Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
U.S. Marines Push Into Fallujah; John Kerry Vows to Cut Deficit in Half
Aired April 07, 2004 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Uprising in Iraq. U.S. Marines tonight pushing deeper into Fallujah. U.S. commanders say they will destroy the enemy.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We take them out and we do away with the terrorists.
DOBBS: Tonight, I'll talk with former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski about Iraq and other global challenges to American power.
Senator John Kerry says he will cut the federal budget deficit in half.
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The federal budget has gone from record surpluses to record deficits.
DOBBS: Senator Kerry's economics adviser, Roger Altman, says U.S. companies shouldn't be rewarded for exporting American jobs. He's our guest. And former Bush economics adviser Dr. Glenn Hubbard disagrees. He's also our guest.
And in "Broken Borders" tonight, you won't believe what happens to thousands of illegal aliens once they're apprehended crossing our border, a special report.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Wednesday, April 7. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening.
Tonight, U.S. troops in Iraq are engaged in the heaviest fighting since the fall of Baghdad a year ago. In the Sunni stronghold of Fallujah, U.S. Marines are fighting house to house against insurgents. Elsewhere in Iraq, U.S. soldiers are preparing to go on the offensive against the militia loyal to the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al- Sadr. About three dozen coalition troops have been killed since Sunday, all but two of them American.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS (voice-over): For a third straight day, Fallujah is the site of fierce fighting between U.S. forces and Sunni Muslim insurgents. U.S. Marines in Fallujah fought in at least two separate locations.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Marines are pushing the insurgents out of the neighborhoods. They're going door to door finding insurgent locations. They've engaged them in firefights.
DOBBS: U.S. fighter aircraft dropped two 500-pound precision bombs on a wall surrounding a mosque being used as a refuge for the enemy. Elsewhere in the Sunni Triangle, Marines continue to fight insurgents in Ramadi. And in Baghdad, the U.S. Army reinforced its troops to take on Shiite gunmen. Tanks are protecting police stations in Sadr City, a stronghold of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt said coalition forces are determined to destroy the enemy.
BRIG. GEN. MARK KIMMITT, U.S. DEPUTY CHIEF OF OPERATIONS: Those offensive operations will be deliberate, they will be precise, and they will be powerful, and they will succeed.
DOBBS: Al Sadr supporters remain in control of Najaf. Al-Sadr is believed to be hiding in the city.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld today said the United States remains in control of Iraq despite the uprising. Rumsfeld said U.S. troops are facing a relatively small number of insurgents.
Senior Pentagon core respondent Jamie McIntyre reports -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, along with the battle against insurgents, the Pentagon is also battling the perception that it may be losing the upper hand in Iraq. Today, in a hastily called press briefing here at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and Joint Chiefs Chairman General Richard Myers both insisted that the U.S. is still winning in Iraq, and Rumsfeld insisted that the situation is not spinning out of control.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: ... said there was a test of wills today.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: It is.
MCINTYRE: Is this a turning point, a critical juncture?
RUMSFELD: I wouldn't use that phrase. I thought the way I phrased it is about right. It is a moment on the path towards a free Iraq. And very few countries have gone from a repressive system to a free system on a smooth, perfectly proper, everything wonderful path.
GEN. RICHARD MYERS, JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN: I think it's important to remember what this is not. And it's certainly not a popular uprising or movement supported by the majority of Iraqis. It is not that at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: Sources say in a video teleconference today with President Bush, the president was assured by his top commander in Iraq, General John Abizaid, that the U.S. military plan to aggressively attack the anti-U.S. forces is working and will succeed.
And Abizaid, we're told, did not ask for additional troops to be sent to Iraq, but the Pentagon is approving a plan that will result in some of the troops that are currently there staying on to -- quote -- "see the situation through." That includes, sources say, elements of the 1st Armored Division and some quick-response, quick-reaction forces from the 1st Cavalry Division that were scheduled to start coming home. They're going to be redeployed to other hot spots in Iraq -- Lou.
DOBBS: Jamie, as you know, there are reports today that some coalition troops in Iraq are remaining at their bases or even abandoning their positions. Is the Pentagon concerned?
MCINTYRE: Well, the Pentagon insists that, for the most part, Iraqi troops and coalition countries are performing admirably. There are some isolated reports of -- particularly with Iraqi forces of them being overwhelmed and sometimes abandoning or retreating from their bases, sometimes aligning themselves temporarily with the anti-U.S. forces, but they insist they have no evidence of any widespread problem.
DOBBS: OK, thank you very much, Jamie McIntyre, senior Pentagon correspondent.
During the Pentagon's new conference today, Jamie McIntyre's colleague Barbara Starr tried to find out how many armed Iraqis support the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. The replies from Secretary Rumsfeld and General Myers suggested that the Pentagon simply isn't sure.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUMSFELD: I was going to say -- you said 1,000. I think I said 1,000 to 6,000, and we don't know the number. So it's not the one.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Let me rephrase my question...
RUMSFELD: I wouldn't want people to walk out thinking we'd said what you said we'd said.
STARR: OK. Let me rephrase my question very quickly: How is it that this situation has led the Bush administration to step back one step from its promise to the troops that they would be home within a year?
MYERS: I think one thing we've always said, from day one, before major combat began is that what the combat commander on the ground needs in terms of resources -- men, women, materiel -- he'll get. And that's still the promise today. And the numbers in Iraq and the numbers in Afghanistan have varied over time to deal with the situation on the ground and the capability the commander needs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: As you noted, General Myers asserting that the promises to the commanders would be kept and did not respond to Barbara Starr's question as to whether or not the promises to American troops would be kept.
As insurgents increase their attacks against American and coalition forces in Iraq, politicians in Washington are beginning to step up the debate about U.S. policy in Iraq.
Congressional correspondent Joe Johns has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOE JOHNS, CNN CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The escalating violence in Iraq is causing a heated debate in the U.S. Senate over comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam. Republican Senator John McCain, a Vietnam veteran, says the comparisons are flat wrong.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I happen to know something about Vietnam. And I know we don't face another Vietnam.
JOHNS: Senator Edward Kennedy, John Kerry's closest ally in Congress, first made the political loaded comparison on Monday. He was followed today by the Senate's leading critic Robert Byrd. Byrd compared the violence to Tennyson's "Charge of the Light Brigade."
SEN. ROBERT BYRD (D), WEST VIRGINIA: Theirs is not to reason why. Theirs is but to do and die. Into the valley of death rode the 600.
JOHNS: Then he said the V word.
BYRD: Surely, I'm not the only one who hears echoes of Vietnam in this development.
JOHNS: Republicans are furious. Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, a hard-liner on defense, said American lives could be endangered by statements made by politicians.
SEN. SAXBY CHAMBLISS (R), GEORGIA: Statements that tend to incite the opposition and to put our men and women in greater harm's way.
JOHNS: The Senate's top Democrat, while voicing support for the troops, accused Republicans of trying to stifle debates.
SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D-SD), MINORITY LEADER: I think in an open democracy people ought to have a right to express themselves without fear of character assassination.
QUESTION: Even in a time of war?
DASCHLE: Absolutely, especially in a time of war.
JOHNS: Kerry, another Vietnam veteran, steered clear of the argument.
KERRY: No matter what disagreements over how to approach the policy in Iraq, and we have some, we are all united as a nation in supporting our troops and, ultimately, in our goal of a stable Iraq.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
JOHNS: Daschle and many Democrats say more troops may be needed to deal with the situation in Iraq. That view appears to be picking up support among at least a couple moderate Republicans. The Senate majority leader says, whatever support the Pentagon needs, Congress is willing to provide -- Lou.
DOBBS: Joe, thank you very much -- Joe Johns reporting from Capitol Hill.
And that brings us to the subject of our poll tonight. The question: Should Congress have a stronger voice in U.S. foreign policy, including Iraq, yes or no? Please cast your vote at CNN.com/Lou. We'll have the results for you later in the broadcast.
President Bush is, meanwhile, closely following events in Iraq from his ranch in Crawford, Texas. Today, President Bush was briefed by the head of Central Command, General John Abizaid.
White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux reports from Crawford -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, President Bush today participated in not one, but two video conference calls with his National Security Council. And on the line was General Abizaid.
The president has always said, if he wanted troops, he would get more troops. So far the Pentagon is just taking advantage of this overlap in troop deployment. But the White House today, despite what you are seeing on the ground, violence from Sunni, as well as Shia sects, downplayed the significance.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: What you're seeing is what I just described, a relatively small number of extremist element who are trying to take advantage of the situation and go about a violent power play to try to undermine the transition from oppression to democracy that is under way in Iraq, but they will fail.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: President Bush also spent 30 minutes on the phone with his closest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the two of them strategizing. Blair will come and visit Bush. This is next Friday at the White House, strategizing how to turn over power back to the Iraqi people and still meet that June 30 deadline -- Lou.
DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much -- Suzanne Malveaux reporting from Crawford.
We'll have much more on Iraq still ahead here, including serious charges that the White House ignored CIA warnings about this Iraqi uprising. We'll be talking with former CIA analyst Ken Pollack. I will also be talking tonight with former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.
