Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Former Lebanese Prime Minister Killed by Car Bomb; Bush Requests $82 Million for Iraq War
Aired February 14, 2005 - 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.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Monday, February 14. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty pilgrim.
KITTY PILGRIM, HOST: Good evening.
A massive bombing in Beirut, Lebanon, today. It wounded 100 people, killed nine, including a former prime minister with close ties to the United States.
There are fears the attack could spark a new civil war in Lebanon. The former prime minister, Rafik Hariri, resigned last October after a dispute with Syria, the main power broker in Lebanon.
Brent Sadler reports from Beirut.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRENT SADLER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The heart of Beirut brutally thrown back to the bloodshed of civil war years here, shattering a decade and a half of hard-won success to rebuild the international reputation of this once war-torn Middle East capital.
The blast was so powerful it sent shockwaves in a radius that were felt for miles around, striking fear and panic in the immediate aftermath of the explosion.
At the center of this carnage, the blazing wrecks of vehicles in the motorcade of former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri. The attack so strong it tore through Hariri's armor-plated convoy, killing the politician instantly, claiming the lives of other victims, both within the convoy and passersby.
Minutes after the explosion, some of Hariri's most trusted aides stumbled from the wreckage as emergency services fought their way through the debris, to extinguish flames that sent up a huge column of black smoke and to evacuate the dead and injured.
As the casualty toll rose, allies of Hariri, who was internationally credited with spearheading efforts to reconstruct Lebanon after its 15-year civil war, called his killing a merciless act of political assassination.
HANI HAMMOUD, HARIRI ADVISER: It's a doomsday for Lebanon. What we're witnessing today is not just the assassination of former Prime Minister Hariri. It is the assassination of Lebanon as a democracy. SADLER: Hariri supporters took to the streets in anguish and despair. Lebanon, in the throes of vicious political in fighting, resolving around Syria's dominant role over this fractious nation.
Political opponents of Syria have called it a crucial battle for Lebanese freedom, ahead of a general election, drawing encouragement from strong international pressure on Syria to change policy.
Hariri's killing was claimed by an unheard-of extremist group, citing his close ties to the ruling family of Saudi Arabia, a claim so far unsubstantiated.
MICHAEL YOUNG, LEBANON POLITICAL ANALYST: The fact of the matter is that whoever killed Rafik Hariri, the fact of the matter, is that I think it's the Syrians who will pay the political price, whether they killed him or not.
SADLER: Hariri's allies and opposition leaders held a crisis meeting, blaming both Syria and the Lebanese authority for the assassination, warning that Lebanon could be on the verge of an abyss.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SADLER: The Syrian leadership under President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus has denounced the bomb attack that killed Hariri and has also completely denied any involvement, saying the attack was aimed to destroy Lebanese unity and to destabilize the country at the same time as this country is trying to move forward, says Syria, to a democratic state -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Brent, any clues emerge today on who might be responsible and how are they pursuing this investigation?
SADLER: No, the calculations of who might be responsible are still taking place. Obviously, accusations have been made by the opposition here towards Syria. There are other opponents of the opposition within Lebanon blaming perhaps Syria -- the hand of Israel, rather.
In addition to that, we do know that the military authorities here have now been put on a general state of mobilization. All leave has been canceled. This is Valentine's Day night here. Lebanon is normally a city that parties -- Beirut is normally a city that parties on nights like this. I can tell you, Kitty, there's palpable fear in the Lebanese capital, and the city is deserted right now.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much. Brent Sadler.
Well, the White House today condemned the attack in the strongest possible terms. The White House did not blame Syria for the attack, but it says the assassination is a reminder that Lebanon is under Syrian occupation.
Senior White House correspondent John King reports -- John.
JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And Kitty, the reaction here quite interesting, the administration immediately saying it wants an international oversight, anyway, of any investigation into this assassination.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice calling the U.N. Secretary- General Kofi Annan, asking for immediate U.N. Security Council involvement in this, not only in the investigation, but Secretary Rice, as you see the pictures of the aftermath of the killing here, calling for Security Council debate on Resolution 1559, which calls for Syria to withdraw all its forces from Lebanon.
