Evans, Novak, Hunt & Shields

Bill McCollum and Bill Nelson Discuss their Florida Senate Battle

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

AL HUNT, CO-HOST: I'm Al Hunt. Robert Novak and I will question two candidates for the United States Senate seat in Florida.

ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: They are Congressman Bill McCollum, Republican, and State Insurance Commissioner Bill Nelson, Democrat.

We will question Commissioner Nelson later, but first, we will interview Congress McCollum.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): Bill McCollum, a lawyer from Longwood, Florida, and Seminole County Republican chairman was elected to Congress in 1980 at age 36 and came to Washington along with Ronald Reagan. He had specialized in anti-crime legislation and has advocated term limits, but is best known to the country as one of the Clinton impeachment managers.

Congressman McCollum has attacked Bill Nelson as a failed insurance commissioner and accused his opponent of negative campaigning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. BILL MCCOLLUM (R), FLORIDA: Bill Nelson and his special interest supporters has started their typical negative campaign: mud and distortions. It's ridiculous and demeaning to both you and me. I want to talk common sense, debate the issues and tell you exactly where I stand from requiring a two-thirds majority in Congress before taxes can be raised to rebuilding our national defense.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

NOVAK: Congressman McCollum, you have said that President Clinton is calling the shots in Bill Nelson's campaign. Do you have hard evidence of that? Or is this just an attempt to associate Mr. Nelson with President Clinton in Florida?

MCCOLLUM: Well, Bob, I don't think I've ever used those precise words. I think that perhaps at some point along the way in a fund- raising letter I indicated that I thought that Bill Clinton would like to see me defeated, and I think that came from a New York Times piece that was run several months ago.

I don't have any knowledge of what the motivations are of Bill Clinton. I just know he came in here and raised over $1 million in soft money for Bill Nelson the first day of the Republican National Convention.

I also know that Bill Nelson and Bill Clinton and Al Gore seem to be on the same tune of music without every issue that's out there right now. And I run my campaign on the basis of better government not bigger government. And I think that they stand for bigger government. They stand for more intrusion on our lives and fewer choices for individuals, and that's what I see in this campaign more than anything else.

NOVAK: Sir, there is a new interview with President Clinton in Esquire magazine in which he says the Republican Party in the House of Representatives should apologize to the country for impeaching him.

Without giving an apology, sir, do you find anything -- looking back on the impeachment -- anything that you would do differently if you had to do it over again?

MCCOLLUM: Well, it was a very divisive period for our nation, a very tough and anguishing period for our nation. There's no doubt about that at all. And it was not easy for me personally. But I believe that the president had committed the impeachable offenses with which he was charged. I upheld my duty and constitutional duty as a trial manager, and I don't think there's anything specifically, Bob, that I would differently today.

HUNT: Congressman, for 20 years you've been a conservative champion in Congress: 95 percent, American Conservative Union voting approval. You've opposed expansion of government, you've been against the Brady bill and assault weapons ban, you've been a champion of the social right.

But today, Floridians are seeing a new Bill McCollum, or it seems a different Bill McCollum. You're appearing with gays and lesbians, against hate crimes legislation, you're for common-sense gun control. Why the change in Bill McCollum?

MCCOLLUM: Well, Al, there's really no change in me. It's the fact that for whatever reason at one time or another the press or media focused on one aspect of me. I've been a supporter of hate crimes legislation for a long time. I was an original cosponsor of the bill with Chuck Schumer in 1997.

I strongly am committed to the principle that if somebody commits a crime against an individual principally because of their race or their religion or their sexual orientation or their gender, they should get enhanced punishment because that crime is again not just the person but against that person's status. And it's one of the most horrible crimes you can imagine. It tears at the fabric of America, and so I think they should get extra punishment, if that's the reason they've done it. HUNT: Let's take one issue, then. Let's take the issue of gun control, because both the National Rifle Association and Handgun Control, two opposite sides of this issue, agree that you have been a champion of the gun lobby for most of your time in Congress. They've contributed money to your campaigns. You say, however, your critics are extremists, left-wingers. The chief critic who's been down to Florida to campaign against you is Jim Brady, who was Ronald Reagan's press secretary when he was shot. Do you think that Jim Brady is an extremist?

MCCOLLUM: Well, Al, I think we have a difference of opinion between Jim Brady and I over the waiting period way back when. But the truth is, I've never taken money since 1982 from the National Rifle Association or any gun lobby.

