LOU DOBBS TONIGHT
Massive Earthquake Strikes Japan; A look at Recent Political Debates
Aired September 25, 2003 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening.
Tonight, a powerful earthquake has hit northern Japan. And authorities have issued tsunami warnings throughout the Pacific region. Residents of Hokkaido are being told the flee inland, as are residents all along the tsunami warning region. The magnitude-8 earthquake hit the island of Hokkaido. Tsunami waves 3 feet high have already started hitting the island. And Tsunami warnings have been issued as far away as Hawaii.
The U.S. Geological Survey said the earthquake was located 20 miles beneath the Pacific Ocean.
These are the pictures of the interior of that office as the earthquake struck this afternoon, this, an oil refinery in Hokkaido. Fire broke out at the oil refinery near the center of Hokkaido. There are no reports of any casualties, although reports of a derailed train.
Joining me now on the telephone is Waverly Person. He is the geophysicist at the National Earthquake Information Center in Golden, Colorado.
Thank you for being with us.
This magnitude is remarkable, is it not, Mr. Person? Mr. Person, can you hear me? This is Lou Dobbs in New York.
The pictures you're looking at, again, as the earthquake hit near Hokkaido, Japan.
We're going to try return to Waverly Person at the Earthquake Information Center in Golden, Colorado, Waverly Person, geophysicist.
Are you there now, sir? As I said, we'll return to him momentarily.
Let's turn to other news quickly in this country, politics coast- to-coast, candidates trading charges and countercharges. In a nationally television debate in New York today, General Wesley Clark faced his first political test, as 10 Democratic presidential candidates debated the economy.
In California, the economy also the main issue, as Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger took part in his first and only televised debate in the gubernatorial recall race. Jonathan Karl is in New York and Bob Franken in Los Angeles covering the recall race.
Let's go first to Jonathan -- Jonathan.
JONATHAN KARL, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, with 10 candidates on the stage, it was a rather disjointed two-hour debate, but it did have some moments. One came right at the very beginning, where General Wesley Clark, for the first time, took the stage with his other presidential candidates and set out with a whack at President Bush for recklessly endangering America's place abroad, he said, and America's economic position at home.
And then explained why he considers himself a Democrat.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WESLEY CLARK (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I am pro-choice. I am pro-affirmative action. I am pro-environment, pro-health. I believe the United States should engage with allies. We should be a god player in the international community. And we should use force only as a last resort. That's why I'm proud to be a Democrat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: A new direction. The debate was taken up -- much of the debate was taken up with other Democrats taking on who has emerged somewhat as the front-runner here.
Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean took whacks from four of the other Democrats on the stage, including this one from Dick Gephardt.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT (D-MO), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We need a candidate against George Bush that can take the fight to him on it, not someone who agreed with the Gingrich Republicans.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Governor Dean?
HOWARD DEAN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: That is flat-out false. And I'm ashamed that you would compare me with Newt Gingrich. Nobody up here deserves to be compared to Newt Gingrich.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
DEAN: The fact is that what I -- first of all, I did say Medicare was a dreadful program, because it's administered dreadfully. I've done more for health insurance in this country, Dick Gephardt, frankly, than you ever have, because I have delivered it to a lot of seniors and a lot of young people.
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In defense of Dick Gephardt, I didn't hear him say he was like Newt Gingrich. I heard him say that he stood with Newt Gingrich.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: Now, John Kerry, in addition to John Edwards and Joe Lieberman, also took on Howard Dean for calling on repealing all of the Bush tax cuts. They said repealing all the Bush tax cuts would in fact be a tax increase on the middle class. That was the tone for much of the debate here.
But with 10 candidates on the stage, again, Lou, it was hard to get any sustained action. They only had a little bit of time each, even though it was a two-hour-long debate -- Lou.
DOBBS: And the winner is, Jonathan?
KARL: Tough to call.
In some sense, you would say General Wesley Clark came out, he did what he needed to do in terms of establishing the fact that he can talk about domestic issues. He did pretty well in this debate. If there was a winner, you might say General Clark, because he came out and he showed he can talk about domestic issues, as well as international issues.
DOBBS: Jonathan Karl, thank you.
In California today, calls for unity among Republicans after the first and only televised debate between the five leading candidates in that recall election. Arnold Schwarzenegger today won the endorsement of conservative businessmen and former gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon. Tomorrow, Congressman Darrell Issa is also expected to announce his support for Schwarzenegger.
Bob Franken is in Los Angeles and has the story -- Bob.
BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Lou, this just in, and we do have a this-just-in.
The 58 Republican county chairmen in California just seconds ago have concluded their meeting and announced that they are endorsing Arnold Schwarzenegger to be the Republican candidate for governor to replace Gray Davis in the recall. This is an announcement that just happened, as I said, moments ago. And it was very unusual, because, usually, the party chairmen try and stay above the fray.