Here at the White House, the press secretary, Scott McClellan saying it is too soon in the investigation to say who is to blame, and he said there was no evidence of -- direct evidence of Syrian involvement. But he said Syrian, for certain, is in the view of this White House, is responsible for the uncertain political climate in Lebanon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The United States will consult with other governments in the region. And on the Security Council today they brought measures that can be taken to punish those responsible for this terrorist attack, to end the use of violence and intimidation against the Lebanese people, and to restore Lebanon's independence, sovereignty, and democracy by freeing it from foreign occupation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Now, President Bush met with Mr. Hariri here at the White House almost three years ago. Now the White House called him someone who was a tireless advocate for an independent and prosperous Lebanon.
And again, this is at the time the administration is singling out Syria for criticism after this assassination at a time it already has some sanctions in place against Syria. Administration officials say additional sanctions are being considered. That debate started some time ago, of course, because of what the administration says is inadequate efforts by Syria to enforce its borders, both during the Iraq war and during the ensuing insurgency.
The Bush administration again, Kitty, quickly making its displeasure unclear and it's quite mindful. This is an administration often skeptical of the role of the United Nations, immediately calling for Security Council debates -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: John, Lebanon is not the only crisis that's claiming the attention of the Bush administration today. There were top-level talks in Washington today about North Korea's escalating nuclear weapons program. What's the latest on that, John?
KING: South Korea's foreign minister, both at the State Department for meetings with Secretary Rice and here at the White House for meetings with National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley.
Secretary Rice over the weekend also called her counterpart in China, the foreign minister there. The administration's top priority now is to keep all of the parties in the so-called six-party talks -- Russia, China, Japan and South Korea -- to keep diplomatic pressure on North Korea.
There's some debate in Washington about stricter economic sanctions or, some say, a quarantine against North Korea imposed by the United States. Officials say as that is being considered the most important point, Kitty is trying to pressure North Korea to come back to the bargaining table. In that end, South Korea and China, of course, are critical.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much. John King.
Well, a test of an experimental missile defense system today ended in failure. The program is designed to protect this country from an attack by a rogue state such as North Korea.
The Missile Defense Agency said an interceptor missile failed to launch as planned from a base in a Pacific Ocean. This was the second failure in two months.
The Pentagon is building two interceptor bases: one in California, another in Alaska, and so far six interceptor missiles have been deployed in Alaska, and two in California.
President Bush today asked Congress for another $82 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Seventy-five billion dollars of that will pay for military operations, including training for Iraqi police and troops.
Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr has our report -- Barbara.
BARBARA STARR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello to you, Kitty. Well, as you say, the whole package, $82 billion, the great majority of it, $75 billion, going to the Pentagon. And most of that is actually going to continue to go to the war in Iraq, which is costing over $1 billion a week to run.
But there are some other interesting tidbits for the Pentagon in this $82 billion supplemental request. One of them is it's now getting to be time to pay for new equipment, equipment that is worn- out and pretty much stretched to the limit from the war. So there's a request for about $12 billion to repair and refurbish worn-out equipment.
Also another $3 billion for armored vehicles, which of course were of such great controversy earlier this year, and to get the Iraqi forces up and running more quickly, about another $5.7 billion.
To get the U.S. Army up and running more quickly, another $5 billion for what they call around here transformation. But that's basically restructuring some of those old Army divisions into lighter, more mobile, more rapidly deployable units. That has been one of the great lessons in the war on Iraq for the U.S. Army, that it has to get moving a lot faster. There are other pieces in this supplemental that are going to other programs outside the Pentagon. We will tell you quickly. About $950 million for aid for tsunami victims. Another $350 million for the Palestinians, all of this, Kitty, this $82 billion supplemental request on top of the $2.5 trillion budget the president sent to Congress last week -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much.
Barbara Starr.
In Iraq today, an American soldier was killed in a bomb attack on a U.S. patrol near the City of Baqubah. Three other soldiers were wounded.
Three Iraqi National Guardsmen were killed in a separate bomb attack in Baqubah itself. Several civilians were wounded in that attack.
And, in northern Iraq, insurgents blew up part of an oil pipeline near the City of Kirkuk.
Now all of these attacks come as Iraqi politicians begin negotiations to form a new government after the elections.
The United Nations today congratulated Iraq on its successful elections and offered to help Iraq's new government when it's formed.
