

that. That is what they do. You have high administrative costs,

plus the prospect on top of that. - - profit. If you are going to save

any money, what has to happen is that the money has to come from

somewhere. And when the mood to a voucher system, you are putting

seniors at the mercy of those insurance companies. And over time,

if traditional Medicare has decayed or fallen apart, then they are

stark. This is the reason why it has been said that your plan will

weaken Medicare substantially. And that is why they were supportive of

the approach that we took. One last point I want to make, we do have to

know what the cost of healthcare. Not just in Medicare. But overall.

That is a big topic. Is that a separate topic? The President said

the government can provide the service at a lower caste. It will

always be the best product that people can purchase. My experience

is the private sector will provide a better product at a lower cost.

Ken you agree that the voters have a clear choice between the two of

the in Medicare? Absolutely. What is your view about the level of

federal regulation of the economy right now. Too much? In your case,

Mr President, should there be more? This is not a new to read -- two

minutes Segment. Then we will go to healthcare. We deletion is the

central. You cannot have a free market work if the dinner have

regulation. -- regulations are the central. You have to have

regulations so you can have an economy work. At the same time,

regulations can be excessive. now? In some places years. It can

become out of date. You have seen regulation become excessive and it

has hurt the economy. Let me give you an example. There are some

unintended consequences that are harmful to the economy. 122

Committee and small banks have closed. Here is another. D1 to

repeal it? I want to repeal it and replace it. You have to have

regulation. You need transparency. Unita had been a budget limits. --

you need to have. Let him have a response. This is a great example.

There has been such an enormous economic crisis... It was prompted

by reckless behaviour across the board. It was not just on Wall

Street. You have learned officers who were giving loans and mortgages

that really should not have been given because they did not qualify.

But people were borrowing money to buy houses they could not afford.

Credit agencies were stamping bees as great investments when they were

not. You also have banks are making money, churning out products that

the bankers themselves do not understand. In order to make big

profits but knowing it made the entire system vulnerable. What did

we do? We step in and had the toughest reforms on Wall Street

since 1930s. We said you have to rage a capital requirements. He

cannot engage in some of the risky behaviour. We will make sure bet

you have a living will so we can know how you're going to wind

things down if you make a bad debts are we do not have other bail-out.

We also made sure that all the help we provided those banks were paid

back with interest. Governor Romney says he wants to repeal it. I

appreciate it. It appears we have some agreement that a market place

needs to have some regulation. But in the past, he says he just wants

to repeal it and roll it back. The question is does anybody out there

think that the big problem we had is that there was too much

oversight and regulation of Wall Street? If you do, then governor

Romney is you cannot day. That is not what I believe. -- your

candidate. We have to have regulation in Wall Street but I

would not designate five banks too big to fail and give them a blank

cheque. That is one of the unintended consequences of this. It

was not thought through properly. It is chilling regional and small

banks. -- is killing. The regulation says we have to have

qualified mortgages and if he did not qualify and mortgages, there

are big penalties. But they never define what a qualified mortgage is.

It has been two years and we still do not know. Banks are reliable did

to make loans and mortgages. Try and get a mortgage today. It is

hurting the housing market. It was not anticipated what regulations

you needed to have. Sometimes they do not come up with a clear

regulation. I will make sure we do not hurt the functioning of our

market place and our businesses, because I want to bring back

housing and get good jobs. We have another clear difference between

the two of you. Let's move to healthcare. I know there is a clear

difference. That has to do with the affordable care acts. That means

two minutes each. You go first, governor Romney. You want to repeal

it. I'm sure did. It comes from my experience. A woman came to me and

said I cannot afford insures for myself and my son. I met a couple

who said, we're thinking about dropping Alan shares because we

cannot afford it. And the number of small businesses I have gone to who

said they are dropping their shares because they cannot afford it. We

have to deal with cost. -- insurance. The Congressional Budget

Office says will cost 200 and -- 200 $1,000 a year more traditional

insurers. It is adding to the cost. By this year, he would have brought

down the cost of insurance for each family. It has gone up by that

amount. It is expensive. Expensive things hurt families. That is why

add to not wanted. It cuts $716 billion from Medicare to pay for.