But there's a very compelling party interest, they believe, in unifying the party, so one candidate can carry the banner against the candidates. Tom McClintock, of course, the other Republican. And he is the one who has been a spoiler for Arnold Schwarzenegger. You're looking now at some video of the party chairmen as they just came out. They joined Bill Simon, another conservative Republican, who earlier in the day held an event with Arnold Schwarzenegger to announce that he, too, would be supporting Schwarzenegger, very important, because Simon, in addition to being a candidate who brings, of course, his own following into the race, he's also the person who was a conservative who had entered the race himself.
And he had pulled out. He had also lost to Governor Gray Davis. He has his own constituency and would have been an ideological twin almost of Tom McClintock. We're also told by sources who are very close to Coming Darrell Issa, the man who financed the recall, that, tomorrow, when they negotiate a venue, he will be joining Arnold Schwarzenegger to announce his support.
All of this comes as Tom McClintock gets under increasing pressure to pull out. But McClintock so far says, to CNN and other media, he is staying in the race, that he has no intention of pulling out. But the pressure on him to get out in favor of Schwarzenegger is obviously continuing -- Lou.
DOBBS: Bob, where does this leave Tom McClintock? Is there any late indication as to his position? Does it look like he's entrenched and will remain or is he preparing as well to join with the other candidates and support Schwarzenegger?
FRANKEN: Well, by his telling, he's planning to stay in the race.
I should point out that some important polls are going to be coming out in the next couple of days. And that might be a stronger indication of his position relative to Schwarzenegger. One other person, of course, to be accounted for. And that's Peter Ueberroth. He pulled out. He's expected to announce his endorsement perhaps next week.
DOBBS: All right. And in that debate, the winner is, Bob?
FRANKEN: Probably the winner, many people feel, might be Gray Davis.
DOBBS: All right, Bob Franken, reporting from Los Angeles, thank you.
As we reported at the outset here, an 8.0 earthquake on the Richter scale, measuring 8.0, hitting near the island of Hokkaido, where we're now joined on the telephone from Golden, Colorado, at the National Earthquake Information Center in Colorado by Waverly Person, geophysicist.
Mr. Person, can you hear me now?
WAVERLY PERSON, NATIONAL EARTHQUAKE INFORMATION CENTER: Yes, I can.
DOBBS: Tell us, is this in fact a so-called great earthquake?
PERSON: Yes, it is. Magnitude 8.0 and above is classified as great earthquakes.
DOBBS: And with this 8.0 earthquake, we are getting only limited information from Hokkaido. We do know there's a tsunami warning. We have reports that tsunami waves have already struck parts of Hokkaido. What is your anticipation as a result of this powerful earthquake?
PERSON: There's a possibility that these waves could be Pacific- wide. We're not sure. But we do know that they have hit Hokkaido at this time, approximately 2 feet. But we don't know whether it's going to go high or not.
And we have some reports of damage on Hokkaido. And that's what we know at the present time. But an hour after the main shock, we had a magnitude 6 aftershock. And we do expect aftershocks to continue for some time.
DOBBS: These tsunamis, this warning does not necessarily mean, does it, sir, that the waves will actually materialize. But the warning extends as far as Hawaii?
PERSON: Yes. They gave the warning up the way up through the Aleutian Islands. So they don't know where it might go, but they are tracking it at the Tsunami Warning Center, Honolulu, Hawaii, and Palmer, Alaska.
DOBBS: And, typically, how quickly do tsunami waves move?
PERSON: Well, these waves can travel up to 600 miles per hour. So they don't do anything until they hit the coastal area and the water was shallow, and that's when it take on its height.
DOBBS: And the height can reach?
PERSON: As much as 60, 70 or 80 feet.
DOBBS: This is extraordinary. You're obviously watching this very carefully and closely.
What is the nearest -- in terms of power, as measured by the Richter scale, when is the last time that we had an 8.0 earthquake, a great quake,, hit near a populated area?
PERSON: Well, we had a great earthquake in this area in 1968. There was one there in 1952 that was an 8.6 And they both generated tsunamis in that area.
DOBBS: Waverly Person, geophysicist at the National Earthquake Information, we thank you very much, sir. And we will be, if we way, staying in touch to monitor these developments as a result of this earthquake.
PERSON: OK. That's fine.
DOBBS: Thank you.
Again, an 8.0 earthquake has hit near the island of Hokkaido. It struck this afternoon. A tsunami warning has been issued for the Pacific region. That means that it extends from the Aleutian Islands in the north, all the way to Hawaii. And, obviously, we are following this very carefully.
Let's go now by telephone to our Tokyo bureau chief, Rebecca MacKinnon.
Rebecca, give us the very latest information that you have there now.
REBECCA MACKINNON, CNN TOKYO BUREAU CHIEF: Well, Lou, here's what we have at the moment.
One thing that's important to note is that this earthquake did occur offshore, about 65 miles offshore. And it also occurred underground, over 30 miles underground. That appears to be one of the reasons why this earthquake, which happened about two hours ago now, before dawn, does not appear to have killed anybody, as far as we know. We have reports of 15 people injured around the town of Kushiro, which is the closest town to where the earthquake took place.