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said, "The United Nations is deeply committed to playing a full part in the next stage in the transition." Annan said, "The United Nations will spare no effort to meet the expectations of the Iraqi people through this critical period in their country's history."
The United Nations, of course, was unable to provide more than a few dozen people to help organize the Iraqi elections, and, so far, it is unclear if or what role the United Nations can play now that the Iraqi people have made their choice.
Well, next, a 50-year-old boy who could go to prison for 30 years for a double murder. His defense team says a common prescription drug is to blame.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Jury deliberations began today in the murder trial of 15-year-old Chris Pittman. Pittman is accused of shooting his grandparents to death.
In closing arguments, the defense claimed that prescription antidepressants destroyed Pittman's ability to think clearly. The prosecution argued the drug should not be a factor.
Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There's no question 12-year-old Chris Pittman killed his grandparents. He confessed.
LUCINDA MCCLELLAN, LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENT: "I got the shotgun out of the cabinet. I went in their room. I just aimed at the bed. I shot four times."
COHEN: The question is why. Voices in his head, he said.
DR. LANETTE ATKINS, DEFENSE PSYCHIATRIST: Echoes from inside his head saying, "Kill. Kill. Do it. Do it."
COHEN: The defense said an antidepressant drug, Zoloft, sent the boy spinning out of control. Relatives said it changed the child.
MELINDA RECTOR, PITTMAN'S AUNT: He says, "It's like I'm burning under my skin, and I can't put it out."
DANIELLE PITTMAN FINCHUM, PITTMAN'S OLDER SISTER: He was constantly up and down, in and out of the house. He was just crazy.
COHEN: Chris, now 15, was diagnosed with depression. In some cases, the government says, these antidepressants can lead to an increased risk of suicidal behavior by younger patients, but the FDA has not linked drugs like Zoloft to violence against others.
DR. JAMES BALLENGER, PROSECUTION PSYCHIATRIST: You know, I think he did it because he was very mad, very angry.
COHEN: The prosecution said Chris killed his grandparents in a fit of anger for disciplining him. They said he burned down the house in an effort to cover up the crime.
DR. PAMELA CRAWFORD, PROSECUTION PSYCHIATRIST: It shows that not only he knew it was wrong, but he knew that it was legally wrong to do this, that he knew there would be some consequence.
COHEN: In the end, this battle of the psychiatrists is left to 12 ordinary citizens to settle, to look into the mind of a boy and to try to sort out his thinking.
JUDGE DANIEL PIEPER, TRIAL JUDGE: Who can tell me the facts in People v. Kiley (ph)?
COHEN: Teaching a law class, this is the way the trial judge explained the law and the question given this jury.
PIEPER: An act does not make one guilty unless the mind is guilty. That is unless the intent is criminal.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COHEN: The jurors have been deliberating for about three hours. They just sent a note to the judge saying they wanted one more hour, and, if they didn't come up with a verdict, then they would wind down for the evening and then come back in the morning -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Elizabeth, one quick point. Now we know that Zoloft was approved for adults, but was it ever approved for treating depressed children?
COHEN: It was never approved for treating depressed children, Kitty, and that's been a big issue, the defense has tried to make it a big issue. So that's on the one hand.
On the other hand, it's been prescribed "off-label" to millions and millions of adolescents and kids. That's the way it works. It doesn't have to be approved for kids to be used in kids, but that's been a big issue, especially because of the dosage. There is no approved dosage for depressed children.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very much.
Elizabeth Cohen.
President Bush today nominated Lester Crawford as commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. Crawford has served as acting FDA commissioner since March of 2004 when the agency has been under fire over drug safety concerns. Crawford's nomination must be confirmed by the Senate.
Well, former Major League Baseball player Jose Canseco has said some of the biggest stars in his sport used steroids. His controversial new book went on sale today. Last night in a television interview, Canseco said he would never have been a Major League Baseball player if he hadn't used steroids.
Michelle Bonner records.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHELLE BONNER, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): After retiring from baseball in 2002, Jose Canseco said one day he would write a tell-all book. That day has come. During an interview about his new book with "60 Minutes," Canseco claimed he used steroids with former Oakland teammate Mark McGwire.