It puts in place an unelected board which was tell people what kind of

trick mistaken have. I do like that idea. -- do not. I do not know how

the President could come into office, facing 22 million people

out of work, rising unemployment, and economic crisis at the kitchen

table, and spent his energy and passion fighting for Obamacare and

son are fighting for jobs for the American people. It has killed jobs.

We must crack a plan on the state level that fits the knee of the

state. Then let's focus on getting the cost down for people. Rather

than raising it. Mr President? years ago when I was running for

office, I was travelling around and hand -- around and having the same

conversations. It was not just that small businesses work seen class

scarab good and they could not get affordable coverage even if they

wanted to provide it to their employees. It was families. They

were worried about going bankrupt if they got sick. Millions of

families, all across the country. They had a break existing condition.

-- pre-existing. They do not have enough money to pay the bills

because the insurance companies say they have hit the limit. We did

work on this, alongside with working on jobs. This is part of

the plan to make sure middle class families are secure in this country.

Let me tell you what Obamacare did. If you have got held in shares, it

does not mean a government takeover. You keep your own insurance. But it

does say insurance companies can jerk you around. -- cannot. Bacon

nine per as arbitrary lifetime limits. They have to let you keep

your kid a new insurance plan until you 26. It also says you going to

have to get rebates if insures companies are said -- spending

Morar on administrative costs and profits than they are on actual

care. If you do not have health insurance, we are setting up a

group plan. This is a BBC News special. You alive in Denver

Colorado with a special coverage of the first televised debate of the

2012 presidential debate campaign. Back to the debate now. Be an irony

is, we have seen this model of work really well. In Massachusetts.

Governor of one needed a good thing, working with Democrats in the state

to set out what is essentially the identical model. As a consequence,

people are covered there. It has not destroy jobs. As a consequence,

we have a system in which we have the opportunity to start bringing

down class. Your five seconds when I did with my first statement but I

will go on. First, I like the way we did it is Massachusetts. I like

the fact in may state we had Republicans and Democrats work

together. Instead you pushed through a plan without a single

Republican vote. When Massachusetts reelectricityed a Republican

Senator to stop Obama Care you pushed it through anyway. We in the

legislation 87% Democrat worked together. 200 only voted against

the plan by the time we finished. We did not raise tax. You have

raised them by $1 trillion under Obama Care. We did not cut Medicare

by $1 716 million. We did not tell people what kind of treatments they

would receive or do something a number of people across this

country recognise - put people in a position where they will whose the

insurance they had and wanted. Right now the CBO says up to 20

million people will lose insurance as Obama Care goes into effect next

year. Likewise a study by McKenzie and company of American businesses

said 30% anticipate dropping people from coverage so for those reasons,

for the tax, for Medicare, this barred and people losing their

insurance, this is why the American people do not want care kairb. It

is why Republicans - Obama Care - said do not do this. Republicans

put a plan out, a bipartisan plan that was swept aside. I think

something this big, this important has to be done on a bipartisan

basis and we have to satisfy President who can reach across and

fashion important legislation with the input from both parties

Governor Romney says this has to happen on a bipartisan basis, this

is a Republican idea. Governor Romney at the beginning of this

date wrote and said at we did in Massachusetts could be a model for

the nation. I agree the Democratic legislatures in Massachusetts might

have given advice the Republicans in Congress about how to cooperate.