None of them seem to be life-threatening, as far as we know at this time. There are some people in hospitals. We have an oil refinery that was set ablaze, obviously buildings jolted, people jolted out of their beds at 4:50 in the morning. About an hour later, there was a strong aftershock as well. And, as you mentioned in your report, there are tsunami warnings, tidal wave warnings, warnings that the tidal waves could reach around 6 feet of height.
However, there is an evacuation warning along the coast. We do not have any reports of serious casualties at this time and no reports of fatalities at this point -- Lou.
DOBBS: Rebecca, in this situation, proximity to the epicenter in Hokkaido means those waves will be actually smaller and less of a threat, although significant, than perhaps to other parts of the Pacific region if they do materialize. Is that correct?
MACKINNON: That's true. The way waves work -- of course, I'm no physicist -- but they do gather momentum and size over time. So, apparently, according to the local media, the tsunami warning situation is changing constantly.
There are warnings for evacuation along part of the main island of Honshu as well, where there are some other populated cities. So we're just waiting to see how this is going to develop -- Lou.
DOBBS: And those evacuation warnings are not necessarily orders to evacuate, but really to put people on alert. Is that correct?
MACKINNON: Well, the national media is telling people who live along the east central coast of Hokkaido to evacuate immediately. So it is essentially...
DOBBS: So it's an order to evacuate, in other words?
MACKINNON: It's an order to evacuate, yes.
DOBBS: Rebecca, thank you very much -- Rebecca MacKinnon, reporting from Tokyo, about 500 miles from Hokkaido, where this earthquake struck two hours ago.
You see there on your screen the impact of this 8.0 earthquake, a great quake. That has now been confirmed by the National Earthquake Information Center in Golden, Colorado. And we will, of course, be coming back to this situation this evening. And we will keep you fully up to date.
Coming up next here: tracking terrorist funding, Senator Richard Shelby leading a Senate investigation beginning with Saudi Arabia. Senator Shelby is our guest.
And the exodus of high-technology jobs from this country and what's being done to stop it. Bill Tucker reports. Congressman Adam Smith joins us.
And from the candidates in California, to the Democrats in the race for the White House, who's winning in the race for public opinion and support? Senior political analyst Bill Schneider, Ron Brownstein of "The Los Angeles Times" both join us with their analysis.
Please stay with us.
DOBBS: A member of the Iraqi Governing Council today died of wounds she received in an assassination attempt five days ago. She was wounded when gunmen attacked her convoy in Baghdad. It was the first attack on a member of the Governing Council since it was established.
In northern Iraq today, eight soldiers were wounded when terrorists attacked a convoy of the 101st Airborne Division, this attack coming in western Mosul. Three of the 101st soldiers are in serious condition tonight.
Central Command today reported 306 Americans have been killed in Iraq since the beginning of the war against Saddam Hussein, 191 killed of those in action, 115 in accidents. The number of wounded has risen to 1,644, wounded and injured, all but 322 of them, in combat.
How long American troops remain in Iraq depends in part on the number of multinational forces that will help keep the peace. So far, only Britain and Poland are leading multinational divisions in Iraq. Other countries are willing to contribute their forces, but their help comes with a hefty price tag.
Kitty Pilgrim has that story.
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Trying to rally the allies, Secretary of State Powell today minutes after leaving the U.N.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We are anxious to see other nations join in the stabilization force.
PILGRIM: The United States today saying more troop support was a work in progress. SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We are continuing to have conversations with nations about that. But, I mean, it's kind of speculating at this point.
PILGRIM: Meanwhile, the United States is providing plenty of financial support all around. Take Pakistan, one of the key countries asked to send troops to Iraq. It has not yet committed.
In the meantime, Pakistan gets $200 million in economic aid, $50 million in military support, and the World Bank and IMF have forgiven $1 billion in loans to Pakistan, President Musharraf saying he wants certain conditions before committing troops, including a U.N. resolution.
PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, PAKISTANI PRESIDENT: At the end of the day, we would like to send Pakistan forces, not to be seen as an extension of occupation, but to be seen as a force which has gone there for the welfare of the people of Iraq.
PILGRIM: How about Turkey? The United States has also asked them for a significant number of troops. Just days ago, at the annual meeting of the IMF in Dubai, Treasury Secretary John Snow announced an $8.5 billion loan to Turkey, not for troop support. His explanation:
JOHN SNOW, TREASURY SECRETARY: To mitigate the economic impact on Turkey related to the Operation Iraqi Freedom.
PILGRIM: Now, the real test will come in October at an international donors conference to be held in Madrid. The United States is hoping to raise some $10 billion. It's looking increasingly likely like only a fraction of that may come through -- Lou.
DOBBS: This price tag is really adding up.
PILGRIM: It's billions, Lou, and it's shocking.
DOBBS: And we're going to continue to tabulate the numbers through the next days and weeks. Kitty, thank you very much -- Kitty Pilgrim.
Coming up next here: "Exporting America," high-technology jobs being taken out of this country. Bill Tucker reports on "Exporting America." Congressman Adam Smith joins us to talk about what needs to be done.