And Senator John Kerry launches a new offensive against President Bush's economic policies. The administration strikes back. We'll have a report.
And in "Broken Borders" tonight, the incredible story of what happens to thousands of illegal aliens once they're captured and arrested after crossing our borders.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: My guest wrote the influential book "The Threatening Storm: The Case For Invading Iraq," which laid out at least part of the rationale for the Bush administration's decision to depose Saddam Hussein.
Surprisingly tonight, Ken Pollack levels a serious charge against the White House for failing to heed CIA warnings about the current uprising in Iraq and joins us tonight from Washington, D.C.
Good to have you with us.
KENNETH POLLACK, CNN ANALYST: Good to be here, Lou.
DOBBS: The level of intelligence suggesting this uprising, in your judgment, was it of a quality and sufficient character to be acted upon by the White House, by the administration, the Pentagon?
POLLACK: Let me make it clear, Lou, I don't know that the CIA was able to warn about this particular uprising.
What I do know is that before the war, before the invasion of Iraq, there were constant warnings from the CIA and from a whole host of other people within the intelligence community, Iraq experts outside, warning the administration that the reconstruction of Iraq was going to be a very, very difficult process and that if not handled properly and with enough resources, it is could easily degenerate into exactly what we're seeing this week.
DOBBS: To degenerate into what we're seeing this week, an alliance, at least in coincidence, if not an outright conspiracy, between Sunnis and Shias in simultaneous attacks against U.S. interests, as well as Iraqi interests, what do you make of that?
POLLACK: Lou, I think you're putting your finger on one of the most troubling aspects of what we're seeing over these last few days, is that you have got Shia insurgents and Sunni insurgents which seem to be making some degree of common cause, at least on the battlefield. I don't think there's any evidence that they are necessarily planning this.
But it just seems to be the case that Sunnis and Shia, for their own reason, are becoming sufficiently frustrated that they are willing to make common cause with each other against the United States, small numbers of people, to be sure, but it is a troubling first sign.
DOBBS: Another troubling aspect, if I may say, the secretary of defense today referring to thugs and gangs in Iraq. We have heard such language as dead-enders, bitter-enders before, without discrete, definitive descriptions of the enemies that are being faced by American troops. Does that trouble you?
POLLACK: Yes, because I think it does reduce the problems that we're facing in Iraq to just a tiny little segment of the society. And we have a larger problem in Iraq, which is that we have alienated certain elements of the community as a whole.
I think it is still the case that most Iraqis do want the reconstruction to succeed. In fact, I think the Iraqis are starting to get a little bit desperate for the reconstruction to succeed. And that's part of the problem, is some of the Iraqis are getting so frustrated that after 12 months the United States has not made greater progress, that they are beginning to lose faith and beginning to heed the call of people like Muqtada al-Sadr, who for 12 months have been calling for this.
DOBBS: Frustration, though, Ken, seems a bit of a mild term, if I may say, for a situation in which Sunnis and Shias, irrespective of the numbers, who have taken up arms to confront the mightiest force on the planet, that is, the U.S. military. This is a remarkable development at this particular late stage, a year after the fall of Baghdad.
POLLACK: Right.
Well, what we're seeing, Lou, is a response in both communities to actions taken by the United States. And the Marines in Fallujah and Ramadi are doing something that should have been done, honestly, 12 months ago, which is to go in and finally pacify those towns. For 12 months, they were allowed to exist like the wild, wild West, doing their own thing. They became hotbeds of resistance to the United States.
The Marines are finally doing that. In the South, what we see is the U.S. moving against al Sadr. I think that there is real debate as to whether now is the right time to be doing it. But that is what is sparking the resistance, is the United States going in and trying to do things at a very delicate moment.
DOBBS: We had an interesting development that we reported at the outset of the broadcast tonight, Ken. And that is the secretary of defense trying to correct, in point of fact, one of our colleagues at CNN, Barbara Starr, who used the term 1,000 followers in terms of Muqtada al-Sadr. He had actually said 1,000 to 6,000, then said he didn't know what the actual number was, but didn't want to be misquoted.
As a former CIA analyst, certainly we know with some specificity the strength of al-Sadr's follower, the level of their armament and something about their disposition. And if not, what in the world has the CIA, military intelligence, and the Pentagon been doing for a year?
POLLACK: Well, you know, I appreciate your confidence in the CIA. And believe me, I have got friends back there. They're good people. They're smart people trying to do a good job. But this is a an extraordinarily difficult situation. And you know the difficulties that all the intelligence agencies had in Vietnam trying to figure out how many Viet Cong there were.
And I think that what we've seen over the last few days -- and, again, I think this is part of a wakeup call that we need to all take into account -- is that Muqtada al-Sadr seems to have a lot more followers than any of us realized.
DOBBS: You talked about the difficulty. The difficulty as we watch American men and women in uniform being shot dead and wounded, frankly, the order of difficulty becomes far from interesting. It is a difficult job. We knew that. As you articulated, the CIA had some sensibility about what would follow here.
Is there any comprehension about why, with that foreknowledge, that understanding, that those warnings are not part of the planning and the response?
POLLACK: Yes.
Lou, you're getting at a really important issue here. And it is one that is very troubling to me, in particular, with the issues in the south. This is an extraordinarily delicate moment. You have got Lakhdar Brahimi, the U.N. representative in Iraq, trying desperately to reconstruct some kind of interim government that can see Iraq through until it can have democratic elections.
And at this particular moment, to be stirring up the hornet's nest of Muqtada al-Sadr's followers, that doesn't strike me as particularly good timing. I really don't know what it was that we were thinking by doing these two things simultaneously.
DOBBS: One has to ask the question, Ken, and I would appreciate your answer on this. As we discuss the secretary of defense's language and talk about dead-enders, bitter-enders, gangs, thugs, and talking about discrete elements of Iraqi society and those radicals and insurgents who are attacking the U.S. troops, we are also hearing the language of putting an international face on U.S. force, talking about handover and trying to disguise the words occupation, when that is precisely what has been the last 12 months in Iraq.
Have we tried -- has this administration tried, perhaps too much, to put politics and a good face, rather than using straightforward language like occupation, like the deployment and use of American power, and given in too much to, if you will, some sense of correctness in the Middle East and, in particular, in Iraq?
POLLACK: Well, I think that, certainly, communication has been a problem throughout the course of the occupation. One of the things that you hear from Iraqis on a regular basis is one of the sources of their greatest anger is that no one in the CPA tells them what's going on.
And when you talk about the CPA, they're incredibly frustrated that no one in Washington is telling them what's going on and U.S. forces out in the field are constantly frustrated that they don't know exactly what's going on. So I think the more that we could actually level with all of these different groups and having them speak to each other in clear, plain language, I think the better off everyone would be.
DOBBS: Ken Pollack, thank you very much for being with us.
THOMPSON: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: Still ahead, U.S. troops face the biggest challenge in Iraq in almost a year. We'll be joined by our military expert, General David Grange. Tonight, I'll also be talking with former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.
And, yes, it is the economy. John Kerry takes a familiar campaign theme on the road. We'll tell you why he says the wealthiest Americans need to be taxed more.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Senator Kerry today offered more details of his ambitious plans for the economy. Today, Senator Kerry focused on his plan to roll back tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans while still cutting the deficit in half over four years.
Kitty Pilgrim reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): John Kerry warns deficits will destroy America.
KERRY: In the last three years, the federal budget has gone from record surpluses to record deficits which if left unchecked can become a fiscal cancer that will erode any recovery and threaten the prospect of lasting prosperity in our nation.
PILGRIM: Kerry promises to cut the nearly $500 billion deficit in half in four years. Other proposals, pay-as-you-go rules, no federal increases in spending without matching cuts in other areas, cutting taxes for middle-class Americans, taking away the current tax cuts for Americans earning $200,000 or more and cutting corporate taxes by 5 percent.
KERRY: Under my plan, 99 percent of American businesses and 98 percent of Americans will get a tax cut. And I believe that will advance the economy of our country.
PILGRIM: The Bush administration counters the charge its tax cuts are for the wealthy, saying they are for small business owners. Treasury Secretary Don Evans spoke at a small-business owners conference today.
DON EVANS, COMMERCE SECRETARY: Because your personal and your business taxes are lumped together. The president's tax cuts went to families and small businesses in this country and small businesses create 70 percent of the new jobs in America.
PILGRIM: The issue of job creation was the theme of Kerry's speech two weeks ago, where he promised 10 million new jobs in four years. He also condemned outsourcing, saying again today that he wants to take away the tax advantages for American companies who ship manufacturing jobs overseas.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: John Kerry did not go into specific budget figures in the speech. However, he said that money earned back from rolling back tax cuts on the wealthy would be used for education and health care -- Lou.
DOBBS: And said he was willing as well to roll back his own ambitious plans to spend money in order to meet those deficit goals.
PILGRIM: Yes, he likes a pay-as-you-go plan.
DOBBS: We will be talking with Senator Kerry's principal economic adviser, Roger Altman, later in the broadcast. Kitty, thank you very much.