We use the same advisors and they say it is the same plan. When

Governor Romney talk about this board, for example, unelected board

we have created. What this is, is a group of health care experts,

doctors, to figure out how can we reduce the cost of care in the

system overall? Because there are two ways to deal with our health

care crisis - one is to simply leave a whole bunch of people

uninsured and let them fend for themselves, to let businesses

figure out how long they can continue to pay premiums until they

give up and workers are no longer insured which has been the trend

line or alternatively we can figure out how to make thes cost of care

more effective and there are ways of doing it. So at Cleveland Clinic

one of the best health care systems in the world, they actually provide

great care, cheaper than average. The reason they do is because they

do some smart things. They say if a patient situation in, let's get all

the doctors together at once, do one test instead of having the

patient run around with 10 tests, let's make sure we provide care so

ecatch the onset of something like diabetes. Let's pay providers on

the basis of performance as opposed to on the basis of how many

procedures they have engaged in. So this board identifies best practice

an says let's use the purchasing power of Medicare and Mehdi -Cade

to help institution lies all the things we do when Obama Care is

fully implemented we will be in a position the show that costs are

going down and over the last two years health care premiums have

gone up, it is true, but they have gone up slower than any time in the

has 590 years. So we are beginning see progress. In the meantime folks

out there with insurance you are already getting a row bait.

Governor Romney says we will replace it but has not said who to

but other than leave to it the States. The fact of the matter is

that so prescriptions he has offered like letting you buy

insurance across 'Stateline's, there is no indication that that

somehow will help someone with a pre-existing condition be able the

finally buy insurance. In fact it is estimated by repealing Obama

Care you are looking at 50 million people losing health insurance at a

time when it is slightly important. Governor what would you do if Obama

Care is repeal? How would you replace it? It a lengthsy

prescription but prey existing conditions are covered, young

people can stay on their family plan which is offered in the

private marketplace. You do not need a government the pan date that

for that to occur. But let's come back the something to the President

and I agree on - the key fast being in health care is to get the cost

down so it is more affordable for families. He has a model for doing

that a board of people, an unelected appointed board of

government who will decide what kind of treatment you should V in

my opinion the Government is not effective in bringing down the cost

of almost anything. As a matter of fact, free people and free

enterprise trying to find people to do things better will be more

effective in bringing down the cost than the Government will ever be.

Your example of the level land Clippic is a case in point along

with others I could describe. These are enterprises competing with each

other learning how to do better and better jobs. I used to consult to

businesses, hospitals, health care providers. I was amazed at the

creativity and innovation that exists in the American people. To

bring the cost of health care down we do not need a board of 15 people

telling us what kinds of treatments we should V we instead need to put

insurance plans, providers, hospitals, doctors on target such

that they have an incentive as you say, performance pay for doing a

excellent job keeping costs down and that is happening. Mao clinic

does it well. Cleveland Clinic, others. But the right answer is not

to have the Federal Government take over health care and start

mandating the providers across America telling it a patient and a

doctor what kind of treatment they can have. Is the wrong way to go.

The private market and individual responsibility always work best.

Let me just point out first of all this board we are talking about

cannot make decision boss what treatments are given. Is explicitly

prohibited in the law - decisions about. Let's go back to what

Governor Romney indicated that under his plan he would be able to

cover people with pre-existing. ACTUALLY, GOVERNOR, THAT IS NOT

WHAT YOUR PLAN DOES. WHAT YOUR PLAN DOES IT TO DUPLICATE WHAT IS THE

LAW IF YOU ARE UNDER HEALTH INSURANCE FOR UNDER THREE MONTHS

YOU CAN GET CONTINUOUS COVERAGE AND ASSURANCE COMPANY CANNOT DENY YOU

ASSURANCE COMPANY CANNOT DENY YOU ASSURANCE COMPANY CANNOT DENY YOU

IF IT HAS BEEN UNDER 90 DAYS. BUT THAT IS ALREADY THE LAW AN DOES NOT

HELP THE MILLIONS OUT THERE WITH WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS. THERE

IS A REASON GOVERNOR ROMNEY SET UP BUT WHEN GOVERNOR ROMNEY CAN NOT

DETAIL HOW IT WILL BE PLACED. THE REASON HE SET UP THE SYSTEM IN

MASSACHUSETTS IS BECAUSE THERE IS NOT A BETTER WAY THE DEAL WITH THE

PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS PROBLEM. HE SAYS IT WILL - HE WILL CLOSE