And "Grange on Point": A radical revolution in U.S. troop deployment moves American troops closer to potential hot spots. General David Grange joins us.
And a growing hot spot for the planet, the hole in the ozone layer. There is some help and some hope on the horizon. Lisa Sylvester reports.
Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Coming up: following the money and finding out who is financing international terrorism. Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, leads the investigation and joins us next.
Please stay with us.
DOBBS: One of the great American success stories has been the semiconductor industry. From 1985 through 2000, the industry's share of manufacturing production rose dramatically, from half-a-percent to more than 6 percent. That huge growth created tens of thousands of new jobs. But now many of those jobs are being exported out of America.
Bill Tucker reports.
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Fear and frustration are not hard to find in Silicon Valley these days. Just ask John Popescu, who has been unemployed for two years now.
JOHN POPESCU, UNEMPLOYED TECHNOLOGY WORKER: I'm completing with people who are offshore that are doing my job offshore for a 10th of the money that I'm making, and that, consequent of the fact that they're in places such as the Third World, it puts me at a high disadvantage. I can't compete on a cost basis with Third World labor. There's no way.
TUCKER: The industry that was at the heart of unprecedented productivity growth in the United States is being seduced to foreign shores.
GEORGE SCALISE, SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION: There are a number of opportunities that are evolving around the world that are making it attractive to move wafer fabs into other areas outside the U.S. There are some in Europe. Certainly, China has been the most recent, Taiwan. But then you see places like Singapore, Malaysia. There are a number of countries where they're putting together incentive packages.
TUCKER: Incentive packages which include tax breaks on capital spending to an industry where one plant can cost $3 billion, tax-free periods of up to five years after profitability. And China is the most aggressive suitor. It's implemented a value-added tax, a tax that makes it much more attractive to make semis in China than to bring them in from out of the country.
The result? Intel now has two plants in China, as does Motorola, raising concern that, where the plans go, so do the jobs. At home, it's the states which are leading fight to keep the semis at home. IBM, for example, has opened a state-of-the-art plant in Fishkill, New York, working with the State Technology Development Program. The plant has a relationship with the state university in Albany, because, without the plants, there is little market for graduating engineers.
TOM HOWELL, INDUSTRY LAWYER: If we get to a point where our best graduates feel they've got to go somewhere else than the United States for their careers, for the benefit of their own careers, we have a real problem.
TUCKER: And these are the kinds of jobs which require skills, require education, and they pay.
TUCKER: And employees in the sector earn 50 percent more in real terms than they did 30 years ago. Compare to a decline of 6 percent in manufacturing wages during the same timeframe -- Lou.
DOBBS: Bill, thank you very much -- Bill Tucker.
This November, the investigative arm of Congress will launch a comprehensive study into the exporting of American jobs. This study will examine the costs and risks associated with massive outsourcing, especially in the area of information technology and its long-term impact on the American economy.
We will be talking about this new initiative to actually understand American trade policy in Washington. We'll be talking with Congressman Adam Smith, the driving force behind that study. He joins us next from Washington.
Stay with us.
DOBBS: Congressman Adam Smith joins us. He's the Democrat of Washington state.
Congressman, good to have you with us.
REP. ADAM SMITH (D), WASHINGTON: Thanks for having me.
DOBBS: Normally, I'd say that another study isn't needed. But after our weeks and weeks of reporting on the exportation of American jobs overseas, the lack of information is remarkable. How quickly do you believe that the GAO, the U.S. government, can get better information?
SMITH: Well, hopefully, it will be a matter of months.
But I think you're right. We have a lot of anecdotes. We have a lot of stories, but actual hard facts aren't really there. I've read a number of studies that say they just don't know exactly what's happening. And it's important to know exactly which jobs are going overseas and what the future is for jobs here in the U.S. It has many, many policy implications in many, many areas, depending on exactly what jobs are going overseas and, more importantly, what jobs are likely to stay here.
DOBBS: And do you not find -- you represent a district in a state that has a technology leader, if not the technology leader, in Microsoft. Why in the world would we not know, once Congress approves such a thing as an H-1B visa, an L-1 visa, what in the world is going on with those people?
SMITH: Well, I think those are important issues.
The more important issue, to me, is the amount of money we spend on education and job training and the amount of money we spend on subsidies, either direct or through tax breaks for various corporations. We need to know, first of all, if the job training and education dollars are going to train people for jobs that are actually going to be here. And second of all, if the companies that were subsidizing are actually creating jobs here in the U.S. That's the information I want to know. That's over $600 billion that we spend each year.
DOBBS: Well, we have -- we have some information, Congressman. We know that we've got a $503 billion deficit in the current account. We know that we've lost almost 3 -- 3 million manufacturing jobs. We know that the technology is taking advantage -- the technology industry -- of the H-1B and L-1 visas. That's not to say that there are not positive and appropriate uses of those visas in certain cases. But in too many, it's a problem. What in the world are we going to do about it?