Returning now to the top story of the day, the uprising in Iraq, as the violence escalated today, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said U.S. troops have not lost control there.
I'm joined now by CNN military analyst General David Grange.
General, almost 12 months after taking Baghdad, it's remarkable that the secretary of defense would have to stay something like, we haven't lost control. What's your reaction?
RETIRED BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, overall, I don't think that the coalition has lost control. It's a tough situation, Lou. No doubt about it. And it could slip away in certain areas if the coalition is careful.
The key is pressure. The key is to surge. If it takes more troops, if it takes more effort, do it and don't let the lid get off this thing. Uprisings are happening here and there and everywhere. Probably don't have a good feel on how many exactly are in the insurgent force, the numbers. And so you either kill them all or you dissuade those that you don't kill that the cause is no good.
DOBBS: Well, as you know, General Kimmitt said that they're going to destroy al-Sadr's army, their militia. Is that in point of fact a practical solution?
GRANGE: I wouldn't say so tonight or tomorrow. I would think that that is down the road if you're going to take that on.
The timing right now, with some of the religious activities, I think it would not be advisable to go in there now. You have a fury of excitement, emotional feelings of rage. Let them burn down a little bit, let them collapse from the joy, and then go in after them. And, hopefully, you only have to take down a few of that number and the rest you could persuade or have disperse and take away their effectiveness.
DOBBS: Are you in favor of sending in more U.S. troops?
GRANGE: I'm in favor of sending in more U.S. troops, not that you have to have more to do the different tasks within Iraq right now. But I don't like the idea that you may have to move some from one area and uncover one area to surge in another.
I think it's important to show that you can move people there immediately, which the U.S. and some other allies can, that you will do it, that you have the resolve to reinforce, if you want to, and, in fact, eliminate any perception that this pressure from insurgents would cause the U.S. to pull out early, but in fact it would reinforce. And this gives you that psychological, I think, advantage over the minds of the enemy and some of the people that are on the fence.
DOBBS: From this point on, General Grange, would you press the fight?
That is, go after not only Al Sadr the Shiite Muslim, the Shiite Muslim Militia and the other insurgents, but, as well, not only engage them but disarm them and disarm all of Iraq?
GRANGE: I would disarm everything, if possible. It should have been done a while ago and may have been a mission too far because of the multitude of tasks. But as you let it go, the longer you wait, the more power these groups obtain. Obviously, it is not only caches of weapons in countries and but weapons I think are coming from somewhere else, whether it be Iran, Syria, wherever, which may be another reason to put down a force for a month or two out of country. Kind of like a surprise to say, don't cross this border. We mean business.
DOBBS: General David Grange, thank you.
When we continue, more on the situation in Iraq. We'll listen to the former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski ahead of Condoleeza's Rice's testimony before the commission.
Senator Kerry attacking President Bush's economic policies. We'll talk with the senators principal economic adviser Roger Altman, next. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Here now with more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: My next guest says the escalating violence will have wide spread implications throughout the Middle East. Zbigniew Brzezinski, served as national security advisor under President Carter, and he joins us tonight from Washington.
Good to have you with us.
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR: Good to be with you.
DOBBS: The most profane implications you see arising from this broader violence over the past four or five days.
BRZEZINSKI: I would say we are running the risk of setting the Middle East on fire. The American occupation of Iraq has been perceived increasingly as a brutal occupation. This may be unfair. In fact, it is unfair, but perceptions are important in politics. Look at the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan. Not everything is perfect in Afghanistan. But in Afghanistan, we have ally whose are helping us. We have Afghans helping us because we helped them earlier against the Soviets. And we have an American administrator in Afghanistan, he's called ambassador, who is flexible and able to work with all the different parties. None of these conditions apply in Iraq, and that's part of the problem.
DOBBS: A fact though, is as you know, a number of the countries in the coalition today, in fact, withdrew troops back to their bases. Also sought, reportedly, security assurances from the United States forces there for their protection. Are you, in fact, criticizing Ambassador Bremer for his administration and adjudication in Iraq?
BRZEZINSKI: I'm concerned by the reports that he has not been able to delegate authority, hasn't been able to work had his British counterpart. That he has had a rather, should we put it, didactic style in dealing with the Iraqi. I think, that's not the way to create consensus and general support of an authority, for which allegedly we are going to be yielding sovereignty within a few weeks.
DOBBS: Do you believe, Mr. Brzezinski, that we should put more troops in Iraq to ensure better security for America and coalition for the Iraqis?
BRZEZINSKI: My answer may sound (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and even contradictory to you, but answer is yes, we put in more troops, absolutely. We should make a much more concerted effort to transfer formal authority to the United Nations and get our allies to become more engaged and they will only become more engaged if we're prepared to deal with the wider problems of the Middle East, including a more active effort to pursue the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Because in the eyes of our allies, and I think they're right, the issue Iraq and the issue of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians are issues that are becoming conflated.
DOBBS: As you describe the Mideast process, despite everything over the course of half a century, been the most frustrating region in all the world. But now a road map that a year ago looked like it could be a hopeful approach to peace in the Middle East, we now see it in tatters. We don't have a particular well enunciated or executed plan to bring any resolution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. We have even though the United States, as Secretary Rumsfeld says remains in control, the policy of this country in the Middle East is, without question under attack, and at best lacking firm enunciation. What would you do to reset?
BRZEZINSKI: Well, first of all, it is absolutely true what you have said, our policy looks totally one-sided. Purely militaristic. And increasing occupation of Iraq and Israeli occupation of the West Bank are seen as two sides of a single coin. I think at the very least we could is try to relate the peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians. The so called road map, to some definition of the outcome. Some description of what that peace that is supposed to be reached by that road is going to look like. And we have a preview of that in the Geneva Accords which were negotiate indeed great detail by a group of Israelis, very important Israelis, including former military loaders and Palestinians. If we were to endorse that, then that means the road map would lead somewhere. And over time, we'll begin to mobilize support from it, from moderate Israelis, from moderate Palestinians. And, similarly, Iraq, we have to have more rapid movement towards ending what appears increasingly to be a very overt U.S. military occupation.
DOBBS: Zbigniew Brzezinski, thanks for being here.
BRZEZINSKI: Good to be with you.
DOBBS: The economy on the campaign trail today. The focus, Senator Kerry wants to cut back on the exporting of American jobs, wants to cut the deficit in half. The senator's economic adviser, Roger Altman joins us. And former Bush economic advisor Dr. Glen Hubbard will also be here. He says outsourcing is good for America.
Also ahead tonight, thousands of illegal aliens caught at our nations borders only to be set free on the streets of this country. We'll have that report for you next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: As we reported, Senator Kerry today, offered more details on the plan for the economy. The Kerry plan would eliminate tax breaks to American companies who export work to cheap foreign labor markets, and would cut the federal deficit in half over four years. Joining me now from Washington, Senator Kerry's economic adviser, Roger Altman. Roger, good to have you with us.
ROGER ALTMAN, ECONOMIC ADVISER TO SEN. KERRY: Good to be here, Lou.
DOBBS: The idea of cutting the deficit, almost the first reaction was, as the Senator acknowledged, he will cut back on some of the programs he has enunciated during the primary. What's your thinking?
ALTMAN: Let's put this in perspective. Senator Kerry today proposed to return to the budget principles, the budget rules which produced the first balanced budget in 40 years during the late 90's and which led to, ultimately to surpluses in that period and also, more importantly, produced the greatest period of prosperity most of us can remember.
Those budget rules were enacted initially on a bipartisan basis in 1990 by the first President Bush. They were extended in 1993. They were extended again on a bipartisan basis in 1997 between President Clinton and then Speaker Gingrich. They expired in the early days of this Bush administration. And the president inexplicably, in my view, and foolishly, declined to renew them.
Those rules are two-fold. No. 1, pay as you go. A very simple concept that most Americans can understand, because that's how they operate their household budgets. It simply means that any initiative you propose, a tax cut, a spending increase has to be offset by a spending cut or tax increase so the impact of the initiative is neutral to the budget.
Second rule if I can, reinstating the inflation-based caps on nondefense discretionary. Again, we lived with them during the '90s. They were enormously successful. We're going back to these two basic rules, Lou, which were so successful before, enacted on a bipartisan basis several time, that is we need to restore.
If we live under those rules as we have committed to do, yes, some of Senator Kerry's initiatives may have to be scaled back or sacrificed. He described three that might be in that category.
DOBBS: The Senator, in talking about cutting the budget deficit, as he acknowledged, would have to roll back immediately -- Republican critics said, look, it's only been a matter of six to eight weeks since he made these promises and already he's rolling them back. Your reaction?
ATLMAN: Well, Senator Kerry has committed himself to return to the type of budget discipline, as I said, which we saw before, what the country needs. Let me remind you, under President Bush so far, in three and a half years, federal spends has risen at an annual average rate of 8.2 percent. Over the eight Clinton years, with these rules in place it rose 2.5, about a quarter of the Bush rate.