I've been chairman of the Crimes Subcommittee. I've tried to put balance in this. I've been a hunter. I believe in the Second Amendment rights.

But I also believe that no criminal should get a handgun or a gun. I think we need to do everything we can to make the background checks and the instant check work. I was one of the original people who promoted the instant check system, when you go to buy a gun from a gun dealer.

I believe in closing the gun show loophole. Had my own effort to do that with a 72-hour wait because I thought that was necessary over the weekend.

I also believe in safety locks. I have voted for them.

I think you have to have balance in this process. It's not just one way or the other.

And you also have to be tough on criminals who commit crimes with guns. I think Jeb Bush's 10, 20, life is a perfectly good example of that, or Project Exile, where you focus on people who commit gun crimes and give them extra-tough penalties, just like you do with hate crimes.

NOVAK: Congressman McCollum, you have described yourself as pro- life. Now, is it true, as Mr. Nelson says, that when we have a Supreme Court with three or four new justices, you would like to see the Supreme Court overturn the Roe v. Wade decision? Would you like to see that decision overturned?

MCCOLLUM: Well, first of all, I am pro-life, but I have opinion about picking justices -- and the Senate of course votes on ratifying justices -- that says there is to be no litmus test. My main concern is: Is a judge or will a judge be somebody who has the right judicial temperament...

NOVAK: Well, would you like to see the...

MCCOLLUM: ... and they have the right background -- if I may finish this. I believe the single biggest criteria is: Will a judge interpret the Constitution, or will somebody who's going to be a justice on the Supreme Court be somebody who's going to legislate or be an activist judge. That's how I think the decision should be made.

Do I think Roe v. Wade is right? No, I don't. Do I think it'll be overturned? It's highly improbable that it will be.

NOVAK: All right. You have been criticism, Congressman, by some members of the press, by your opponent, by the Democrats, for taking contributions from people that you regulate in the housing industry and the banking industry.

We know that many, many congressmen do that. But not talking about the past but the future, in this Senate, do you think it might be a good idea, if you're a U.S. senator, not to take contributions from companies, from industries, that you deal with?

MCCOLLUM: Well, Bob, there's no way to sort all that out. You know, we have rules that I've always abided by where if you have a conflict of interest you don't vote on the matter.

But from the standpoint of contributions, let's take the banking industry for example. There are banks that are there, credit unions that are there, savings and loans, there are insurance interests, et cetera, et cetera, that are always fighting among each other. I've always taken some -- from anybody who wanted to give it except for the gun lobby. That's the only one I think I've excluded.

And let me say something else: In this campaign for the Senate, I have over 30,000 donors, and the average donation is $100. I just want people to know that I never have taken money under any belief that anyone was giving...

HUNT: Congressman, let me...

MCCOLLUM: ... it for any other reason than because of my beliefs...

HUNT: Let me see if I could get...

MCCOLLUM: ... not because of my vote.

HUNT: Let me see if I could get just a 10-second answer to this: You and your opponent have differed over prescription drugs for seniors. You say his plan is too costly. If it could give more generous benefits to seniors for prescription drugs, would you be willing to cut back on your tax cut proposal for the wealthiest Americans?

MCCOLLUM: Well, Al, you've of course asked a lot of things in that question. I think you've set up with the wealthiest-American thing typical class warfare. That's a kind of a liberal position when I think across-the-board tax cuts are much better.

On prescription drugs: The reality is, I like the one I voted for because I think it provides choices for seniors instead of having one-size-fits-all, the big government idea that I think, again, liberals tend to want to do, the people who like Bill Nelson and Al Gore promote.

But with regard to the particulars on a prescription drug plan, I believe that scenario should have a prescription drug coverage under Medicare, and I'm not wedded to any particular way of going about it. I just think that the way I voted and the method of giving them choices is a much better one than the one that Mr. Nelson supports.

HUNT: Congressman, I've got to interrupt because I want to thank you.

But we will be back in just a minute with the "Big Question" for Congressman Bill McCollum.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HUNT: And now, the "Big Question" for Bill McCollum.

Congressman, impeachment was a monumental moment. Let me ask for a direct answer to this: Do you think the country would be better off today if the Senate had followed your admonition and voted to convict Bill Clinton and thrown him out of office?

MCCOLLUM: Well, I obviously believed that then and I believe it now, because I think that he did commit impeachable offenses. And we went through that. As I said earlier, it's a very divisive issue, was, tore the fabric of our country.