SMITH: Well, I -- you know, the visa programs we can talk about. Now I saw your program last night, and there's a few facts that were kind of left out of that.
The H-1B programs has a number of protections for it. am very concerned about the L-1, because it doesn't have those protections.
DOBBS: You're not concerned about the H-1B, Congressman?
SMITH: I think the H-1B is a positive program It brings in, I think, about 95,000 people. It requires that those people be in certain specialized field. It requires them...
DOBBS: Congressman, H-1B visas -- I can tell you -- we asked here in this network -- we have journalists working under H-1B visas. Did you know that? I mean...
SMITH: If you do, then you're violating the law.
DOBBS: Not me, sir. I'm not.
SMITH: Now, well, CNN is violating the law if there are American citizens who can do those jobs, then that does not meet the H-1B visa requirement.
DOBBS: Well that's why I was stunned when you said you were supporting the H-1B visa program, because we can give you case after case that has flowed into this broadcast showing abuses of the H-1B visa program.
SMITH: Well, those need to be enforced. But I can give you case after case of companies in my district that desperately need people with specialized knowledge that they can't find that they bring into the U.S. that help create jobs here in the U.S., companies like Microsoft, Inmunex before they were bought out by Amgen, Boeing -- a lot of different companies grow dependent upon those people. And there are specific requirements.
Now the L-1 visa program has a number of loopholes in it, doesn't have those same requirements, and I am concerned about that.
DOBBS: Well, when does concern translate to action?
DOBBS: We have millions of people in this country, and a lot of them in the technology industry, who are being hammered as a result of misplaced policies, a lack of understanding of international trade. It's remarkable.
SMIIH: Right, and I think focusing on the H-1B visa program is an example of what you're talking about, a misplaced focus on the problem.
Look, we have had a 90 percent decrease in the last years of foreign investment in the U.S.
DOBBS: All right.
SMITH: Our economy is not perceived as a good place to invest money. That is a far larger problem....
DOBBS: Excuse me -- excuse me, Congressman. Say that again.
SMITH: I have -- we have -- the health of the U.S. economy is a far larger problem than the 95,000 people who were brought in last year on H-1B visa programs.
DOBBS: Congressman, did you say -- did you say that this economy is not perceived as a good place in which to invest?
SMITH: In the last three years, we've seen a 90 percent decrease in foreign investment in the U.S. I think there's a lot of concerns about the stability of this economy -- concerns that which we could address. We could build a better infrastructure. We could do a much better job of enforcing the corporate accountability laws.
I watch your tote board on the show and see that two people have gone to jail since those scandals. I mean, we should have laws that say, if you violate those laws, if you steal hundreds of millions of dollars, billions of dollars from people, that money should be taken away and you should be poor for the rest of your life. We haven't done that.
DOBBS: Congressman, I couldn't agree with you more. I'm just -- I have to tell you I'm fascinated with your version to the issue of L- 1s and H-1Bs as a significant part of that.
DOBBS: Let me finish. I listened to you, Congressman. Please let me finish the question. May I?
And the fact is that each one of these is a related issue. You want to put corporate criminals in jail and, frankly, Congressman, so do I. And that's why we've been pursuing this issue for now almost two years on this broadcast since the bankruptcy of Enron. What do you think should be done to corporations who make decisions based on pure, raw labor costs and then cut thousands, in some cases tens of thousands of jobs, and put them in low labor cost countries?
SMITH: Well I don't think we should subsidize them with tax breaks and various other accountabilities.
DOBBS: There's a beginning.
SMITH: But you're suggesting -- if you're suggesting that the U.S. government can go to a corporation and say, We're going to tell you you can't cut cost. We're going to tell you you can't cut these jobs, you can't move them. I mean, that's a degree of government involvement that's likely to backfire.
DOBBS: Oh, Congressman, believe me, the last thing...
DOBBS: The last thing I would ask for is that kind of regulation.
DOBBS: However, I would be curious to understand what your view is of an appropriate trade policy that would put a premium on American labor, because effectively the trade policies in this country, Congressman, I think you would agree right now, mean that a person in this country has to work at almost slave wages in order to compete effectively with many of his or her overseas competitors in the labor market.
SMITH: Well, it depends on the type of job. I mean...
DOBBS: Oh, well, yes it does, Congressman. But in nearly every case, what I'm saying, would you not say is true?
SMITH: Yes, I've to get a couple of words out here in a row in order to get a thought together.
DOBBS: Be delighted to have you do so.
Yes, I think, trade policy is a concern. But again, I don't see where you're going exactly with that in terms of what we do. I mean, should we have a protectionist policy that says, you know, as some have suggested, that we should not trade with countries that have lower labor standards than we do?
I don't think that's the answer. I think there are some places where we can do a much better job of enforcing trade rules. I don't think we've done enough to hold our trading partners accountable for violations of trade laws.
For instance, you know, I represent the area where Boeing's at. Airbus has been subsidized for a number of years. We have not filed a trade action against them. I think we need to be more aggressive on that.