JOSE CANSECO, FORMER MLB PLAYER: Mark and I weren't really in the sense of buddy buddies. We were more acquaintances than actually anything else. But there are certain subjects that we could talk about, like obviously steroids and so forth.
MIKE WALLACE, "60 MINUTES": And he was a user, if you will?
CANSECO: Absolutely.
WALLACE: With you?
CANSECO: Yes.
BONNER: McGwire has consistently denied ever using steroids. Canseco also went on to name Jason Giambi, Rafael Palmero, Juan Gonzalez, and Ivan Rodriguez as former teammates who used steroids.
WALLACE: So you were an eyewitness to seeing Palmero, Gonzalez, Rodriguez...
CANSECO: I injected them. Absolutely.
WALLACE: What?
CANSECO: I injected them. Absolutely.
WALLACE: You injected them?
CANSECO: Yes.
BONNER: All three of those players have denied the accusations. Jason Giambi during his testimony before a grand jury reportedly admitted to using steroids. The grand jury is investigating a California company for the illegal distribution of steroids. Although some question Canseco's credibility, not everyone is ready to completely dismiss his allegations.
KEN ROSENTHAL, THE SPORTING NEWS: You can look at his credibility two ways.
One, he's not credible. He's a guy who is an outcast in the sport out. He's out to make a buck. He's clearly looking to bring people down for his own benefit.
At the same time, this is a person who was a firsthand witness to all the steroid use in the late '80s, early '90s and into the 2000s. He was right in the middle of everything, and you would think that he would have some idea of who did what.
And they can have denial after denial, and I don't think anyone should believe anyone at this point. The credibility of everyone in this sport is lacking.
BONNER: Baseball's brightest star Barry Bonds was not named in Canseco's book, but remains in the spotlight on this story.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Bonds testified to a grand jury that he unknowingly used steroids, thinking he was talking flaxseed oil and a rubbing balm.
The seven-time MVP could break Hank Aaron's all-time home run record this season, so the questions will continue to be asked.
ROSENTHAL: I don't think there's a light at the end of the tunnel for baseball anytime soon. You have Bonds this year. When he approaches Ruth and approaches Aaron, people are going to wonder is this real or is it something else?
BONNER: Michelle Bonner, CNN, Atlanta.
(END VIDEOTAPE) PILGRIM: Next, our special report on American "Culture in Decline." Why American students are learning less and caring less about the Constitution.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: We begin a series of special reports this week on our "Culture in Decline," specifically the decline of our youth culture. Tonight, an alarming number of high school students in this country lack even a basic understanding of history and the Constitution.
Casey Wian reports from Los Angeles.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ED BERGER, BEMA COMMUNITY COLLEGE: This is the branch of the president. Here is the Justice Department.
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Ed Berger teaches a U.S. Constitution course at Pima Community College in Tucson, Arizona. Two-thirds of his students plan to become teachers themselves. When they began his class, Berger says only 10 of the 35 had even a basic understanding of the Constitution.
BERGER: When we talk about three branches of our government, when we talk about early on the Bill of Rights and the first 10 amendments, it is unfortunately pretty shallow. Students come to a college without any real background of our government.
WIAN: Or our history. A recent Education Department study found only 11 percent of 12th-grade students were proficient in history. Fifty-seven percent of them had less than a basic knowledge.
When it comes to understanding the foundation of our democracy, the First Amendment, most high school students don't care. Nearly three-fourths of 100,000 students surveyed by the University of Connecticut say they don't know how they feel about the First Amendment or admit they take its guarantees of freedom of expression, religion and assembly for granted.
Hodding Carter is the president of The Knight Foundation, which funded the study.
HODDING CARTER III, PRESIDENT & CEO, THE KNIGHT FOUNDATION: What it indicated was that they were either ignorant or unconcerned about both the First Amendment generally and its implications for press freedom specifically.
WIAN: In fact, only about half believe newspapers should be allowed to publish without government approval of stories. Educators blame the lack of interest or knowledge of civics on several things, including grade inflation, overemphasis of test scores, and failure to teach the relevance of the Constitution.
ALEXANDER ASTIN, UCLA HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH INSTITUTION: There's been a tremendous emphasis on grading and getting the right grades to get into the right college, rather than what am I learning, why am I learning it, and why is it important to me.