DEDOESS AND LOOPHOLES FOR HIS TAX PLAN - DEDUCTIONS. WE DO NOT KNOW

THE DETAILS. HE SAYS HE WILL REPLACE WALL STREET REFORM BUT WE

DO NOT KNOW WHICH ONES. I think American people have to ask

themselves the reason Governor Romney is keeping plans to replace

secret because they are too good is? It because somehow middle-class

families will benefit too much from them? No, the reason is because

when we reform Wall Street, when we tackle the problem of pre-existing

conditions, then these are tough problems and we have to make

choices and the choices we have made have been ones that ultimately

benefit middle-class families across the country. I have to

respond to that, which is my experience as a Governor that is if

I come in and lay down a piece of legislation and say it is my way or

the eye way, I do not get a lot done. What I do is the same way

that O'Neil and Regan worked together some years ago. When Regan

ran for office he laid out the principles he was going to foster -

lower tax rates, he said he would blooden the base. You service said

the same thing, you will - broaden the base. You said you would

simplify the tax place, broaden the base. I want to bring down the tax

burden for middle income families. I want to work with Congress saying

what are the ways we can bring down redoes. One way toys have a single

number, make up a number, 25,000, 50,000, anybody can have deductions

up to that amount then that number disappears for hi-income people.

Would could follow Simpson for a model, take deductions by

deductions and make difference as the way. There are alternatives to

accomplish the objective I have, which is to bring down rates,

broaden the base, simplify the code and create incentives for growth.

With regard to health care you have remarkable details with regards the

my pre-existing condition plan. You obviously studied up on my plan. I

do have a plan which deals with people with pre-existing conditions

which is part of my health care plan. What we did in has chew sets

is a mod yol for the station state by state. I -- model. I said that

at the time. The Federal Government taking over health care for the

nation whisking aside the 10th amendment is not course for America

to have a stronger more vibrant economy That is a terrific section

way to our next segment which is the role of government. The role of

government - you are first on this Mr President. The question is this

- do you believe both of you, but you had the first two minute on

this, Mr President - do you believe there is a fundamental difference

between the to of you as to how you view the mission of the Federal

Government? Well, I definitely think there are differences. Um,

the first role of the Federal Government is to keep the American

people safe. That is its most basic function. As Commander in Chief,

that is something that I have worked on and thought about every

single day I have been in the Oval Office. But I also believe that

government has the capacity - the Federal Government has the capacity

to help open up opportunity and create ladders of opportunity and

to create frameworks where the American people can succeed. Look,

the genius of America is the free enterprise system. Freedom and the

fact that people can go out there and start a business and work on an

idea, make their own decisions but as Abe Lincoln understand there are

also some things we do better together. So in the middle of the

civil war Abe Lincoln said let's help to finance the

transcontinental railroad. Let's start the national academy sciences,

let's start land grant colleges, because we want to give these

gateways of opportunity for all Americans because if all Americans

are getting opportunity, we are all going to be better off. Does not

restrict people's freedom, that enhances it. So what I have tried

to do as President is to apply those same principles. When it

comes to education, what I have said is we have the reform schools

that are not working. We use something called Race to the Top,

was not a top-down approach, Governor. We said the States, we

will give you more money if you initiate reforms and as a

consequence you had 46 states around the country who have made a

real difference. But what I have said is let's hire another 10,000

maths and science teachers to make sure we maintain our technological

lead so people are skilled and able to succeed and hard-pressed states

cannot all do that. We have seen lay offs of hundreds of thousands

of teachers and Governor Romney thinks we do not need more teachers

but I do. Is the kind of investment the Federal Government can do, kit

not do it all but it can make a different concerns and as a

consequence we will have a better Tened work force which will create

jobs because companies want to I love great schools. Massachusetts,

our schools are ranked number 1. Great teachers. I reject the idea I

do not believe in great teachers. Every state should make that

decision on their own. The role of government, look behind us. The

constitution and the declaration of independence. The role of

government is to promote and protect the principles of those

documents. Life and liberty. A responsibility to protect the lives

and liberties of our people. That means the military. I do not

believe in cutting the strength of the military. We are endowed by our

Creator with their rights. We must maintain our commitment to

religious tolerance and freedom in this country. We are endowed with

are created by the right to pursue happiness as we choose. We need to

make sure that those who are less fortunate are cared for by one

another. We believe that we are role children of the same college.