DOBBS: But what are we going to do with Boeing's support from the import-export bank-- export-import bank?
I mean, there -- you know, these things work a number of ways. There are more complicated than simply saying Airbus is subsidized. Boeing enjoys some rather favored opportunities as well, does it not?
SMITH: Sure, but I thought -- I thought part of the goal here was to protect U.S. jobs. I thought that's what we're talking about. And as long as our foreign competitors are going after us. I mean, we had a major...
DOBBS: No, sir. Your word was protectionism. Mine was, what is the appropriate trade policy to insure that American labor is not reduced to slave wages in order to compete effectively?
SMITH: Well, I think we have to be realistic about how we approach this economic issue, and I think that's one of the things that I am concerned about.
You know, what are the options? It's easy to sort of decry the situation and say, You know, this is -- this is horrible. But what specifically can we do? And is it going to help? I think there are things that we could to improve our trade policy. But if the solution is -- you know, basically we have this problem and you're concerned about us having, you know, to work at the same wages as the rest of the world -- if the solution presented is, we are therefore going, you know, to not trade with those countries and not have that competition, I think the cure is worst than the disease.
And as I said at the start, I think there are things in terms of our economic policy that we could do that would help. I mean, we are wasting a lot of money on job training that's not going in the right areas. There are jobs here in the U.S. There continues to be right now in this economy jobs that are unfilled because we don't have people with the training to fill them. That seems to me like a simple problem to solve. Train them for those jobs. DOBBS: It does, Congressman, and -- but it's somewhat more complicated when you think about those high-paying technology jobs that are being exported and some of those low-paying jobs for which we're thinking about educating and training those who have just lost those higher training jobs.
DOBBS: I would be delighted to have you back to discuss this.
DOBBS: You have been absolutely delightful in your consideration. We thank you very much, Congressman Adam Smith. Please come back soon.
SMITH: Absolutely. Thank you.
DOBBS: We're going to have a lot to talk about.
Labor issues among the topics at today's debate of the Democratic presidential candidates. The 10 Democratic presidential hopefuls today squared off in New York.
For more on the candidates' performance and on the recall race in California, I'm joined by "L.A. Times" columnist Ron Brownstein, who attended the presidential debate; CNN senior political analyst, Bill Schneider.
Gentlemen, good to have you with us.
Let me turn first to the subject of, in reverse order -- or at least chronological order -- the debates last night. Gentlemen, any clear winner?
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think Arnold Schwarzenegger did what he needed to do, which is establish his credibility. The problem was Tom McClintock probably did even better in that debate and there is the risk that McClintock is going to pick up momentum. That's why Republicans in California, as you reported earlier, are getting worried and there is a rush of heavyweight Republicans like Darrell Issa, Bill Simon, who ran against Gray Davis last year, and all 58 county chairmen in the Republican Party to come out and endorse Schwarzenegger to tell Republicans voters, Yes, you like McClintock, but if you vote for him you're really going to elect Cruz Bustamante, a Democrat.
DOBBS: Ron, what do you think? Who was the winner in last night's debate, before we turn to this afternoon's debate?
RON BROWNSTEIN, "L.A. TIMES": Yes. I don't think there was a clear winner, Lou. I thought that McClintock was very effective in making his case. So were Huffington and Peter Camejo. It was a little bit of what you might call the Sharpton syndrome, the longshot candidates because their views sometimes are so extreme, can be more vivid presences on the stage than the mainstream candidates. I had a more mixed impression of Schwarzenegger. I thought he started off very weak, got better, but got baited into what was probably a counterproductive argument with Arianna Huffington, especially for a candidate who already has problems with women.
Cruz Bustamante's strategy was to be above the fray, to try to be the adult in the room of squabbling children. But he carried that so far, sometimes he almost disappeared into the woodwork, and I'm not sure he projected the strength he needs to be seen as an effective governor.
DOBBS: Ron, let's -- I'm going to ask both you and Bill on this -- you have just watched the presidential -- the candidates for the presidential nomination, the Democratic Party. Who won there? You only had 10 people to sort through?
BROWNSTEIN: Some of them are still milling behind me here tonight. It's the debate-a-rama, Lou, California to New York coast to coast. I thought the debate tonight, I don't think there was a clear winner. I thought several did well. I thought Clark, though he was vague on some issues, clearly was comfortable talking about issues. And was vivid presence on the stage.
I thought John Kerry was more forceful in going after Howard Dean as was Dick Gephardt than they were in the first 2 debates. And I thought Dean was much more engaged and animated than he was in those debates as well as John Edwards who for the first time really registered anything by making a sharp critique of the Bush economic policy.
Overall, I thought it was the best by far debate. We have seen substantive, spirits and very engaging.
DOBBS: All right, Bill. We now see 2 polls showing the president's popularity, his approval rating at the lowest of his presidency. How serious is the problem for the Bush administration?
SCHNEIDER: I think it's serious. They've got to be worried about it over at the White House. He's doing worse than his father was at this stage before the 1992 election. His father didn't reach 50 percent until December of 1991.