WIAN: The absence of a challenge also contributes to student apathy.
(on camera): A UCLA survey of incoming college freshmen nationwide found that 43 percent were frequently bored in class during their senior year in high school. That's up from just 29 percent two decades ago.
Casey Wian, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Well, tonight's thought is on education. "Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education."
Next, a growing effort to crack down on the benefits for illegal aliens in this country. States are taking action.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
PILGRIM: In a moment, Arkansas' latest effort to crack down on benefits for illegal aliens. The Arkansas state senator who proposed the legislation is my guest.
But, first, tonight's headlines.
In Spain, the largest fire in Madrid's history has destroyed a skyscraper that stands more than 30 stories high. There are now fears that the building could collapse. Officials say the fire was probably sparked by an electrical short-circuit.
Prosecutors say a man who opened fire in a Kingston, New York, mall had a fascination with the 1999 Columbine High School shooting. The 24-year-old suspect is accused of wounding two people before giving up when he ran out of ammunition. The man is being held without bail and could face 25 years in prison.
Verizon Communications tonight is buying MCI for $6.7 billion. It's the third major telephone industry merger in two months. This move could mean the lost of some 7,000 jobs.
Some lawmakers on Capitol Hill are launching a campaign to stop President Bush from presenting a controversial agreement to Congress. The Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico is very different from those we have with 20 other countries, and opponents say it could bankrupt Social Security.
Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BILL TUCKER, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico is like none other. America has totalization agreements with 21 countries. Not one of those agreements allows for workers to claim benefits for work done while in a country illegally. Paying out benefits to people who haven't paid into the system means extra cost. And that has senior citizen's groups worried.
FLORA GREEN, THE SENIORS COALITION: The totalization agreement as it is presently being addressed does nothing, in my viewpoint, to protect us as American citizens, as recipients of Social Security income, and this is something that's got to be changed.
TUCKER: Totalization agreements serve two main purposes. They protect a worker's retirement eligibility in their home country, and they eliminate the need for the worker to pay Social Security taxes in two countries when American workers go abroad or foreign workers come to work in the United States. Some estimates put the cost of the agreement with Mexico as high as $350 billion. Proponents say the deal makes sense given America's unique relationship with its southern neighbor.
IAN VASQUEZ, CATO INSTITUTE: Mexico is one of the United States' leading trade partners and we have much more integration with Mexico than we do with most other countries, so it makes sense to have a comprehensive agreement.
TUCKER: But it does not make sense to a growing number in Congress. Congressman Rohrabacher is a co-sponsor of a bipartisan bill that is asking the president to not complete the agreement.
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R), INTL. RELATIONS CMTE.: It is totally insane for this administration to be talking about reforming Social Security and bolstering it for our own people, while at the same time negotiating an agreement with Mexico that would make illegal immigrants into our country eligible to collect Social Security for all that time they were here illegally.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: While this agreement with Mexico is unique, so too is the approval process. Congress doesn't have to approve the deal for it to go into effect. Instead, Kitty, Congress must actively disapprove an act to block the bill in order to keep it from going into effect as it has been negotiated.
PILGRIM: Well, it's certainly getting a good bit of attention right now. Thanks very much, Bill Tucker.
Well, a national effort is under way to crack down on benefits for illegal aliens in this country. Lawmakers in Arkansas have proposed new legislation that's modeled on Arizona's Proposition 200. Now like the Arizona law the Arkansas legislation would require proof of citizenship in order to vote and to receive state benefits. Arkansas state Senator Jim Holt proposed the legislation in his state and he joins me tonight from Little Rock. Thanks for which for being here, sir.
JIM HOLT (R), ARKANSAS STATE SENATE: Thank you, Kitty, for having me. I appreciate it.
PILGRIM: Do you expect this to pass? What are the odds?
HOLT: I think the odds are pretty well right now. Right now we're going through the education process. The first salvo that was fired already saying that this bill is racist and it's bigoted and of course it's quite the contrary. My cousins are Latino, I have several which are Latino. My wife is the great grand-daughter of a Russian immigrant. So of course that has nothing to do with the issue. The issue has to do with compassion and justice for the taxpayers of Arkansas. And not only that, it has to do with those 600,000 legal people who are trying to get here -- the immigrants who are trying to get here legally. And that's something that we need to address.