Now, if you take out defense and security, spending under President Bush would still have risen at least twice the Clinton rate. The country cannot afford that. We have the worst budget record here, Lou, in American history. 500 trillion dollar ten-year estimated surplus, now a 5 trillion dollar estimated 10 year deficit. That's Goldman-Sachs estimate. That's the biggest reversal in the history of the country since George Washington. And it is a record we cannot sustain. We can't afford this. DOBBS: Roger, the Bush administration says that we can't afford those tax rollbacks that Senator Kerry has proposed, raising taxes on those making $200,000 a year or more because Commerce Secretary Evans today said, those are primarily small businesses under subchapter S. Your reaction?
ALTMAN: Well, it may sound nice, Lou, but it has the unfortunate reality untrue, it's just untrue. The reality is that 98 percent of Americans, 98 percent of tax filers will not see their taxes increase, most will receive a tax cut under Senator Kerry's plan.
If your income is less than $200,000 a year, and 98 percent of Americans who filed taxes have income below that threshold, your taxes will not go up, most will be a cut. Only if your income is $200,000 more, that effects 2 percent of filers.
By the way, those increases go back to the Clinton level. And the Bush administration likes to say that we're raising taxes on small business. It's not true. Very few small businesses will be affected.
DOBBS: Roger thank you very much, we're out of time. Roger Altman, thank you.
My next guest says that, amongst other things, that outsourcing is good for America. He recently wrote, in fact, that, quote, "rants about offshoring are at the top of a slippery slope towards wrongly condemning overseas operations and even trade itself." Dr. Glen Hubbard is the former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers for President Bush and here in New York. Good to have you here.
DR. GLEN HUBBARD, ECONOMIST: Thanks, Lou.
DOBBS: Before we turn to outsourcing. These number that is are being bandied about. Your successer, Greg Mankiw, said 2.6 million in his report for the president would be created, 2.6 million jobs. Senator Kerry now is talking about 10 million jobs over the next four years. Why in the world should any of us believe any of you about what jobs will be created over any period of time?
HUBBARD: It's very hard to forecast job growth, Lou, you're absolutely right. But it is inconceivable to me, as an economist, if we continue to see GDP growth in the 4, 4.5 percent range that we won't see very strong payroll employment growth. I can't tell you which month. But I think we will see strong growth.
DOBBS: Strong growth, and point of fact, wouldn't it be better for both parties, Democrats and Republicans, because hard-working Americans who are being hit by things like outsourcing, by lower paying jobs, loss of benefits, the middle clast squeeze in this country, is incontrovertible.
Why not a set of principle, that if voters out there, tonight, every night, as they listen to the candidates can say, that president is making sense. They're going to set certain values, they're going to protect public education, they're going to provide that multinationals have responsibility to working men and women in this country that go beyond just simply an investor, that actually extend to an employer and other stake holders including the communities in which they work.
HUBBARD: You're right. What we've got to do is focus on what is making our economy work well, which is its economic flexibility. We have two star engines in job creation. One is multinationals, they create two jobs here for every one that goes abroad, and small businesses who are the bulk of the brunt of Senator Kerry's tax increase.
DOBBS: Now, that 70 percent, as Secretary Evans referred to in small business, why should we tolerate U.S. multinationals offshoring, outsourcing American jobs to cheap overseas labor simply markets because they can pay someone in Romania or Philippines or India less than they would pay in America, in this country, to provide the same service for product in this market, in the United States.
HUBBARD: Well the truth isn't -- that's not what most multinationals do, Lou.
DOBBS: It is part of what they're all doing who are outsourcing jobs overseas.
HUBBARD: But the bulk of the investment overseas is to access foreign markets, or to improve jobs in the U.S. by bringing higher paying headquarters and R and D jobs back.
DOBBS: No, no, no, no, no. That isn't what we are talking about. Because there is a lot of confusion. And I don't know how much is intentional, or how much is, let's just say, accidental. But what we talked about on this broadcast is the outsourcing of American jobs to places like India, principly in IT, in this country simply to provide the same service or product to this 11 trillion dollar market using cheap labor in India, the Philippines, Romania, Ireland, and a host of other countries. Do you really believe that that's good for this economy or any other?
HUBBARD: I think its useful to look at the facts, Lou. Again, we have two jobs here for every one overseas. And people who have studied the overseas activity...
DOBBS: What does that mean? We have two jobs here no every one overseas?
HUBBARD: It means that the labor we have overseas is strongly complimentary to the labor we are here. By having more labor overseas we also have larger markets and more headquarters.
DOBBS: But no one have a problem with that. When you invest plant and equipment and hire people in India to serve the Indian market or China to serve the Indian market, that makes all the sense. That's just good, competitive business. But it doesn't make any sense for the American people to be tolerating U.S. multinationals exploiting this market and costing U.S. jobs by hiring cheap labor in countries that have cheap labor markets. HUBBARD: I think it is useful to look at examples. When the offshoring of PC manufacturing took place, we gained a lot of jobs in software, data base management and so on, these are good jobs and important jobs.
DOBBS: We appreciate you taking the time to be here. Hope you will come back.
HUBBARD: My pleasure.
DOBBS: I have a feeling we'll have opportunities over the next several months. Dr. Glen Hubbard.
Still ahead, in "Broken Borders." The U.S. border patrol agents forced to release thousands of illegal aliens each year after they're caught crossing our borders. It is unbelievable, but it's what's happening. We'll have a special report for you. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Updating a story we reported to you last night. Voters in a suburb of Los Angeles have voted against the construction of a huge Wal-Mart super center in their community. Voters siding with the local government in turning down the shopping center which would have been the size of 17 football fields, that in Inglewood, California.
In "Broken Borders" tonight, a frustrating game for Border Patrol agents and customs agents. Thousands of illegal aliens apprehended each year are simply turned loose in this country, because there's not enough room to hold them in jails and other facilities. Casey Wian reports from Nogales, Arizona.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Near midnight in Nogales, Arizona, the busiest place in town is the Border Patrol's detention facility. Here, captured illegal aliens are identified, photographed, fingerprinted, and entered into a computer database.
Aliens are separated by gender, nationality, and criminal background. Non-criminals are on their way back to Mexico within a couple of hours, classified as voluntary returns. They could face felony charges if caught again.
(on camera): On this night between 3:00 and 11:00 p.m., the Nogales Border Patrol station apprehended 410 suspected illegal aliens. Vast majority will be voluntarily deported to Mexico. But for some others, it is not that simple.
(voice-over): They are called OTMs, for "other than Mexican." Deporting these aliens can involve months of bureaucratic maneuvers. And because space at detention facilities like this is so limited, each year about 6,000 are brought before judges who set a deportation hearing date, then release them onto the streets of the United States. Not surprisingly, 86 percent don't show up and simply disappear. REP. JIM KOLBE (R), ARIZONA: It makes absolutely no sense. What we need to do is have a lot more detention facilities. We need to have better -- we need to have money to pay for those detention facilities, and we need to reimburse local law enforcement agencies that are detaining these people.
WIAN: The head of the Bureau of Customs and Immigration Enforcement says aliens who are determined to be national security risks are kept in custody.
MICHAEL GARCIA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: We detain about 23,000 people at any given time. That's our maximum bed space. So we're always looking at, what are the worst cases, what are the cases where we have the greatest risk of flight, the greatest risk to the community? And those are the aliens that we're going to make sure stay within the detention system.
WIAN: President Bush has asked for more than $100 million for expanded alien detention facilities in next year's budget. The Homeland Security Department is also testing alternatives, such as electronic monitoring devices. Meanwhile, word of the catch-and- release policy has spread to places like Brazil, attracting more illegal aliens who know U.S. detention facilities are full.
Casey Wian, CNN, Nogales, Arizona.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Taking a look now at some of your thoughts. Many of you writing in about whether the president should remain committed to turning over sovereignty to an Iraqi government on the 30th of June.
John G. of Severn, Maryland. "Our commitment to the Iraqi people to return sovereignty to them must be kept so those that support us know that we're keeping our word to them."
Rebecca of Jackson, Tennessee: "There is clearly no government, no solid police force and no Iraqi military. The president needs to have a more realistic date that is not driven by the November election."
And on "Broken Borders," Charles Becker of Waycross, Georgia: "With governors allowing illegal aliens to have driver's licenses, why in the world are we spending money to police the borders? When did the word illegal start to mean welcome, how may we be of service?"
And David Palmer of Daly City, California. "It used to be a point of pride for companies as to how they treated their employees. Now, the big guys line their pockets while the rank and file get downsized."
We love hearing from you. E-mail us at loudobbs@cnn.com.
A reminder to check our Web site for the complete list of companies we've confirmed to be exporting America. That's cnn.com/lou. We continue in just a moment with the results of tonight's poll. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results now of tonight's poll. Ninety-one percent of you say Congress should have a stronger voice in U.S. foreign policy, including Iraq. Nine percent of you say no.
That's our show for tonight. And we thank you for being with us. Pease join us here tomorrow, when National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice testifies before the 9/11 commission, and commissioners Timothy Roemer and Slade Gorton join us on the broadcast to give us their reaction to her testimony. Former presidential adviser David Gergen is also our guest tomorrow night. We hope you'll 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
Aired April 7, 2004 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Uprising in Iraq. U.S. Marines tonight pushing deeper into Fallujah. U.S. commanders say they will destroy the enemy.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We take them out and we do away with the terrorists.