They've got two problems and they're related and they were related in the debate among the Democrats today. One is the economy. The fact is that 3 million jobs have been lost since 2000. And that, to most American's, is the core of the economic problem. They're not going to believe tax cuts are working until they see the job situation turning around.
And second,when the president this month asked for $87 billion in Iraq. Americans stood up and they said wait a minute, $87 billion in Iraq? Why are we pouring all of that money over there when we have problems here of our own? That was a big problem..
DOBBS: You know Ron, as Bill is talking, I can think back to 1991 when the poll numbers for this president's father fell immediately arranged was a trip to Asia to South Korea, to Australia, to obviously Tokyo and Singapore. And the mantra was on the tarmac of Andrews Air Force Base, I remember it like yesterday, was jobs, jobs, jobs. The similarity is more than ironic and it's got to be just disturbing that the dickens out of this White House.
BROWNSTEIN: It does, but history doesn't repeat itself exactly, Lou. I think, one difference is the perceived strength on national security is probably more of an asset for this president than it was for his father. For the simple reason that when the Gulf War was over in 1991, it was over and the war on terror is an ongoing issue for Americans.
In that sense, I think, the sense of him as a strong commander in chief is more valuable for him. Is it valuable enough to overcome doubts about the specific policy in Iraq and especially the economy at home we'll have to see. But if you look at the numbers and it looks like we're close back to where we were in the 50/50 nation in the year 2000. A very, very polarized country, split almost exactly in half on the performance and priorities of this president.
DOBBS: Bill Schneider, last word.
SCHNEIDER: This president has one strength his father did not have, namely, he's got a secure base in the Republican Party. Conservatives were furious of his father for abandoning his no new taxes pledge. But conservatives are totally in line with this President Bush in a very loyal way.
DOBBS: Ron, Bill, thank you both gentleman. Appreciate it.
That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. The question, "has your support for President Bush slipped over the past year, yes or no." We'll get nuanced in this poll as the days and weeks progress. But for now, if you would, consider it a yes and no response.
We love to have your participation in these polls. We'll have results later in the show. We will continue with the broadcast in just moments. Financing terror: who is keeping international terrorists in business? the Senate launched an investigation. Senator Richard Shelby chairman of the Senate Banking Committee joins us next. Please stay with us.
DOBBS: The Senate Banking Committee launched a year long investigation into funding that supports terrorist operations. Senator Richard Shelby is the chairman of the committee. Today his hearings focused on Saudi Arabia's commitment to route out terror funding within its own borders. Senator Shelby joins us now from Washington D.C. Senator thanks for being here.
SEN. RICHARD SHELBY, (R-AL) CHAIRMAN SEN. BANKING COMMITTEE: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: In early impressions as a result of your hearing, are you satisfied with what the Saudis are doing?
SHELBY: Oh, I'm not satisfied at all. I think they have begun, as of the day of the attacks on their own homeland, I believe in May, to do much better to cooperate on a larger scale. But I in time will tell if they sustain this effort, not only in their fight against terrorists in their home country, but the fight with us against terrorists all over the world.
DOBBS: As you have pointed out, and you have focused for some time on the funding for terrorism, international terrorism, is it your judgment right now, at least, that funding for terrorism has been reduced significantly to the point it has weakened al Qaeda in particular?
SHELBY: I believe it has been reduced significantly, but a lot of it is still going on. If we're at the 50 percent mark, I would be happy if that were true. If we reduced their funding sources by 50 percent or more, that would be real progress.
But we've got a long way to go. It's very complex. It's difficult. But we must do it because it's the key to terrorist attacks. The funding, the sustaining of terrorist activity.
DOBBS: On the subject of Saudi Arabia, Senator, a most recent Time/CNN poll showed an overwhelming distrust of Saudi Arabia. Is there any basis for the public to change its view here soon and significantly on the issue of trust of Saudi Arabia?
SHELBY: I think that the government of Saudi Arabia will, and the people there, will have to earn our trust. You've got to remember, and you do, that 15, I believe of the 19 terrorists on September 11, were from Saudi Arabia.
SHELBY: And I think you can't have it both ways. You cannot fund terrorism wittingly or unwittingly and then say, gosh, we're helping you everywhere. You've got to be totally committed and I don't see a total commitment from them yet, but there's always hope.
DOBBS: In these hearings, Senator, you're also dealing with the Patriot Act. Is there anything in particular that concerns you about the Patriot Act that you want to either, not only explore, but also change?
SHELBY: I supported the Patriot Act that President Bush signed into law. I thought that was necessary. Some of the proposals that have been floated now to Patriot Act II amendments to it, I think we better be very careful with our constitutional rights there.
DOBBS: Senator Richard Shelby, we thank you for being with us.
SHELBY: Thank you.
DOBBS: Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Tonight's quote from a member of the Bush administration on international participation in Iraq. And we quote, "I think there is a good possibility that we may get some additional help. I don't know the size of that help." That from National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
Coming up next, "Gange On Point" a massive undertaking to move American troops deployed around the world. General David Grange on point next. Stay with us.
