Democratic Party Veterans Answered Questions on the '08 Nominating Race

LEON PANETTA: I think it's about the vision of each of these candidates as to where the country needs to be. You know, obviously Democratic Party in our view, those of us who are Democrats, represents a party that wants to address the issues that are facing families in this country.

There are a huge number of issues out there, I have never in my lifetime seen as many crises confronting a new president as the next president will have to face.

Jesse Jackson referred to the fact that we're confronting a very serious economic crisis now, with the possibility that we may very well be in a recession. Two wars, one that we're now celebrating the fifth year -- we're not celebrating, but we're suddenly recognizing that we have 5 years of war in Iraq. Record deficits, record gas prices.

And so it seems to me that both of these candidates know the importance of addressing those issues, and I think that's what they bring to the table.

Clearly, if there is a difference, it's the difference of Hillary Clinton having a long history in politics, having served as first lady in the White House, in the United States Senate, and presenting, along the trail, some of the solutions that she feels are important.

For Barack Obama it is this message, this broader message of unity, that we have to come together if we're going to deal with these issues.

But, I think deep down, I don't think these candidates are separated very much, in terms of what they want to do to confront these issues. I don't think they're separated in terms of their vision of the Democratic Party and the country, and so that's what makes this a close race.

And hopefully, that's what will make both candidates recognize that in the end, they have to unify behind whoever wins the nomination.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Rev. Jackson, how far apart do you think the visions of these two candidates are?

THE REV. JESSE JACKSON: Well, part of the tension is that they share so much in terms of values. They came to this campaign as friends, they raised funds for each other, and they campaigned for each other, and they both have a sense that the War in Iraq is misguided.

We chose corrupt Iraqi exiles over U.N. inspectors, and that preemptive strike -- in it we've lost money and lives and honor, and we should get out, it's just a matter of degree, and how quickly we do it.

But, they basically share that same view of Iraq and Afghanistan. They both share the position that an economic stimulus, it might be top-down if you tax a gift that will take you to Wal-Mart and get some product made in China.

If you're behind three months in your house, facing a foreclosure, $900 will not do very much for you, you need to restructure your loans and not repossess homes. If we can figure out some plan indeed to bail out and restructure Wall Street and for the likes of Bear Stearns, we can do no less for the American homeowner.

A real stimulus must be bottom-up, rebuild bridges and roads, and sewers and schools, when a bridge collapses in Minneapolis, atop of the Mississippi River, and a levy collapses in New Orleans at the bottom of the Mississippi River, clearly you're forced to reinvest and put America back to work. They share values of public education of all children, and a broader, more accessible health care system.

So, their relationship is fairly close, and that's why I hope that in the end, if the super delegates have a particular role, it will be a role of bridging -- of bridging the gap, and not using their vote to go counter the delegate vote, or go counter the public vote.

Super delegates must be super healers and super reconcilers, to let us leave Denver on one accord.

Setting aside his assumption, here, how would you comment?

LEON PANETTA: Well, you know, the challenge that we all face, and very frankly, both parties face it, is the challenge of how you bring people together to confront the common problems that we all face.

I mean, it is easy for those who want to use fear or divide us, or try to split us apart on race or on religion -- it's always easy for those who want to divide to be able to do that, and frankly, we've had too many races in the past where the parties, in one way or another have fought to divide, as opposed to unify people.

And I think that's what's hurting America. I think all of us feel that this country is not as strong as it should be in confronting all of the problems we have to face, because we are, in many ways, divided, and to a large extent the parties have played to those divisions.

I think we have to move beyond that, and I think this country has to move beyond. And so, you know, to the question, how do we ultimately unify, I think that's the challenge that's facing the next president of the United States -- how do you bring this country together?

We've been divided in the past, and we've had presidents -- President Roosevelt, had to bring this country together to confront the huge challenge of the Depression, and ultimately World War II.

We had the challenge of Harry Truman having to bring the country together to deal with problems of Korea, and the challenges that we were facing here. We've had John Kennedy, be able to try to reach out and heal this country in dealing with racial issues, and the issues dealing with our national security.

So, I'm one who is confident that, whether it's Hillary Clinton or whether it's Barack Obama, that the primary message to the country is, we have to come together to deal with the problems we confront.

We've had 8 years of dividing this country up, of splitting us apart by race, by class, by religion, and we've had enough of that. If this country is going to be great, if it's going to confront the issues it has to face, we simply can --

THE REV. JESSE JACKSON: Can I be quick to say that I thought in Sen. Barack Obama's address against the headwinds of some challenging days, he spoke of the -- he shared his soul, his own pain, with the pains, this path ahead with which he disagrees, his black pastor, things that his white grandmother said that she raised him that made him crass, and yet out of the crucible of that pain, he spoke of a new vision, new hope of reconciliation.

Recognizing, 40 years since Dr. King's death, we are a better nation. We made tremendous progress in racial justice and gender equality and the workers' rights, and when I can look at Mississippi -- this week, 43 years ago, we marched for the right to vote, just this week. And in Mississippi, what was then terror, now becomes terrific when you see whites voting for a black, and women, men voting for a woman, and both Senators Clinton, and Barack, are the conduits through which a new and better America is expressing itself -- that's a good thing. We really are going forward by our hopes, and not by our fears.

JUDY WOODRUFF: We've got a number of questions I want to try to get to. This is from Craig Van Dyke, South Orange, N.J., he says, "Why don't these two candidates declare a truce, and say they will not henceforth criticize each other, but will speak about what they will do to improve the country?" He goes on to say, "It seems that their egos will not let them take, 'the high road,' but the real danger is that they will destroy each other and open the way for the Republicans to keep the White House."