It was very troubling for our nation. I wouldn't want to wish it on anyone to go through it, and I certainly don't wish it on anybody to go through another impeachment trial of a president.

But I believe then, as I do now, that the rule of law needs to be upheld, and I did my constitutional duty.

NOVAK: Congressman McCollum, if you're a U.S. senator in January, what is the first piece of legislation you would like to see considered?

MCCOLLUM: Well, the number one thing to do right now is to preserve and protect Social Security and Medicare. Those are the two things I think most people are focused on at the moment.

And I think we need to come to grips with this in a bipartisan way. We need to find a way to extend the life of both of these programs. As you know, Social Security is a practical matter. For the cash flow basis, we'll go bankrupt in 2015 if we don't address it.

I think that's the number one priority right now in doing something to extend its life. And I think the savings account idea for the younger generation is the way to do that. I believe if we put aside a certain amount of money into that savings opportunity for younger people, younger generation, they build it for 30, 40, 50 years, then it will be saved.

And Medicare is also equally important. And choices in Medicare.

NOVAK: Thank you very much, Congressman Bill McCollum.

We'll be back with Mr. McCollum's opponent, State Insurance Commissioner Bill Nelson after these messages.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NOVAK: Welcome back.

We continue our discussions with the candidates from the U.S. Senate seat from Florida, now with State Insurance Commissioner Bill Nelson, Democrat.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): A lawyer from Melbourne, Florida, Bill Nelson was elected to the Florida House or Representatives in 1972 at age 30. After serving there for six years, he was elected to Congress in 1978 and served five terms. He became one of the congressional experts on the space program and won national attention in 1986 as a legislator- astronaut riding the space shuttle.

After an unsuccessful run for governor in 1990, he was elected as insurance commissioner in 1994, specializing in fighting insurance fraud.

He also accused Congressman McCollum of voting to cut Medicare and denied charges that he has raised insurance rates.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Bill Nelson inherited an insurance crisis after Hurricane Andrew, and he's been taking on the insurance companies ever since. Now the Wall Street Journal has revealed Bill McCollum is using his position in Congress to target banking and financial corporations to underwrite his campaign, trading favors for cash.

Bill McCollum: paid for by the special interests.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

NOVAK: Mr. Nelson, Congressman McCollum has said that your election is the second-highest Senate priority of President Clinton, the highest being his wife, of course. Now, you, of course, were gone from Congress by the time President Clinton got here, but is there anything in the eight years of the Clinton administration, any important policy by President Clinton, that you would have opposed?

BILL NELSON, FLORIDA STATE INSURANCE COMMISSIONER: Well, the way they started out on their gays in the military, I did not approve of that. I thought it ought to be don't ask-don't tell, and I think that's a policy that's working.

And I think that the way they initially approached the health care was not a good way to do it. It was a government-run system. We ought to use the private sector. And with what the people of Florida have taught me as insurance commissioner, if I get to go to the Senate, that's one of the top priorities, health insurance, on making a system that will work. And there are some things we can do right now.

NOVAK: Commissioner Nelson, you've described yourself as an advocate and supporter of the Second Amendment gun rights but also a supporter of common-sense gun control. Your candidate for president, Al Gore, has come out for photo-I.D. licensing for new gun purchases. Do you support that?

NELSON: No, I don't. But clearly we shouldn't be selling AK- 47s, and when I was in Congress I voted against assault weapons being able to be sold. And clearly we ought to do common-sense things like having a criminal background check in the purchase of a handgun and having a waiting-period. And I voted for that when I was in Congress and I support that. And that's a big difference between me and my opponent, Mr. McCollum, because he does not want the waiting period for a criminal background check.

HUNT: Mr. Nelson, you and Vice President Gore both have proposed a number of new government programs. Your critics say that it would bring back big government.

Let me ask you this. If we were to experience an economic downturn, if the business cycle is not returned -- is not repealed, rather, which two or three of those programs would you be willing to scale back or delete?

NELSON: Well, that's why I have a lot of room for error. These budget surpluses, we don't know that they're going to be there 10 years from now, but we know that they are here now. And we ought to use those budget surpluses to pay down the national debt and use that interest savings at the poor end of the Social Security trust fund and to provide other things like modernizing Medicare with a prescription drug benefit.

And also, Al, you ask a very pertinent question, how big a tax cut? I think it ought to be a very substantial tax cut, in the range of about $500 billion over the next 10 years, but my opponent wants a $1.5 trillion tax cut over that same period of time. And that would wipe out the budget surplus, the non-Social Security budget surplus, and you couldn't do any of these other things.