DOBBS: Tonight, I'll talk with former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski about Iraq and other global challenges to American power.
Senator John Kerry says he will cut the federal budget deficit in half.
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The federal budget has gone from record surpluses to record deficits.
DOBBS: Senator Kerry's economics adviser, Roger Altman, says U.S. companies shouldn't be rewarded for exporting American jobs. He's our guest. And former Bush economics adviser Dr. Glenn Hubbard disagrees. He's also our guest.
And in "Broken Borders" tonight, you won't believe what happens to thousands of illegal aliens once they're apprehended crossing our border, a special report.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Wednesday, April 7. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening.
Tonight, U.S. troops in Iraq are engaged in the heaviest fighting since the fall of Baghdad a year ago. In the Sunni stronghold of Fallujah, U.S. Marines are fighting house to house against insurgents. Elsewhere in Iraq, U.S. soldiers are preparing to go on the offensive against the militia loyal to the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al- Sadr. About three dozen coalition troops have been killed since Sunday, all but two of them American.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS (voice-over): For a third straight day, Fallujah is the site of fierce fighting between U.S. forces and Sunni Muslim insurgents. U.S. Marines in Fallujah fought in at least two separate locations.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Marines are pushing the insurgents out of the neighborhoods. They're going door to door finding insurgent locations. They've engaged them in firefights.
DOBBS: U.S. fighter aircraft dropped two 500-pound precision bombs on a wall surrounding a mosque being used as a refuge for the enemy. Elsewhere in the Sunni Triangle, Marines continue to fight insurgents in Ramadi. And in Baghdad, the U.S. Army reinforced its troops to take on Shiite gunmen. Tanks are protecting police stations in Sadr City, a stronghold of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt said coalition forces are determined to destroy the enemy.
BRIG. GEN. MARK KIMMITT, U.S. DEPUTY CHIEF OF OPERATIONS: Those offensive operations will be deliberate, they will be precise, and they will be powerful, and they will succeed.
DOBBS: Al Sadr supporters remain in control of Najaf. Al-Sadr is believed to be hiding in the city.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld today said the United States remains in control of Iraq despite the uprising. Rumsfeld said U.S. troops are facing a relatively small number of insurgents.
Senior Pentagon core respondent Jamie McIntyre reports -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, along with the battle against insurgents, the Pentagon is also battling the perception that it may be losing the upper hand in Iraq. Today, in a hastily called press briefing here at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and Joint Chiefs Chairman General Richard Myers both insisted that the U.S. is still winning in Iraq, and Rumsfeld insisted that the situation is not spinning out of control.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: ... said there was a test of wills today.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: It is.
MCINTYRE: Is this a turning point, a critical juncture?
RUMSFELD: I wouldn't use that phrase. I thought the way I phrased it is about right. It is a moment on the path towards a free Iraq. And very few countries have gone from a repressive system to a free system on a smooth, perfectly proper, everything wonderful path.
GEN. RICHARD MYERS, JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN: I think it's important to remember what this is not. And it's certainly not a popular uprising or movement supported by the majority of Iraqis. It is not that at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: Sources say in a video teleconference today with President Bush, the president was assured by his top commander in Iraq, General John Abizaid, that the U.S. military plan to aggressively attack the anti-U.S. forces is working and will succeed.
And Abizaid, we're told, did not ask for additional troops to be sent to Iraq, but the Pentagon is approving a plan that will result in some of the troops that are currently there staying on to -- quote -- "see the situation through." That includes, sources say, elements of the 1st Armored Division and some quick-response, quick-reaction forces from the 1st Cavalry Division that were scheduled to start coming home. They're going to be redeployed to other hot spots in Iraq -- Lou.
DOBBS: Jamie, as you know, there are reports today that some coalition troops in Iraq are remaining at their bases or even abandoning their positions. Is the Pentagon concerned?
MCINTYRE: Well, the Pentagon insists that, for the most part, Iraqi troops and coalition countries are performing admirably. There are some isolated reports of -- particularly with Iraqi forces of them being overwhelmed and sometimes abandoning or retreating from their bases, sometimes aligning themselves temporarily with the anti-U.S. forces, but they insist they have no evidence of any widespread problem.
DOBBS: OK, thank you very much, Jamie McIntyre, senior Pentagon correspondent.
During the Pentagon's new conference today, Jamie McIntyre's colleague Barbara Starr tried to find out how many armed Iraqis support the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. The replies from Secretary Rumsfeld and General Myers suggested that the Pentagon simply isn't sure.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUMSFELD: I was going to say -- you said 1,000. I think I said 1,000 to 6,000, and we don't know the number. So it's not the one.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Let me rephrase my question...
RUMSFELD: I wouldn't want people to walk out thinking we'd said what you said we'd said.
STARR: OK. Let me rephrase my question very quickly: How is it that this situation has led the Bush administration to step back one step from its promise to the troops that they would be home within a year?
MYERS: I think one thing we've always said, from day one, before major combat began is that what the combat commander on the ground needs in terms of resources -- men, women, materiel -- he'll get. And that's still the promise today. And the numbers in Iraq and the numbers in Afghanistan have varied over time to deal with the situation on the ground and the capability the commander needs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: As you noted, General Myers asserting that the promises to the commanders would be kept and did not respond to Barbara Starr's question as to whether or not the promises to American troops would be kept.
As insurgents increase their attacks against American and coalition forces in Iraq, politicians in Washington are beginning to step up the debate about U.S. policy in Iraq.
Congressional correspondent Joe Johns has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOE JOHNS, CNN CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The escalating violence in Iraq is causing a heated debate in the U.S. Senate over comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam. Republican Senator John McCain, a Vietnam veteran, says the comparisons are flat wrong.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I happen to know something about Vietnam. And I know we don't face another Vietnam.
JOHNS: Senator Edward Kennedy, John Kerry's closest ally in Congress, first made the political loaded comparison on Monday. He was followed today by the Senate's leading critic Robert Byrd. Byrd compared the violence to Tennyson's "Charge of the Light Brigade."
SEN. ROBERT BYRD (D), WEST VIRGINIA: Theirs is not to reason why. Theirs is but to do and die. Into the valley of death rode the 600.
JOHNS: Then he said the V word.
BYRD: Surely, I'm not the only one who hears echoes of Vietnam in this development.
JOHNS: Republicans are furious. Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, a hard-liner on defense, said American lives could be endangered by statements made by politicians.
SEN. SAXBY CHAMBLISS (R), GEORGIA: Statements that tend to incite the opposition and to put our men and women in greater harm's way.
JOHNS: The Senate's top Democrat, while voicing support for the troops, accused Republicans of trying to stifle debates.
SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D-SD), MINORITY LEADER: I think in an open democracy people ought to have a right to express themselves without fear of character assassination.
QUESTION: Even in a time of war?
DASCHLE: Absolutely, especially in a time of war.
JOHNS: Kerry, another Vietnam veteran, steered clear of the argument.
KERRY: No matter what disagreements over how to approach the policy in Iraq, and we have some, we are all united as a nation in supporting our troops and, ultimately, in our goal of a stable Iraq.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
JOHNS: Daschle and many Democrats say more troops may be needed to deal with the situation in Iraq. That view appears to be picking up support among at least a couple moderate Republicans. The Senate majority leader says, whatever support the Pentagon needs, Congress is willing to provide -- Lou.
DOBBS: Joe, thank you very much -- Joe Johns reporting from Capitol Hill.
And that brings us to the subject of our poll tonight. The question: Should Congress have a stronger voice in U.S. foreign policy, including Iraq, yes or no? Please cast your vote at CNN.com/Lou. We'll have the results for you later in the broadcast.
President Bush is, meanwhile, closely following events in Iraq from his ranch in Crawford, Texas. Today, President Bush was briefed by the head of Central Command, General John Abizaid.
White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux reports from Crawford -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, President Bush today participated in not one, but two video conference calls with his National Security Council. And on the line was General Abizaid.
The president has always said, if he wanted troops, he would get more troops. So far the Pentagon is just taking advantage of this overlap in troop deployment. But the White House today, despite what you are seeing on the ground, violence from Sunni, as well as Shia sects, downplayed the significance.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: What you're seeing is what I just described, a relatively small number of extremist element who are trying to take advantage of the situation and go about a violent power play to try to undermine the transition from oppression to democracy that is under way in Iraq, but they will fail.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: President Bush also spent 30 minutes on the phone with his closest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the two of them strategizing. Blair will come and visit Bush. This is next Friday at the White House, strategizing how to turn over power back to the Iraqi people and still meet that June 30 deadline -- Lou.
DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much -- Suzanne Malveaux reporting from Crawford.
We'll have much more on Iraq still ahead here, including serious charges that the White House ignored CIA warnings about this Iraqi uprising. We'll be talking with former CIA analyst Ken Pollack. I will also be talking tonight with former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.