PILGRIM: But this salvo that you call it was leveled on you by the governor of Arkansas. Do you think that he will have enough political leverage to actually block this?
HOLT: Well, we'll have to wait and see. I don't think so. I think the people of Arkansas -- once again we have an issue like it was in Arizona. It's either the state of Arkansas or the people of Arkansas, and I just choose to be on the people's side.
PILGRIM: Why did you decide to introduce legislation rather than have a citizens' initiative?
HOLT: Well, if it doesn't pass this session, we will launch a citizens' initiative. We have a representative republic, and that's what we need to realize as legislators that we need to hear the voice of the people. And when I have Mexican citizens that are here as legal residents telling me we have a problem with illegal immigration and benefits that are being drawn from the state, that's something we need to address and I intend to do that.
PILGRIM: How many illegal aliens do you expect are in Arkansas?
HOLT: Well, there are some reports -- of course, no one really ever knows, but it's been reported as far -- I've heard as little as 40,000, as of 2000 -- Census 2000, all the way up until now I've heard up to 125,00 to 250,000. So no one really knows for sure, of course, Kitty.
PILGRIM: Arkansas isn't a border state. Is it really that big on the consciousness of the citizens?
HOLT: It's huge, especially in my district in northwest Arkansas, it's gigantic. As I went around the state just running for U.S. Senate people wherever I went told me we have to address this issue.
PILGRIM: Now, President Bush has tried to initiate a guest worker type of program. What's your opinion on that, and how does that dovetail with anything you're trying to do? HOLT: Well, it goes back to the issue of this. People that are here legally already, what does that say to them? What does that say when we're trying to wait and become legal citizens of America and Arkansas. What does that say to them? It says you're a fool if you wait in line, and this is about the respect of law and justice, and we're going to have to -- as far as Bush's plan, the proposal for the guest worker program, I have not read it. I would have to read it before I'll be able to give you an accurate comment on that.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very for being with us. Jim Holt, thank you.
HOLT: Thank you.
PILGRIM: And that brings us to the subject of tonight's poll, would you support a measure like Proposition 200 in your state? Yes or no. Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'll bring you the results later in this show.
Let's take a look at some of your e-mail. We love to do that. Many of you wrote about a new bill in Congress that would give illegal aliens working on our farms legal status.
Donna of Chicago, Illinois writes, "is Congress going to have special amnesty bills for illegal hotel workers and illegal construction workers? We Americans say no to any and all forms of amnesty. Will it take losing your jobs, Senators, for you to face the facts and act accordingly?"
Well, Fred Hoffman of Gold Canyon, Arizona writes, "giving illegal aliens that are already here legal status will only send a message to those still wanting to come that they, too, can become legal citizens."
Jack Webber of Washington. "The entire illegal alien debate often is based on the false premise that they do work that Americans won't, pay minimum wages and provide livable safe working conditions and American labor would flock to agricultural jobs. As a consumer I'm willing to pay higher food prices knowing that those employed in the industry aren't being perpetually exploited."
We love hearing from you. Email us at loudobbs@CNN.com.
In Washington, another member of President Bush's new cabinet was sworn in today. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales vowed that his first allegiance will always be to the constitution. President Bush said Gonzales has his, quote, "complete confidence."
On Capitol Hill, the Senate began debate on another cabinet nominee, homeland security nominee Michael Chertoff is expected to be confirmed in a Senate vote tomorrow.
Well, this Valentine's Day brought disappointment for many couples in Venice. There were no romantic gondola rides to take after the city's gondoliers went on strike. The gondoliers are protesting a law prohibiting gondola rides in Venice's famed canals during the morning rush hour. While some tourists expressed their disappointment, others said they would have no trouble discovering the legendary romance of that city without a gondola ride.
Next, should the United States believe North Korea's claim that it has nuclear weapons? A former ambassador to South Korea and China is my guest next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) * PILGRIM: The United States today firmly ruled out offering North Korea any economic incentives to end its nuclear weapons program. North Korea has declared for the first time that it has nuclear weapons and it has also withdrawn from six-country talks about its nuclear program. And my next guest says North Korea has no plans to take on the United States. He says Pyongyang is just playing a game.