We care for those who have difficulties. -- the same God. We

need to provide the pursuit of happiness for our citizens. We also

want to maintain the right of individuals to pursue their dreams.

The Government should not replace that. We are seeing a trickle-down

government approach. The Government thinks it can do a better job than

three people pursuing their dreams. It is not working. One in six

people are in poverty. We have $32 million gone from 32 million people

on foot stems to 47 million people on food stamps. It is time for a

new path. Let us go for some specifics. Education. Does the

federal government have a responsibility to improve the

quality of public education? primary responsibility is at the

state and local level. The federal government can play an important

role. I agree with some of the ideas. The federal government can

get local and state schools to do a better job. I have added that. I

once the children getting federal money, these are disabled or low-

income kids, I want them to be able to go to the school of their choice.

I once the parent and the child to decide where to send them. How do

see the federal government's responsibility to improve the

quality of public education? It has a significant role to play. Through

our programmes we have worked with democratic and Republican

governments. They have an impact. Do you have different views with

the governor Mitt Romney? This is where budgets matter. Burgess

reflect choices. When Governor Romney indicates that he wants to

cut taxes and benefit folks like me and him, to pay for it we are

having to initiate significant cuts and federal support for education.

That makes a difference. The budget reflects many of the principles

that Governor Romney has been talking about. It is not very

detailed. What it did do, you look at cutting the education budget by

up to 20%. When it comes to community colleges. We are seeing

great work done all over the country. We can train people for

jobs that exist right now. One thing that we probably agree on is

that getting businesses to work with community colleges to set up

training programmes. Let me finish my point. They are partnering so

that they can design training programmes and people know there is

a job waiting for them. But that requires some federal support. One

final example. When it comes to making college affordable, one of

the things I did as president was send $60 billion to banks and

lenders as middlemen for the student loan programme. There was

no risk for the banks and lenders. But they were taking billions out

of the system. As a consequence, we have been able to provide students'

assistance and lower interest rates. This is an example where priorities

make a difference. Governor Mitt Romney believes in assistance. But

when he tells a student you should borrow money from your parents to

go to college, that indicates the degree to which there may not be a

focus on the fact that certain people just do not have that option.

They need to have that opportunity and walk through that door. That is

vitally important. We are running out of time. Respond to that.

President, you own your own house and plane, but not to own facts. I

am not going to cut education funding. I can not going to make

changes there. The place to put your money is an indication of wear

your heart is. You put $90 billion in green energy. That would have

hired 2 million teachers. Many of these businesses have gone out of

business. Many are working to be to steer campaigns. -- were

contributing to your campaigns. We do not want to pick winners and

losers. Telling people what kind of health treatment they can receive.

Taking over the healthcare system that has existed in this country.

The right answer is to consider how to make the private sector more

efficient and effective. I propose we grade our schools. So parents

know which schools are succeeding and failing. I do not want to cut

our commitment to education. I want to make it more effective and

efficient. I have that experience. - to such schools are ranked number

one in the nation. -- Massachusetts. It is because I care about

education. We only have three minutes left. I do not want to say

I have done a poor job. You have done a great job. We have lost a

pot. We only have three minutes left. Then we go to closing

statements. I want to ask, in three minutes total time, many of the

legislative functions of the federal government right now higher

in a state of paralysis as a result of Paterson divide. If elected or

re-elected, what would you do about that, Governor? I was elected in a

state where my legislature was 87% democrat. Attica doubt that I had

to get along and work across the aisle. Our schools are number one

in the nation. We cut taxes 19 times. As President I'll sit down

on day one with Democratic and Republican leaders and talk about

the issues and challenges. We have to work on a collaborative basis.