How do -- what about that, Leon Panetta?

LEON PANETTA: Well, I'm with that listener, that's probably a very good idea. You know, the problem is not so much the egos of the candidates, it's the political consultants that each of the candidates have, because the consultants will tell you that the only way you can win in a political race is to tear down your opponent, and to be negative on your opponent.

And so, I'm sure they're trying to urge the candidates one way or another to continue to attack each other, because that's all political consultants, frankly, know.

But, I think that if, in fact, Democrats are going to unify, that these candidates have to take these issues to a higher plane. I think what Barack Obama did today is very important -- this is an important discussion that we need to have with ourselves.

I think that both candidates need to talk about how we fix this economic crisis that we're facing. What do we do about Iraq? What do we do about Afghanistan? What do we do about the issues of health care and education?

I mean, those are the issues. And I would hope that the candidates will rise above the politics, and above their political consultants, and talk to those issues. If they do, we will be stronger it.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Rev. Jackson, you've run a campaign for President yourself. Is this realistic, to think that this kind of criticizing each other could stop?

THE REV. JESSE JACKSON: Well, it must stop. Because as they tear each other down, they weaken their candidacies, and the focus is to drawing each other's blood, and not lifting the people up, that then need to turn out and vote.

In Pennsylvania, for example, Eastern Pennsylvania is Appalachia -- hard-working steel miners, or coal miners, or chemical workers.

And coal miners fare badly with black lung disease -- what a great chance to put focus on the Appalachia during this campaign. Abandon urban policy, with jobs and investments are leaving, and drugs and guns are coming in, with taxes up and services down, and first class children in second-class schools.

What a great moment, therefore, to recognize that this is the time to shift from racial battleground to economic common ground, and onto moral higher ground.

I think that Sens. Clinton, and Barack Obama, are equal to that task, that certainly is their moral challenge and their opportunity.

And then, a Bill Adair from Philadelphia, he says, "I'm concerned, are the Democratic candidates beating themselves up so much that whoever emerges as the victor will be permanently damaged?" He says, "Can we actually unite the party by November?"

Rev. Jackson, a quick answer to this.

THE REV. JESSE JACKSON: Well, that is the risk they take when they attack and counter-attack. I hope that they'll focus on who is in the wagon, and who belongs in the wagon, not just the horse race.

Let the statisticians focus on delegate count -- let them focus on vision for our economy and a way to end this war and have peace with honor.

LEON PANETTA: I think they -- you know, the problem is that they really do need to focus on John McCain, who -- somebody I've served with, he's been a maverick in the past, but clearly is running as the alter-ego of George Bush.

And if that's the case, then we're not going to face any changes in our economy, we're not going to face any changes in the war in Iraq, we're not going to face any changes when it comes to health care and the needs of people.

That, it seems to me, has to be the fundamental goal, which is to say, do you want another 8 years of what we've seen over the past? And most Americans think they're worse off, and that seems to me to be where the Democratic candidates need to be.

JUDY WOODRUFF: All right, we have several questions about the Super Delegates, I'm going to read one, this is from Michael Burns in Schenectady, N.Y.

Reverend Jackson, he says, "This year it appears we may be on the verge of defeat," people taking a pessimistic view, here, "due to intra-party bitterness caused by the Michigan and Florida situations, and the super delegate rancor. What changes in the primary and super delegate system do you see resulting from this year's mess?"

THE REV. JESSE JACKSON: Well, clearly, there should be a rhythm determined that in the unevenness in the process, the so-called Super Tuesday cluster where it's designed to break someone who does not have enough money to go on, is a bad idea.

The idea of maybe a -- Iowa and New Hampshire being, say -- environment in New Hampshire and South Carolina, a more balanced season would be significant.

Maybe a Southern primary, given how critical the South is to us. Maybe something dealing with these industrial states -- but a rhythm that is more definite. This year, the unevenness of the rhythm -- to think that we've got six weeks between Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania, that is absurd.

We need a better rhythm than that.

LEON PANETTA: The system is broken. Our primary system is broken. You know, states were rushing to move up front, everybody was trying to out-do Iowa and New Hampshire so that they would have some say. That resulted in the problem we now have with the -- Florida and Michigan.

I really do think both parties ought to move towards regional primaries --

THE REV. JESSE JACKSON: Yeah.

LEON PANETTA: -- where you basically combine a set of states in each of the regions, and you can rotate that every four years, so that we have some kind of standard system that we follow in terms of deciding who's going to be the next president of the United States, and stop this system where, obviously, money and organization play such a large role in determining who's going to win.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Leon Panetta, what about the super delegates? Should they determine -- if this is still unresolved after all the primaries are over, should the super delegates -- is there any -- is there really any other choice than to see the super delegates decide the outcome?

LEON PANETTA: Well, I think that's where we're at, I think we are headed towards the convention. We're probably headed towards a situation where the super delegates will be the deciding votes as to who gets the nomination, so a lot depends on the role they play.

They are -- they were created to be independent. They were not created to simply be like other delegates, and so they're going to have to exercise some leadership here, in determining who should be the candidate. What do they take into consideration?

Obviously, they take into consideration, you know, who has won the largest number of delegates, who has got the popular vote, but then they have to also think about who can best win in November, who has got the best chance of beating John McCain, and it seems to me all of those have to be considered, and hopefully they'll do that before they get to the convention, as opposed to having a, you know, a real conflict and battle on the floor of the convention, which I think will lead to the kind of consequences that Jesse talked about.

THE REV. JESSE JACKSON: And the next, further campaigns, from Pennsylvania to North Carolina to West Virginia -- that spurt of the campaign season might determine and help sway the votes of the super delegates, ultimately.