James Lilley is a former ambassador to South Korea and China. He is now a senior fellow at American Enterprise Institute. Thanks very much for joining us this evening.
JAMES LILLEY, FORMER AMBASSADOR TO CHINA AND SOUTH KOREA: Thank you, Kitty, for asking me.
PILGRIM: I wanted to get your interpretation on something today. South Korea's unification minister said today it's too early to declare North Korea a nuclear power. It's hard to figure out where they were going with this, given that North Korea claimed that they do have nuclear weapons. How do you interpret this?
LILLEY: Well, the day before, their foreign minister said we will not tolerate nuclear weapons on the peninsula, a very tough statement. So the unification minister comes in after him and waters it down somewhat, because the South Koreans really feel that these guys are their brothers. It's like having a drunken relative, who's impoverished, who's running around with a loaded .45 automatic. And they say it's better to sober him up and feed him than knock the gun out of his hand right off the bat.
So they're trying to soothe it into North Korea. That's their tactic.
PILGRIM: I call on your expertise in China to tell us where do you think the Chinese stand in all this. Don't they have the most influence?
LILLEY: The Chinese have a lot of influence. They supply a good percentage of the food and the oil that goes to North Korea that props up the regime. This gives them great leverage. How they use this remains to be seen.
This recent shock that the North Koreans have delivered has done the one thing the North Koreans did not want to happen. It's driven the various powers around them together. We're now closer to China and South Korea than we have been for a long time. And I think we should work with them very carefully to develop a concrete program to deal with the common program within the six-party framework. Bring the North Koreans back, don't bribe them this time. There are disincentives for not coming back, not incentives for coming back. And that's something we have to work out with our friends and allies.
PILGRIM: The great discussion today in all the papers is the attempt to perhaps isolate North Korea, set up some kind of a quarantine. What do you think of that strategy?
LILLEY: Well, no, I don't think you're really going to isolate them. What you're going to do in this toolkit, as I see, is you are going to go after their illegal activities. They're into narcotics. They're into counterfeiting. They're into weapons smuggling, into nuclear proliferation. We've got to stop those. Legitimate trade deals, they can go ahead with, if they have them. They can go ahead with them.
What we're going to do is to stop their blatant illegal activities. And I think that's perfectly logical, because the worst danger in all of this is these people in North Korea putting some kind of weapons of mass destruction, biological, chemical, or nuclear, in the hands of a terrorist.
PILGRIM: North Korea has not been shy of selling missiles all around the world. How do you assess the potential threat of them selling some kind of nuclear material to terrorists?
LILLEY: Oh, I think they have already tried to do it in Libya. They have got some hexofluoride, uranium hexofluoride, which they detected, which isn't totally conclusive, but it shows that they were probably shipping some kind of nuclear weapons material to Libya before the Libyans went straight.
Yes, they're involved with terrorist organizations all over the world. They're involved in triads, in the Mafia, all these groups. They work with them to distribute their products, so they can, after setting up these channels, they can use them and divert weapons material.
They really haven't done it, as far as we know, to any great extent yet, but there's some evidence that they've been involved.
PILGRIM: The military option is not off the table, certainly for bargaining purposes. How do you assess the capacity for the United States to pursue a military option if necessary?
LILLEY: There's no military option. I'm sorry. If you started to bomb North Korea, they would kill half the people in Seoul, and this would be five, six million people. You can't have that happen. They've got you checkmated on the military option.
What you have to do is to stop any military adventurism on their part by deterrence. We can do this with sea, air power and missiles. We don't have to have ground troops. South Korea has 600,000 ground troops. Their military options are very, very limited right now.
PILGRIM: Ambassador Lilley, thanks very much for your expertise on this very important issue. Thank you. LILLEY: Thank you for asking me, Kitty.
PILGRIM: OK. Coming up next, is the U.S. economy driving economic growth, or falling behind? Our special report is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Our nation's trade deficit with the rest of the world surged to a record $617 billion last year, and the Washington spin on those numbers is that they show the United States is the engine of global economic growth. But critics say the U.S. is rapidly becoming the caboose. Christine Romans reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In Baltimore harbor, the ships stream in loaded with imports. Most leave empty. This, we're told, is a sign of great American economic strength. Powerful American consumers are gobbling up cheap imports and supporting the rest of the world.