DOBBS: In "Grange on Point" tonight, the Pentagon has become one of the most radical changes in the overseas deployment of American troops in half a century. Joining me General David Grange. Good to have you.
BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Good evening.
DOBBS: The purpose of this redeployment, general?
GRANGE: Well, what we're having is a relook at the basing overseas, the array of forces in places like Germany, Korea, new bases that we may position troops in order to rotate forces rapidly and effectively troubled spots around the world. This right now we're posturing a post cold war positions and they need to be changed to meet the current.
DOBBS: From the cold war positions and strategies, then, to the more current and significantly more relevant war on terror, from Korea, from Germany, from Japan, where do these troops go?
We're talking about divisions of troops.
GRANGE: Well, there's a lot of divisions. I would estimate that what will happen is they'll move large numbers of troops out of Germany back to home bases in the United States, and then rotate those troops on shorter deployments like six months at a time to forward operating bases in places like east -- Eastern Europe, Uganda, Africa, off the coast, let's say, of Nigeria, places like (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to meet threats in the regions where they're occurring.
DOBBS: Militarily, obviously, as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld pointed out we cannot afford both positioning of the cold war era and the current needs in the war against terror. But this secretary of defense has called up more reserves after telling us that we don't need more troops. What is going to be the impact on the reserves and significantly do we need more men and women in uniform in this country?
GRANGE: Lou, I believe we need more men and women in the military today and in the future. But what's happened right now with the massive mobilizations of the reserve and national guard is that they have to mobilize and train to deploy in many of the bases that some are getting old and need to get updated, to be like the bases that the active service members use because they go to the same places and perform the same kind of duties that active service members use. And so there's a lot of rehashing of the bases in the United States, not only for deployment overseas but for homeland defense, as well as bases overseas. Many affected by status forces agreements and reduced training areas. So the troops can be ready to go where they need to at a moment's notice.
DOBBS: Dave Grange, as always, thank you.
GRANGE: My pleasure, Lou.
DOBBS: When we continue we'll have the resulted of "Tonight's Poll." We look at some of "Your Thoughts" on our series of special reports, "Exporting America." Please stay with us.
DOBBS: Now the results of "Tonight's Poll." Has your support for President Bush slipped over the past year? Ninety three percent voted, yes, 7 percent said no.
Well, on Wall Street, stock prices tumbled to the lowest level in a month. The Dow Jones Industrial average down 81.5, the Nasdaq fell more than 26, and the S&P down 6.
Christine Romans is here with more on the sell-off -- Christine.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT: Indeed, Lou, that seven- month rally is starting to stall. September now a negative month for the Dow and the S&P 500, and volume above average again today after a 12 percent Dow rally this year. Higher oil prices and earnings warnings have some investors taking a little off the table. Kodiak was a quarter of the Dow's loss. Once the richest dividend payer in the industrials, it slashed its pay out by 72 percent. It's going to focus now on digital photography and printers. The stock tumbling to the lowest price since at least the early 1980s.
On the jobs front, Levi Strauss is closing its remaining North American plants. That's a loss of 2000 jobs. The work will be contracted out, overseas. And Lou, another resignation at the New York Stock Exchange. The director of the board Carl McCall, the lead director, called it quits one week after Dick Grasso resigned for his huge pay package.
DOBBS: And the look into governance at the big board continues?
ROMANS: Yes, it does.
DOBBS: All right, Christine, thank you. Christine Romans.
Let's take look now at some of "Your Thoughts." Many of you writing in about our series of special reports, "Exporting America."
Jerry VanHoose of Westerville, Ohio, "I want to personally thank you for finally getting some of the truth about H1-B and L-1 Visas publicized. This has been one of corporate America's and our government's dirty little secrets for too long." Will Thomas, Madison, Wisconsin, "You rock, Lou. Thanks for being the only one in television news to expose the visa fraud and the outsourcing of American jobs being perpetrated by corporate America."
Colin Jenson, of Lompoc, California, on yesterdays court decision to block the nationial "Do Not Call" list. "I don't understand this free speech thing with the "Do Not Call" list. I am paying for my telephone utility that they are using to call me. Where is the free?"
And Phil Martin of Tuftonboro, New Hampshire had a provocative idea. "Lou, why don't you find and post the phone number of that judge who ruled against the "Do Not Call" legislation? I can think of about 50 million people who'd like to give him a call at dinner time tomorrow evening."
Well, the number is -- no, we're just kidding. In fact, we want to report to you that the United States Congress has already acted to observe the wishes of 50 million Americans and now legislation awaits the president's signature to put that registry into effect.
We love hearing from you. E-mail us at email@example.com.
That's our show for the night. Thanks for being with us.
Tomorrow, "Exporting America" what the administration is doing to save American jobs.
And in your weekly feature, "Heroes," we profile Marine Staff Sargent Brian Cox (ph) who aided in the rescue of Jessica Lynch.
Also the editor of "Forbes," "Fortune," Business Week" join us. Please be with us.
For all of us here good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com