And Senator John Kerry launches a new offensive against President Bush's economic policies. The administration strikes back. We'll have a report.
And in "Broken Borders" tonight, the incredible story of what happens to thousands of illegal aliens once they're captured and arrested after crossing our borders.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: My guest wrote the influential book "The Threatening Storm: The Case For Invading Iraq," which laid out at least part of the rationale for the Bush administration's decision to depose Saddam Hussein.
Surprisingly tonight, Ken Pollack levels a serious charge against the White House for failing to heed CIA warnings about the current uprising in Iraq and joins us tonight from Washington, D.C.
Good to have you with us.
KENNETH POLLACK, CNN ANALYST: Good to be here, Lou.
DOBBS: The level of intelligence suggesting this uprising, in your judgment, was it of a quality and sufficient character to be acted upon by the White House, by the administration, the Pentagon?
POLLACK: Let me make it clear, Lou, I don't know that the CIA was able to warn about this particular uprising.
What I do know is that before the war, before the invasion of Iraq, there were constant warnings from the CIA and from a whole host of other people within the intelligence community, Iraq experts outside, warning the administration that the reconstruction of Iraq was going to be a very, very difficult process and that if not handled properly and with enough resources, it is could easily degenerate into exactly what we're seeing this week.
DOBBS: To degenerate into what we're seeing this week, an alliance, at least in coincidence, if not an outright conspiracy, between Sunnis and Shias in simultaneous attacks against U.S. interests, as well as Iraqi interests, what do you make of that?
POLLACK: Lou, I think you're putting your finger on one of the most troubling aspects of what we're seeing over these last few days, is that you have got Shia insurgents and Sunni insurgents which seem to be making some degree of common cause, at least on the battlefield. I don't think there's any evidence that they are necessarily planning this.
But it just seems to be the case that Sunnis and Shia, for their own reason, are becoming sufficiently frustrated that they are willing to make common cause with each other against the United States, small numbers of people, to be sure, but it is a troubling first sign.
DOBBS: Another troubling aspect, if I may say, the secretary of defense today referring to thugs and gangs in Iraq. We have heard such language as dead-enders, bitter-enders before, without discrete, definitive descriptions of the enemies that are being faced by American troops. Does that trouble you?
POLLACK: Yes, because I think it does reduce the problems that we're facing in Iraq to just a tiny little segment of the society. And we have a larger problem in Iraq, which is that we have alienated certain elements of the community as a whole.
I think it is still the case that most Iraqis do want the reconstruction to succeed. In fact, I think the Iraqis are starting to get a little bit desperate for the reconstruction to succeed. And that's part of the problem, is some of the Iraqis are getting so frustrated that after 12 months the United States has not made greater progress, that they are beginning to lose faith and beginning to heed the call of people like Muqtada al-Sadr, who for 12 months have been calling for this.
DOBBS: Frustration, though, Ken, seems a bit of a mild term, if I may say, for a situation in which Sunnis and Shias, irrespective of the numbers, who have taken up arms to confront the mightiest force on the planet, that is, the U.S. military. This is a remarkable development at this particular late stage, a year after the fall of Baghdad.
POLLACK: Right.
Well, what we're seeing, Lou, is a response in both communities to actions taken by the United States. And the Marines in Fallujah and Ramadi are doing something that should have been done, honestly, 12 months ago, which is to go in and finally pacify those towns. For 12 months, they were allowed to exist like the wild, wild West, doing their own thing. They became hotbeds of resistance to the United States.
The Marines are finally doing that. In the South, what we see is the U.S. moving against al Sadr. I think that there is real debate as to whether now is the right time to be doing it. But that is what is sparking the resistance, is the United States going in and trying to do things at a very delicate moment.
DOBBS: We had an interesting development that we reported at the outset of the broadcast tonight, Ken. And that is the secretary of defense trying to correct, in point of fact, one of our colleagues at CNN, Barbara Starr, who used the term 1,000 followers in terms of Muqtada al-Sadr. He had actually said 1,000 to 6,000, then said he didn't know what the actual number was, but didn't want to be misquoted.
As a former CIA analyst, certainly we know with some specificity the strength of al-Sadr's follower, the level of their armament and something about their disposition. And if not, what in the world has the CIA, military intelligence, and the Pentagon been doing for a year?
POLLACK: Well, you know, I appreciate your confidence in the CIA. And believe me, I have got friends back there. They're good people. They're smart people trying to do a good job. But this is a an extraordinarily difficult situation. And you know the difficulties that all the intelligence agencies had in Vietnam trying to figure out how many Viet Cong there were.
And I think that what we've seen over the last few days -- and, again, I think this is part of a wakeup call that we need to all take into account -- is that Muqtada al-Sadr seems to have a lot more followers than any of us realized.
DOBBS: You talked about the difficulty. The difficulty as we watch American men and women in uniform being shot dead and wounded, frankly, the order of difficulty becomes far from interesting. It is a difficult job. We knew that. As you articulated, the CIA had some sensibility about what would follow here.
Is there any comprehension about why, with that foreknowledge, that understanding, that those warnings are not part of the planning and the response?
POLLACK: Yes.
Lou, you're getting at a really important issue here. And it is one that is very troubling to me, in particular, with the issues in the south. This is an extraordinarily delicate moment. You have got Lakhdar Brahimi, the U.N. representative in Iraq, trying desperately to reconstruct some kind of interim government that can see Iraq through until it can have democratic elections.
And at this particular moment, to be stirring up the hornet's nest of Muqtada al-Sadr's followers, that doesn't strike me as particularly good timing. I really don't know what it was that we were thinking by doing these two things simultaneously.
DOBBS: One has to ask the question, Ken, and I would appreciate your answer on this. As we discuss the secretary of defense's language and talk about dead-enders, bitter-enders, gangs, thugs, and talking about discrete elements of Iraqi society and those radicals and insurgents who are attacking the U.S. troops, we are also hearing the language of putting an international face on U.S. force, talking about handover and trying to disguise the words occupation, when that is precisely what has been the last 12 months in Iraq.
Have we tried -- has this administration tried, perhaps too much, to put politics and a good face, rather than using straightforward language like occupation, like the deployment and use of American power, and given in too much to, if you will, some sense of correctness in the Middle East and, in particular, in Iraq?
POLLACK: Well, I think that, certainly, communication has been a problem throughout the course of the occupation. One of the things that you hear from Iraqis on a regular basis is one of the sources of their greatest anger is that no one in the CPA tells them what's going on.
And when you talk about the CPA, they're incredibly frustrated that no one in Washington is telling them what's going on and U.S. forces out in the field are constantly frustrated that they don't know exactly what's going on. So I think the more that we could actually level with all of these different groups and having them speak to each other in clear, plain language, I think the better off everyone would be.
DOBBS: Ken Pollack, thank you very much for being with us.
THOMPSON: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: Still ahead, U.S. troops face the biggest challenge in Iraq in almost a year. We'll be joined by our military expert, General David Grange. Tonight, I'll also be talking with former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.
And, yes, it is the economy. John Kerry takes a familiar campaign theme on the road. We'll tell you why he says the wealthiest Americans need to be taxed more.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Senator Kerry today offered more details of his ambitious plans for the economy. Today, Senator Kerry focused on his plan to roll back tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans while still cutting the deficit in half over four years.
Kitty Pilgrim reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): John Kerry warns deficits will destroy America.
KERRY: In the last three years, the federal budget has gone from record surpluses to record deficits which if left unchecked can become a fiscal cancer that will erode any recovery and threaten the prospect of lasting prosperity in our nation.
PILGRIM: Kerry promises to cut the nearly $500 billion deficit in half in four years. Other proposals, pay-as-you-go rules, no federal increases in spending without matching cuts in other areas, cutting taxes for middle-class Americans, taking away the current tax cuts for Americans earning $200,000 or more and cutting corporate taxes by 5 percent.
KERRY: Under my plan, 99 percent of American businesses and 98 percent of Americans will get a tax cut. And I believe that will advance the economy of our country.
PILGRIM: The Bush administration counters the charge its tax cuts are for the wealthy, saying they are for small business owners. Treasury Secretary Don Evans spoke at a small-business owners conference today.
DON EVANS, COMMERCE SECRETARY: Because your personal and your business taxes are lumped together. The president's tax cuts went to families and small businesses in this country and small businesses create 70 percent of the new jobs in America.
PILGRIM: The issue of job creation was the theme of Kerry's speech two weeks ago, where he promised 10 million new jobs in four years. He also condemned outsourcing, saying again today that he wants to take away the tax advantages for American companies who ship manufacturing jobs overseas.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: John Kerry did not go into specific budget figures in the speech. However, he said that money earned back from rolling back tax cuts on the wealthy would be used for education and health care -- Lou.
DOBBS: And said he was willing as well to roll back his own ambitious plans to spend money in order to meet those deficit goals.
PILGRIM: Yes, he likes a pay-as-you-go plan.
DOBBS: We will be talking with Senator Kerry's principal economic adviser, Roger Altman, later in the broadcast. Kitty, thank you very much.
