By Aliyah Siddiqui
Nation and World Editor
Sen. JD Vance and Gov. Tim Walz faced off during the vice presidential debate on Oct. 1, marking the first and only VP debate for the 2024 election season. Hosted by CBS News, the debate was moderated by Norah O'Donnell, the anchor and managing editor for “CBS Evening News,” and Margaret Brennan, the moderator and chief foreign affairs correspondent for “Face the Nation.”
According to CBS News, Vance and Walz had varying approaches in preparing for the debate. Vance prepared for the debate for over a month, meeting with his advisors and studying Walz’ policy records. As reported by CBS, Vance hoped to use the debate to highlight Walz’ “left-wing views” and focus on the economy, immigration and international peace. Walz similarly met with advisers to prepare for the debate, but aimed to use the debate to introduce himself to voters and discuss Kamala Harris’ policies and goals for the country.
These preparation sessions came to a test as the two candidates were asked questions regarding a variety of topics important to voters, including the Middle East, climate change, immigration, the economy, personal qualifications, reproductive rights, gun violence, inflation, healthcare costs, childcare and the state of democracy.
The first issue discussed during the debate was on the Middle East, with Brenner asking Walz and Vance if they would support a preemptive strike from Israel on Iran. Walz maintained that Israel had the right to defend itself and that the U.S. needed steady leadership to address the Middle East crisis, a quality that Harris has over Donald Trump. Vance similarly said that the U.S. should support their allies and argued that Trump offered “stability in the world.”
The next issue discussed was on climate change, especially given the recent devastation caused by Hurricane Helene. O’Donnell asked Vance what the Trump administration would do to combat climate change. Vance said that they support clean air and water, but that carbon emissions discussions are a “weird science.” He instead advocated that manufacturing should be done in the U.S. rather than China.
Walz responded to Vance and described the benefits from the Inflation Reduction Act and the efforts Minesotan farmers are taking to protect their crops and improve the climate. For example, he mentioned that in Minnesota, they are starting to weatherproof items and increasing mitigation measures.
On immigration, Vance was asked about how the mass deportation that Trump and Vance campaign on would be implemented. Vance blamed Harris for the immigration crisis and fentanyl increase, while reimplementing Trump’s border policies. Walz defended Harris, referring to the border security bill that would have supported border patrol, but was not passed by Congress due to Trump’s opposition to the bill.
Walz also mentioned how the immigration crisis has also led to the demonization of immigrants, such as was done to Haitian immigrants in Springfield. Vance defended his stance by stating that the U.S. “brought in millions of illegal immigrants to compete with Americans for scarce homes.” However, as Brenner clarified, the Haitian migrants in Springfield have temporary protected status.
In response, Vance attempted to speak over the moderators about the CBP One App established by the Biden Administration, which he claimed would allow undocumented migrants to apply for asylum. However, this is not true, according to the New York Times, and the app instead allows migrants to make appointments to entry ports.
On the economy, both candidates were asked how their respective Presidential candidates would pay for their economic plans without increasing the deficit. Harris campaigned to have an “opportunity economy” with plans to support new homeowners and young families. While Walz did not directly state how the economic plan would be funded, he alluded that it would be paid by asking “the wealthiest to pay their fair share” and that the plan would save money in the long run.
Vance also did not directly describe how the Trump economic plan would be paid for, but instead described how Trump’s previous economic plan improved the American economy and that economists disapproving Trump’s policies lacked “common sense.” He also described Trump’s plans to bring manufacturing back to the U.S., which Walz said was already being done by the IRA.
The next section of the debate discussed personal qualifications to be vice president. Walz was asked about his comments on being in the Tiananmen Square protest when he wasn’t in China at the time. Walz was not able to explain the discrepancy and that he misspoke, but his time traveling to Hong Kong and China taught him a lot about governance.
Brenner also asked about Vance’s previous comments against Trump, including calling him “America’s Hitler.” Vance said that he had been wrong about Trump.
On the issue of reproductive rights, Walz was asked whether he supported abortion in the 9th month. Walz said that the bill passed in Minnesota aimed to protect abortion rights and reproductive healthcare, and then gave examples of Amanda Zaworski and Hadley Duvall, women for whom the access to abortion was or would have been vital to their wellbeing.