Not because we want to compromise our principles, but because there

is common ground. The reason I am in this race is that because people

are hurting today in this country. We face a deficit that will cross -

- crash future generations. There are developments of concern. We

need to have leadership in Washington that will keep people

together. They do not need to care less if it is a Democrat and

Republican. The Easter President? Governor Romney will have a busy

first day. He will also repeal the healthcare reforms. My philosophy

has been, I will take ideas from anybody. As long as they are

advancing the cause of making middle class family stronger. That

is how we cut taxes for middle class families and small businesses.

That is how we cut one trillion dollars of spending. That is how we

signed three trade deals into law. That is how we repealed do not ask,

do not tell. That is how we ended the war in Iraq. That is how we are

going to end the war in Afghanistan. We have seen progress even under

Republican control of the House of Representatives. But part of being

principled is being able to work out what it is you intend to do.

Not just saying, I'll sit down. You have to have a plan. You have

occasionally got to say no to folks in you're own party and the other

party. We have had some fights between me and the Republicans.

That was a fight that needed to be had. And we were fighting on making

sure that Americans had more security with the health insurance.

That was a fight we needed to have. Part of leadership and Government

is saying what it is you're four Put also been willing to say no to

some things. Governor Romney, when it comes to his own party, has not

displayed the willingness to say no to some extreme parts. That brings

us to closing statements. A coin toss, Governor Romney elected to go

last. I want to thank you and government rummy -- Governor Romney.

I want to thank the University of Denver. Four years ago, we were

going through a major crisis. But my faith and confidence in the

American future is undiminished. The reason is because of its people.

The woman I met in North Carolina who decided at 55 to go back to

school to inspire her daughter and get a new job, because a company in

Minnesota or was willing to give up salaries and perks for their

executives to make sure they did not lay off workers, the workers I

met in Toledo or Detroit. It gives in that sense of pride. They are

helping to build America. The question is how we build on their

strengths. Everything I have tried to do and everything I am proposing

on improving education and closing loopholes foreign companies

shipping jobs overseas for ending the deficit in a way that allows us

to invest in the future. All of those things are designed to make

sure the American people, their genius, their determination is

channelled and they have an opportunity to succeed. Everybody

is getting and doing a fair share. Four years ago, I said I am not a

perfect man and would not be a perfect President. Governor Romney

probably thinks I have kept that promise. But I also said I would

fight every single day on the behalf of the American people. I

have kept that promise. If you vote for me, I will continue that.

Governor Romney. Thank you for tuning in this evening. This is an

important collection. I am concerned about America. I am

concerned about the direction it has been taking over the last four

years. This is a bigger collection than the two of us as individual.

It is an election about the course of America. There are two very

different parts that we have been speaking about this evening. We

will talk about those in future debates. They lead in different

directions. It is, just looking to words. You can look at the record.

You will continue to see a middle class squeeze. In comes going down,

prices going up. You will see chronic unemployment. If I am

president, I will help create 12 million new jobs. The President is

re-elected, the healthcare system will be fully installed. Fatah will

mean a whole different way of life for people on the insurance plan

they had in the past. If I am elected, we will put in place the

kind of principles I've put in place in my own state. We will

focus on getting the cost of healthcare down. If the President

is re-elected to receive a $716 million cut to Medicare. I will

restorer that $716 billion to Medicare. And finally, military.

You will see dramatic cuts. The Secretary of Defence said these

would be devastating. I will not The next debate will be the advice

presidential event on Thursday October 11 at Centre cap college in

Kentucky. For now from the University of deny very, thank you

and goodnight. (APPLAUSE) This is a BBC special. We are there in

Colorado. What do you think? Well, it was certainly serious, Mike. It

Watts 90 minute of solid economic policy, the kind of debate American

voters have been telling me they want to hear. They want to know

about Medicare and taxes. They want to know about social security and

whether people could actually follow it though is a totally

different question. I was incredibly complicated, very

numbers-laden and detated. You have to tread this fine line between

explaining in detail what your policies are going to be while not

losing the audience l I wonder how much this debate managed to do that.