Returning now to the top story of the day, the uprising in Iraq, as the violence escalated today, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said U.S. troops have not lost control there.
I'm joined now by CNN military analyst General David Grange.
General, almost 12 months after taking Baghdad, it's remarkable that the secretary of defense would have to stay something like, we haven't lost control. What's your reaction?
RETIRED BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, overall, I don't think that the coalition has lost control. It's a tough situation, Lou. No doubt about it. And it could slip away in certain areas if the coalition is careful.
The key is pressure. The key is to surge. If it takes more troops, if it takes more effort, do it and don't let the lid get off this thing. Uprisings are happening here and there and everywhere. Probably don't have a good feel on how many exactly are in the insurgent force, the numbers. And so you either kill them all or you dissuade those that you don't kill that the cause is no good.
DOBBS: Well, as you know, General Kimmitt said that they're going to destroy al-Sadr's army, their militia. Is that in point of fact a practical solution?
GRANGE: I wouldn't say so tonight or tomorrow. I would think that that is down the road if you're going to take that on.
The timing right now, with some of the religious activities, I think it would not be advisable to go in there now. You have a fury of excitement, emotional feelings of rage. Let them burn down a little bit, let them collapse from the joy, and then go in after them. And, hopefully, you only have to take down a few of that number and the rest you could persuade or have disperse and take away their effectiveness.
DOBBS: Are you in favor of sending in more U.S. troops?
GRANGE: I'm in favor of sending in more U.S. troops, not that you have to have more to do the different tasks within Iraq right now. But I don't like the idea that you may have to move some from one area and uncover one area to surge in another.
I think it's important to show that you can move people there immediately, which the U.S. and some other allies can, that you will do it, that you have the resolve to reinforce, if you want to, and, in fact, eliminate any perception that this pressure from insurgents would cause the U.S. to pull out early, but in fact it would reinforce. And this gives you that psychological, I think, advantage over the minds of the enemy and some of the people that are on the fence.
DOBBS: From this point on, General Grange, would you press the fight?
That is, go after not only Al Sadr the Shiite Muslim, the Shiite Muslim Militia and the other insurgents, but, as well, not only engage them but disarm them and disarm all of Iraq?
GRANGE: I would disarm everything, if possible. It should have been done a while ago and may have been a mission too far because of the multitude of tasks. But as you let it go, the longer you wait, the more power these groups obtain. Obviously, it is not only caches of weapons in countries and but weapons I think are coming from somewhere else, whether it be Iran, Syria, wherever, which may be another reason to put down a force for a month or two out of country. Kind of like a surprise to say, don't cross this border. We mean business.
DOBBS: General David Grange, thank you.
When we continue, more on the situation in Iraq. We'll listen to the former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski ahead of Condoleeza's Rice's testimony before the commission.
Senator Kerry attacking President Bush's economic policies. We'll talk with the senators principal economic adviser Roger Altman, next. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Here now with more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: My next guest says the escalating violence will have wide spread implications throughout the Middle East. Zbigniew Brzezinski, served as national security advisor under President Carter, and he joins us tonight from Washington.
Good to have you with us.
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR: Good to be with you.
DOBBS: The most profane implications you see arising from this broader violence over the past four or five days.
BRZEZINSKI: I would say we are running the risk of setting the Middle East on fire. The American occupation of Iraq has been perceived increasingly as a brutal occupation. This may be unfair. In fact, it is unfair, but perceptions are important in politics. Look at the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan. Not everything is perfect in Afghanistan. But in Afghanistan, we have ally whose are helping us. We have Afghans helping us because we helped them earlier against the Soviets. And we have an American administrator in Afghanistan, he's called ambassador, who is flexible and able to work with all the different parties. None of these conditions apply in Iraq, and that's part of the problem.
DOBBS: A fact though, is as you know, a number of the countries in the coalition today, in fact, withdrew troops back to their bases. Also sought, reportedly, security assurances from the United States forces there for their protection. Are you, in fact, criticizing Ambassador Bremer for his administration and adjudication in Iraq?
BRZEZINSKI: I'm concerned by the reports that he has not been able to delegate authority, hasn't been able to work had his British counterpart. That he has had a rather, should we put it, didactic style in dealing with the Iraqi. I think, that's not the way to create consensus and general support of an authority, for which allegedly we are going to be yielding sovereignty within a few weeks.
DOBBS: Do you believe, Mr. Brzezinski, that we should put more troops in Iraq to ensure better security for America and coalition for the Iraqis?
BRZEZINSKI: My answer may sound (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and even contradictory to you, but answer is yes, we put in more troops, absolutely. We should make a much more concerted effort to transfer formal authority to the United Nations and get our allies to become more engaged and they will only become more engaged if we're prepared to deal with the wider problems of the Middle East, including a more active effort to pursue the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Because in the eyes of our allies, and I think they're right, the issue Iraq and the issue of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians are issues that are becoming conflated.
DOBBS: As you describe the Mideast process, despite everything over the course of half a century, been the most frustrating region in all the world. But now a road map that a year ago looked like it could be a hopeful approach to peace in the Middle East, we now see it in tatters. We don't have a particular well enunciated or executed plan to bring any resolution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. We have even though the United States, as Secretary Rumsfeld says remains in control, the policy of this country in the Middle East is, without question under attack, and at best lacking firm enunciation. What would you do to reset?
BRZEZINSKI: Well, first of all, it is absolutely true what you have said, our policy looks totally one-sided. Purely militaristic. And increasing occupation of Iraq and Israeli occupation of the West Bank are seen as two sides of a single coin. I think at the very least we could is try to relate the peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians. The so called road map, to some definition of the outcome. Some description of what that peace that is supposed to be reached by that road is going to look like. And we have a preview of that in the Geneva Accords which were negotiate indeed great detail by a group of Israelis, very important Israelis, including former military loaders and Palestinians. If we were to endorse that, then that means the road map would lead somewhere. And over time, we'll begin to mobilize support from it, from moderate Israelis, from moderate Palestinians. And, similarly, Iraq, we have to have more rapid movement towards ending what appears increasingly to be a very overt U.S. military occupation.
DOBBS: Zbigniew Brzezinski, thanks for being here.
BRZEZINSKI: Good to be with you.
DOBBS: The economy on the campaign trail today. The focus, Senator Kerry wants to cut back on the exporting of American jobs, wants to cut the deficit in half. The senator's economic adviser, Roger Altman joins us. And former Bush economic advisor Dr. Glen Hubbard will also be here. He says outsourcing is good for America.
Also ahead tonight, thousands of illegal aliens caught at our nations borders only to be set free on the streets of this country. We'll have that report for you next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: As we reported, Senator Kerry today, offered more details on the plan for the economy. The Kerry plan would eliminate tax breaks to American companies who export work to cheap foreign labor markets, and would cut the federal deficit in half over four years. Joining me now from Washington, Senator Kerry's economic adviser, Roger Altman. Roger, good to have you with us.
ROGER ALTMAN, ECONOMIC ADVISER TO SEN. KERRY: Good to be here, Lou.
DOBBS: The idea of cutting the deficit, almost the first reaction was, as the Senator acknowledged, he will cut back on some of the programs he has enunciated during the primary. What's your thinking?
ALTMAN: Let's put this in perspective. Senator Kerry today proposed to return to the budget principles, the budget rules which produced the first balanced budget in 40 years during the late 90's and which led to, ultimately to surpluses in that period and also, more importantly, produced the greatest period of prosperity most of us can remember.
Those budget rules were enacted initially on a bipartisan basis in 1990 by the first President Bush. They were extended in 1993. They were extended again on a bipartisan basis in 1997 between President Clinton and then Speaker Gingrich. They expired in the early days of this Bush administration. And the president inexplicably, in my view, and foolishly, declined to renew them.
Those rules are two-fold. No. 1, pay as you go. A very simple concept that most Americans can understand, because that's how they operate their household budgets. It simply means that any initiative you propose, a tax cut, a spending increase has to be offset by a spending cut or tax increase so the impact of the initiative is neutral to the budget.
Second rule if I can, reinstating the inflation-based caps on nondefense discretionary. Again, we lived with them during the '90s. They were enormously successful. We're going back to these two basic rules, Lou, which were so successful before, enacted on a bipartisan basis several time, that is we need to restore.
If we live under those rules as we have committed to do, yes, some of Senator Kerry's initiatives may have to be scaled back or sacrificed. He described three that might be in that category.
DOBBS: The Senator, in talking about cutting the budget deficit, as he acknowledged, would have to roll back immediately -- Republican critics said, look, it's only been a matter of six to eight weeks since he made these promises and already he's rolling them back. Your reaction?
ATLMAN: Well, Senator Kerry has committed himself to return to the type of budget discipline, as I said, which we saw before, what the country needs. Let me remind you, under President Bush so far, in three and a half years, federal spends has risen at an annual average rate of 8.2 percent. Over the eight Clinton years, with these rules in place it rose 2.5, about a quarter of the Bush rate.