HUNT: But, Mr. Nelson, in your tax-cut proposal, you would have a myriad of different proposals that would reward people for various behaviors, many of them I'm sure very laudable. But in 1986, when you were in Congress, you voted for the Bradley-Gephardt bill, which had an entirely different approach. It would have -- it lowered rates and broadened the base rather than making it more complex. Wouldn't we better -- wouldn't we be better off with a simpler tax code?

NELSON: In 1981 and '86, I supported President Reagan's tax cuts. And we had to modify some of those in 1982 and then again in '86 with Reagan's Tax Simplification Act. What I think we need to do now is to use some common sense and help where we need help with tax cuts, for example a tax credit for care giving so that people have an alternative to help their mom and dad stay in their own home instead of having to pout them into a nursing home. Not only is it a better quality of life for their parents, but it's a lot cheaper than putting in a nursing home, as well.

So tax cuts targeted like that I think make the most sense.

NOVAK: Commissioner Nelson, Vice President Gore and the Democratic Party have been opposed to what they call tax cuts for the rich. What is the upper limit beyond which nobody should get a tax cut? Should a person who gets $50,000 not get any tax cut? Or is it $100,000, or is it $75,000? What is the measurement above which if a person makes above that much he should not get any tax cut?

NELSON: I don't look at it that way, Bob. I look at it of returning some of this surplus to the people and to doing it in ways that people need help. For example, a tax deduction for college and university tuitions so that families can, through their children, achieve the American dream.

NOVAK: Without an upper income limit?

NELSON: I don't think that there ought to be an upper income limit on a tax cut. For example, I've been criticized -- I support the repeal of the inheritance tax. I voted for that in '81, I voted for it again in 1986, and I still think it's a good thing. But right now we shouldn't do a $1.5 trillion tax cut and wipe out the surplus so that you can't do all these other things.

Defense -- providing for the common defense is one of the most important thing in America...

HUNT: If I may jump in just for a second, Mr. Commissioner...

NELSON: Sure.

HUNT: ... you have accused your opponent of being captive of the various special interests involved in this campaign, and yet several months ago you had Bill Clinton come to Florida. He raised $1 million of soft money. I don't think he raised that from the average folks. Doesn't that raise the issue of hypocrisy on your part?

NELSON: Well, sure it does. But my opponent, Mr. McCollum had President Bush come and raise $1 million for him. But the fact is we need to reform the laws.

Now Senator McCain has said that he will shut down the Senate until the Senate in January passes campaign finance reform and bans soft money. I have pledged that I will do that. My opponent has not. I have a voting record that has always voted to ban soft money. My opponent has a record that he's never voted for passage of a bill to ban soft money.

So the question is, what are we going to do in the future? I think campaign finance reform is one of the most important things we can do. HUNT: OK, we're going to take a break now and we'll be back with the "Big Question" for Bill Nelson.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HUNT: And now the "Big Question" for Bill Nelson.

Mr. Nelson, you and Congressman McCollum have many differences. Let's just set those aside for a moment. Do you think the fact that he was such a leader in the impeachment effort, that fact alone should disqualify him for the United States Senate?

NELSON: No, I don't, but I think it gives a window into what his style is and his personality and what kind of legislator he would be. That was a time in which what the president said was that he had done wrong, the American people knew that it was wrong, I said it was wrong. But it didn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense.

And instead of using that time for passing prescription drugs and saving Social Security, there was a shrill partisan food fight in Washington. And I think that gives a window into a personality that contrasts hopefully with mine, that I'm a bipartisan consensus builder.

NOVAK: Just briefly, Commissioner Nelson, if you are elected to the U.S. Senate, what do you think the prime issue, the priority issue, should be that is taken up in the Senate in January?

NELSON: Well, first of all campaign finance reform is one, and then get about saving Social Security by using the interest savings and then a prescription drug benefit guarantee to modernize Medicare...

NOVAK: Bill...

NELSON: ... and then we can get on to education.

NOVAK: Bill Nelson, thank you very much.

Coming up in one half hour on "RELIABLE SOURCES," are the networks providing enough news about campaign issues in the presidential race, or trading the coverage for profits?

And coming up at 7:00 p.m. on "CAPITAL GANG," what's ahead in the final days in the presidential campaign and a focus on New York's U.S. Senate race between Rick Lazio and Hillary Clinton.

HUNT: Thanks for joining us.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com