I'm looking at the social media as I'm sure you have been. A lot of

people say Governor Romney in many ways made the running. He was Sian

upbeat and unusual for him homely. The President seemed less energised,

more strained, more tired and there was so much detail if him? Yeah, I

think I would agree with all of that. I think Governor Romney gave

a solid performance. He was crisp. He came across as, you know, as

human as you could come across when you discuss dense economic policy.

He was clear and punchy. I think u I think he looked presidential and

fulfilled that role. Voters who perhaps were wavering about his

credibility as a President certainly in terms of the visuals

of this, will have felt that he managed to fulfil that role. Now,

the big question is going to be whether this debate changes any

minds between now and November 6. To some extent that will depend on

how it was played but I think people were wavering about Governor

Romney and might well feel tonight he gave a very solid performance.

We will run some clips from the debate in a moment. But the

moderator taking quite a kicking on the social media. A lot of people

suggesting he let Governor Romney take over the debate It is

interesting you refer to the social Mead yafplts I have been watching

it too tweeting -- media - I have been tweeting and watching Twitter

during the course of the debate. In previous elections it was cable

television that was the decider of who won and lost these things and

it replayed all the clips. This might be the first presidential

debate where it is Twitter and social media who are the early

arbitors of who wins the depit and you are right suggesting tonight

Governor Romney was the winner and there were questions had the

moderator was punchy enough entrusting them an keeping them on

track incur tailing Governor Romney who certainly over road the

moderator when he told him his time was up. On tax both candidatess

attempted to appeal to the squeezed middle-class. Mitt Romney saying

the pressure they faced is crushing. We should provide tax relief to

people in the middle-class but I'm not going to reduce the high income

people. They will to fine whether you are President or I am. The

people having the hard time are middle income Americans. Under the

President's policies they have been buried. They have been crushed.

Middle income American haves seen their income come down by 4300

dollars. This is a tax of itself, I call it the economy tax. It has

been crushing Added to that Governor Romney crucially for him

denied he would make tax cuts for the rich an repeated there would be

no tax cut that adds to the deficit.There Was 25 minute on

taxation in the course of a 90- minute debate tonight. I think that

underlines how critical a difference this is between the two

candidates. I think it is the most fundamental difference between Mitt

Romney's view of America and the American economy and Barack Obama's

view of how to run the economy. Mitt Romney fundamentally believes

if you give tax cuts to everybody you will get a trickle-down effect

in term of job creations. You should not over-tax the wealthy

because they are the people that create jobs in the country and that

it will stimulate economic growth if you keep tax cuts in place for

everyone. Barack Obama does not believe that and as he said during

the course of this debate, "We have tried that method and it did not

work, it did not stimulate growth and led Tuesday the time of trouble

we got into before the 208 crash". It is not surprising to me they

spent a lot of time on this issue. It is surprising they spent almost

half an hour on it but it was the meet between the difference between

the to candidates. The President was questioned about his tax

policies. He defended the proposals he implemented as President. Four

years ago I said I would cut taxes for middle-class families. We cut

taxes for middle-class families by about 3600 dollars. The reason is

because I believe that we do best when the middle-class is doing well.

By giving them those tax cuts they have a little more money in their

pocket so maybe they can buy a new car. They are certainly in a better

position to weather the extraordinary recession that we

went through. They can buy a computer for their kid who is going

off to college which means they are spending more money, business haves

more customers, businesses make more profits then hire more workers.