He additionally added that access to abortion and infertility treatments is a “basic human right” and that the Harris-Walz campaign is “pro-women” and “pro-freedom to make your own choice.”
Vance, while denying that the Trump administration would create a federal pregnancy monitoring agency, said that they would support “pro-family” policies, such as making childcare affordable and fertility treatments accessible, while leaving abortion to the states.
In the second segment of the debate, the candidates were asked about their stances on how to address gun violence in the country. Vance argued that schools need to have more security and that mental health needs to be addressed as well to resolve the gun violence problem. He also supported empowering law enforcement to reduce “gun offenders” in urban areas.
Walz, on the other hand, clarified that the Harris campaign does not intend to take away people’s guns, but there does need to be fun safety legislation, such as the red flag laws and enhanced background checks in Minnesota. He also cautioned against the stigmatization of mental health, stating that “a mental health issue doesn't mean you're violent.”
Inflation was also discussed during the debate. Brenner asked Walz about the Harris campaign promise of providing down payment assistance, tax credit and home development and whether it would increase inflation. Walz maintained that they were not just handing out money and that the country would save money in the long run, such as in the case of Minneapolis.
Vance, while discussing the Trump campaign's promise to increase housing by using federal lands, provident tax breaks and removing regulation, blamed the high housing prices on Harris for allowing in undocumented immigrants, although immigration has not been found to primarily cause the housing shortage. He also said Americans would provide immediate relief by lowering energy prices. Similar to Walz, he did not specify where housing would be built.
The debate then shifted to the high cost of healthcare. Vance was asked about specific plans from the Trump campaign to improve healthcare. Vance said that he would cover Americans with pre-existing conditions; however, the Affordable Care Act already resolves this issue. Vance also described Trump’s previous actions as president, including increasing price transparency, and that the current plans are to keep the current regulations and expand the healthcare marketplace.
Walz, on the other hand, pointed out that Trump aimed to repeal the ACA when he was president. He also said that Harris would “protect and enhance the ACA,” citing the Biden-Harris administration’s efforts in negotiating some drug prices for Medicare. He also claimed that the Trump-Vance plan on adjusting the risk pool would take the U.S. back to pre-ACA days.
On the issue of childcare affordability, both Walz and Vance agreed that the government needs to spend money to provide childcare, such as through child tax credits.
Finally, when asked about the state of democracy, the two candidates had differing opinions on what the threat to democracy was. According to Vance, censorship was a “threat to democracy,” dodging Brenner’s questions on whether he would “seek to challenge this year's election results, even if every Governor certifies the results.” He also said that issues such as this should be debated peacefully in a public setting.
Walz responded to Vance saying that differences need to be settled at the ballot and that “democracy is bigger than winning an election. You shake hands and then you try and do everything you can to help the other side win.” Vance agreed that peace is necessary, but maintained that censorship was a threat to democracy and that both parties needed to reject it. He did not comment on the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, but said Trump left the White House peacefully.
In their closing statements, both Walz and Vance thanked the American people for tuning in and ended with words on the future of the country.
“Kamala Harris is bringing us a new way forward. She's bringing us a politics of joy. She's bringing real solutions for the middle class,” Walz said. “And she's centering you at the heart of that, all the while asking everyone, ‘Join this movement. Make your voices heard. Let's look for a new day where everybody gets that opportunity and everybody gets a chance to thrive.’ I humbly ask for your vote on November 5 for Kamala Harris.”
“What that has taught me is that we have the greatest country, the most beautiful country, the most incredible people anywhere in the world. But they're not going to be able to achieve their full dreams with the broken leadership that we have in Washington,” Vance said. “We need change. We need a new direction. We need a President who has already done this once before and did it well. Please vote for Donald Trump.”
Throughout the debate, both candidates showed civility, at times agreeing with the comments the other candidate made. According to NPR, the word “agree” was said over two dozen times, with the candidates having similar concerns about the problems facing the country but different approaches to addressing them.
There were also moments of mistruths and misrepresentation as well, however. Many fact checkers, including ones by The New York Times and CBS News, give more insight into the comments both candidates made during the debate.
Whether the debate swayed voters is yet to be determined, but Americans can vote for their preferred candidate on Nov. 5.