Now, if you take out defense and security, spending under President Bush would still have risen at least twice the Clinton rate. The country cannot afford that. We have the worst budget record here, Lou, in American history. 500 trillion dollar ten-year estimated surplus, now a 5 trillion dollar estimated 10 year deficit. That's Goldman-Sachs estimate. That's the biggest reversal in the history of the country since George Washington. And it is a record we cannot sustain. We can't afford this. DOBBS: Roger, the Bush administration says that we can't afford those tax rollbacks that Senator Kerry has proposed, raising taxes on those making $200,000 a year or more because Commerce Secretary Evans today said, those are primarily small businesses under subchapter S. Your reaction?
ALTMAN: Well, it may sound nice, Lou, but it has the unfortunate reality untrue, it's just untrue. The reality is that 98 percent of Americans, 98 percent of tax filers will not see their taxes increase, most will receive a tax cut under Senator Kerry's plan.
If your income is less than $200,000 a year, and 98 percent of Americans who filed taxes have income below that threshold, your taxes will not go up, most will be a cut. Only if your income is $200,000 more, that effects 2 percent of filers.
By the way, those increases go back to the Clinton level. And the Bush administration likes to say that we're raising taxes on small business. It's not true. Very few small businesses will be affected.
DOBBS: Roger thank you very much, we're out of time. Roger Altman, thank you.
My next guest says that, amongst other things, that outsourcing is good for America. He recently wrote, in fact, that, quote, "rants about offshoring are at the top of a slippery slope towards wrongly condemning overseas operations and even trade itself." Dr. Glen Hubbard is the former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers for President Bush and here in New York. Good to have you here.
DR. GLEN HUBBARD, ECONOMIST: Thanks, Lou.
DOBBS: Before we turn to outsourcing. These number that is are being bandied about. Your successer, Greg Mankiw, said 2.6 million in his report for the president would be created, 2.6 million jobs. Senator Kerry now is talking about 10 million jobs over the next four years. Why in the world should any of us believe any of you about what jobs will be created over any period of time?
HUBBARD: It's very hard to forecast job growth, Lou, you're absolutely right. But it is inconceivable to me, as an economist, if we continue to see GDP growth in the 4, 4.5 percent range that we won't see very strong payroll employment growth. I can't tell you which month. But I think we will see strong growth.
DOBBS: Strong growth, and point of fact, wouldn't it be better for both parties, Democrats and Republicans, because hard-working Americans who are being hit by things like outsourcing, by lower paying jobs, loss of benefits, the middle clast squeeze in this country, is incontrovertible.
Why not a set of principle, that if voters out there, tonight, every night, as they listen to the candidates can say, that president is making sense. They're going to set certain values, they're going to protect public education, they're going to provide that multinationals have responsibility to working men and women in this country that go beyond just simply an investor, that actually extend to an employer and other stake holders including the communities in which they work.
HUBBARD: You're right. What we've got to do is focus on what is making our economy work well, which is its economic flexibility. We have two star engines in job creation. One is multinationals, they create two jobs here for every one that goes abroad, and small businesses who are the bulk of the brunt of Senator Kerry's tax increase.
DOBBS: Now, that 70 percent, as Secretary Evans referred to in small business, why should we tolerate U.S. multinationals offshoring, outsourcing American jobs to cheap overseas labor simply markets because they can pay someone in Romania or Philippines or India less than they would pay in America, in this country, to provide the same service for product in this market, in the United States.
HUBBARD: Well the truth isn't -- that's not what most multinationals do, Lou.
DOBBS: It is part of what they're all doing who are outsourcing jobs overseas.
HUBBARD: But the bulk of the investment overseas is to access foreign markets, or to improve jobs in the U.S. by bringing higher paying headquarters and R and D jobs back.
DOBBS: No, no, no, no, no. That isn't what we are talking about. Because there is a lot of confusion. And I don't know how much is intentional, or how much is, let's just say, accidental. But what we talked about on this broadcast is the outsourcing of American jobs to places like India, principly in IT, in this country simply to provide the same service or product to this 11 trillion dollar market using cheap labor in India, the Philippines, Romania, Ireland, and a host of other countries. Do you really believe that that's good for this economy or any other?
HUBBARD: I think its useful to look at the facts, Lou. Again, we have two jobs here for every one overseas. And people who have studied the overseas activity...
DOBBS: What does that mean? We have two jobs here no every one overseas?
HUBBARD: It means that the labor we have overseas is strongly complimentary to the labor we are here. By having more labor overseas we also have larger markets and more headquarters.
DOBBS: But no one have a problem with that. When you invest plant and equipment and hire people in India to serve the Indian market or China to serve the Indian market, that makes all the sense. That's just good, competitive business. But it doesn't make any sense for the American people to be tolerating U.S. multinationals exploiting this market and costing U.S. jobs by hiring cheap labor in countries that have cheap labor markets. HUBBARD: I think it is useful to look at examples. When the offshoring of PC manufacturing took place, we gained a lot of jobs in software, data base management and so on, these are good jobs and important jobs.
DOBBS: We appreciate you taking the time to be here. Hope you will come back.
HUBBARD: My pleasure.
DOBBS: I have a feeling we'll have opportunities over the next several months. Dr. Glen Hubbard.
Still ahead, in "Broken Borders." The U.S. border patrol agents forced to release thousands of illegal aliens each year after they're caught crossing our borders. It is unbelievable, but it's what's happening. We'll have a special report for you. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Updating a story we reported to you last night. Voters in a suburb of Los Angeles have voted against the construction of a huge Wal-Mart super center in their community. Voters siding with the local government in turning down the shopping center which would have been the size of 17 football fields, that in Inglewood, California.
In "Broken Borders" tonight, a frustrating game for Border Patrol agents and customs agents. Thousands of illegal aliens apprehended each year are simply turned loose in this country, because there's not enough room to hold them in jails and other facilities. Casey Wian reports from Nogales, Arizona.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Near midnight in Nogales, Arizona, the busiest place in town is the Border Patrol's detention facility. Here, captured illegal aliens are identified, photographed, fingerprinted, and entered into a computer database.
Aliens are separated by gender, nationality, and criminal background. Non-criminals are on their way back to Mexico within a couple of hours, classified as voluntary returns. They could face felony charges if caught again.
(on camera): On this night between 3:00 and 11:00 p.m., the Nogales Border Patrol station apprehended 410 suspected illegal aliens. Vast majority will be voluntarily deported to Mexico. But for some others, it is not that simple.
(voice-over): They are called OTMs, for "other than Mexican." Deporting these aliens can involve months of bureaucratic maneuvers. And because space at detention facilities like this is so limited, each year about 6,000 are brought before judges who set a deportation hearing date, then release them onto the streets of the United States. Not surprisingly, 86 percent don't show up and simply disappear. REP. JIM KOLBE (R), ARIZONA: It makes absolutely no sense. What we need to do is have a lot more detention facilities. We need to have better -- we need to have money to pay for those detention facilities, and we need to reimburse local law enforcement agencies that are detaining these people.
WIAN: The head of the Bureau of Customs and Immigration Enforcement says aliens who are determined to be national security risks are kept in custody.
MICHAEL GARCIA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: We detain about 23,000 people at any given time. That's our maximum bed space. So we're always looking at, what are the worst cases, what are the cases where we have the greatest risk of flight, the greatest risk to the community? And those are the aliens that we're going to make sure stay within the detention system.
WIAN: President Bush has asked for more than $100 million for expanded alien detention facilities in next year's budget. The Homeland Security Department is also testing alternatives, such as electronic monitoring devices. Meanwhile, word of the catch-and- release policy has spread to places like Brazil, attracting more illegal aliens who know U.S. detention facilities are full.
Casey Wian, CNN, Nogales, Arizona.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Taking a look now at some of your thoughts. Many of you writing in about whether the president should remain committed to turning over sovereignty to an Iraqi government on the 30th of June.
John G. of Severn, Maryland. "Our commitment to the Iraqi people to return sovereignty to them must be kept so those that support us know that we're keeping our word to them."
Rebecca of Jackson, Tennessee: "There is clearly no government, no solid police force and no Iraqi military. The president needs to have a more realistic date that is not driven by the November election."
And on "Broken Borders," Charles Becker of Waycross, Georgia: "With governors allowing illegal aliens to have driver's licenses, why in the world are we spending money to police the borders? When did the word illegal start to mean welcome, how may we be of service?"
And David Palmer of Daly City, California. "It used to be a point of pride for companies as to how they treated their employees. Now, the big guys line their pockets while the rank and file get downsized."
We love hearing from you. E-mail us at loudobbs@cnn.com.
A reminder to check our Web site for the complete list of companies we've confirmed to be exporting America. That's cnn.com/lou. We continue in just a moment with the results of tonight's poll. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results now of tonight's poll. Ninety-one percent of you say Congress should have a stronger voice in U.S. foreign policy, including Iraq. Nine percent of you say no.
That's our show for tonight. And we thank you for being with us. Pease join us here tomorrow, when National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice testifies before the 9/11 commission, and commissioners Timothy Roemer and Slade Gorton join us on the broadcast to give us their reaction to her testimony. Former presidential adviser David Gergen is also our guest tomorrow night. We hope you'll 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