Is this fair in addition to laying out in detail his plans and his

defence of his plans I have the sense that Barack Obama was

constantly attacking Governor Romney on a plan that Governor

Romney had said he absolutely was not going to implement. I was not

his plan and there was a slight sense that Mitt Romney was more

sure-footed and swift-footed. He was on the move. President Obama

was not. I wondered half way through the debate whether the

Obama campaign had made the decision they were not going to

attack during the course of this debate. I wonder if that is because

President Obama has done so well in the polls on this issue of

likability, he has been consistently ahead on this issue of

likability. Was that it they decide it was just not worth jeopardising

that? They did not want risk him coming across as unlikeable because

he was attacking Governor Romney. It was almost like President Obama

had decided "I'm not going to rise to the occasion, I'm not going to

keep attacking. I'm not really going to go for this". I'm not sure

if that is what the kolkue laigs was but you are right, Governor

Romney was more sure footed going after the President's record and

attacking that record than the other way around. The debate turned

to deficit reduction. The President outlined the reason behind the $1

trillion deficit he won a when he faced the presidency In the oval

office I had more than $1 trillion deficit greeting me and we know

where it came. From two wars paid for on a credit card. Two tax cuts

that were not paid for and a bunch of programmes that were not paid

for then a massive economic crisis. Despite that what we have said

situation, yes, we had to take some initial emergency measures to make

sure we did not slip into a great depression but what we have also

said is let's make sure we are cutting out the things that are not

helping us grow. Mitt Romney of course has the face down this

constant accusation he is a big money man not in touch with the

American people. He insisted dealing with the deficit was a

moral issue not just an economic one. I think it is not just an

economic issue. I think it it is a moral issue. I think it is frankly

not moral for my generation to keep spending massively more than we

take in knowing purchase denys will be passed onto the next generation

-- those burdens. The amounts of debts we are adding at $1 trillion

a year is simply not moral. So how do we do it? Mathematically there

are three ways you can cut a deficit. One is to raise taxes.

Number two is to cut spending and number three toys grow the economy

because if Moir -- is to grow the economy because if more people work

you can get the job done that way. The President would prefer raising

taxes. I understand. The problem with raising taxes is that it slows

down the rate of growth. You could never quite get the job done. I

want a low - to lower spending and encourage economic growth at the

same time On the back of that Mitt Romney made this point which may

follow with the voters. He said to Barack Obama "You have been

President four years. We still have a $1 trillion deficit. You

President for another four years, we will have more trillion dollar

deficits". How is it going to play, do you think? I thought that was

one of the strongestt point of the debate for Governor Romney when he

and said, "Look what have you done in the last four years in terms of

deficit reduction? You have not done anything" and for conservative

voters worried about the deficit that will have been a strong moment

in the campaign. It was directly questioning the President's record

over the last four years as a quint essential part of the Romney

strategy because what the are trying to say is you have not

achieved in the last four years what you said you were going to.

Your plan is not working, it is now time to give Republicans and to

give my plan a chance. Is the kind of broad backdrop of what

government for Romney was saying. One other thing I would say from

this clip which is so interesting about it being a moral issue which

is so different from America and countries, that is this really is

for very many Americans the deficit is a moral issue and government

spend sing is a moral issue. How to deal with health care can become a

moral issue in the way that it is not in European countries like

economic policy but here it is a issue of value and I think Mitt

Romney will have fund a lot of conservatives ears. Stay with us.

You have been watching a BBC special on the first televised

electial election with Governth Govern

and President Barack Obama. Thank you very The

candidates were asked to define their differences on Obama Care.

Mitt Romney, let's to go clip - he commanded the appeal universal

health care and on the President on jobs. Do not know how the President

could have come into office facing crisis at the kitchen table and

spend his energy over two years fighting for Obama Care instead of

fighting for jobs for the American people. It has killed jobs. The

boast course for health care is to do what we did in my state, craft a

plan at the state level that fits the needs of the state and then

let's focus on getting cost down for people for people an raising

witness the $2500 additional Thank you very much. This was

President Obama's defence of his medical policy. When Obama Care is

fully implemented, we are going to be in a position to show that costs

are going down and over the last two years health care premiums have

gone up, it is true, but they have gone up slower than any time in the

In the meantime, folks with insurance are getting a rebate.

Obama there of course. That concludes our summary of the first

televised presidential debate. There is a sense of some things