REP. BENJAMIN CARDIN (D), MARYLAND: Five out of six ships that come in full of cargo from China leave empty, and that one ship that has cargo, the leading export product is waste products and scrap metal. So certainly I don't think that's what we want to be known for.
ROMANS: What we're known for is a voracious appetite for cheap, imported goods.
Last year's trade deficit topped $600 billion. The gap with China, a staggering $162 billion. Never has any country had such a lopsided balance sheet.
Put simply, factories in China have replaced factories at home.
Defenders of U.S. trade policy say manufacturing defined America's strength in the last century. Technology and services are the American advantage in this one. But last year, the U.S. ran a deficit in tech products, and the surplus in services shrank to the lowest level since 1991.
PETER MORICI, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: We're losing ground in high technology products. We have a trade deficit there. We're exporting services jobs. The labor force is shrinking. By all measurable standards, the U.S. economy is contracting in very disheartening and disturbing ways.
ROMANS: Not disturbing or disheartening at the Treasury Department, where the trade debt was hailed as a sign the U.S. is creating more disposable income, or on Wall Street, where critics of record and rising debt are often dismissed as alarmists.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: Yet more and more people are warning that the U.S. is living on credit, credit extended by foreign central banks. They say not only have we given China and others the shirt off our backs, we've given them the looms and the directions on how to keep making shirts and completely put us out of business.
PILGRIM: You know, wrapped in all of this discussion is sort of a tacit blaming of the American consumer for buying so much of this Chinese product.
ROMANS: Blaming of the American consumer, and lauding at the same time, saying, oh, look at the American consumer, it's so powerful, it's the responsibility of consumers to lift up the rest of the world with our buying.
One analyst says that's economic contortionism, to think that the lowly American consumer is responsible for driving world growth. Longer term, this has got to be a trend that reverses, but in the meantime, it doesn't seem like a lot of policymakers are very concerned about the long term, very concerned instead about the short term. And for the short term, it's OK for us to just keep bringing stuff in and bringing it in.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Christine Romans.
Well, as Christine reported, our trade deficit with China topped a record $162 billion last year. My guests say Congress is partly to blame for that, speaking of blaming. Five years ago, lawmakers passed permanent normal trade relations with China. Congressman Bernie Sanders and Congressman Virgil Goode are co-sponsoring legislation that would repeal the so-called PNTR, those trade things with China. And thank you both for joining us tonight.
REP. VIRGIL GOODE (R), VIRGINIA: Nice to be with you.
REP. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: Thank you.
PILGRIM: So you believe it should be repealed. Why? And let's start with you, Congressman Goode?
GOODE: I think it should be repealed because China is capturing the world's manufacturing. The United States used to be the manufacturing giant in the world. Manufacturing creates wealth. It creates jobs. We need those jobs in the United States and not in China.
PILGRIM: Congressman Sanders, how much would repealing this, how many jobs would we benefit from?
SANDERS: Look, the reality right now is the middle class in this country is collapsing, poverty is increasing. The new jobs that are being created are by and large low-wage jobs, with minimal benefits. And what we're doing is not only shipping good-paying, blue-collar manufacturing jobs to China; we're beginning to start hemorrhaging high-tech information technology jobs. There are many IT experts in America who predict that within 10 or 20 years, China will be the information technology center of the world. What kind of good jobs are going to be there for our kids and our grandchildren if we keep exporting those jobs?
PILGRIM: Fair enough question. The average U.S. tariff on Chinese goods is about 3.8 percent. If you increase that or if you -- there's been some discussion of raising it to 27 percent on certain products because of currency imbalances with the Chinese. What does that tariff do for American jobs?
SANDERS: Well, in my view, what it tells corporate America, that you cannot simply throw American workers out on the street, run to China, hire people at 30 cents an hour, and bring those products back into this country. I'm sick and tired of seeing American workers thrown out on the street rather than have corporate America start creating decent-paying jobs in this country rather than China. And establishing a new trade relationship, based on fair trade principles with China, would go a long way to create decent-paying jobs in this country.
PILGRIM: Congressman Goode, do you think that the tariff would address the wage imbalance?
GOODE: It wouldn't. Wouldn't really address the wage imbalance totally, but it would help keep American jobs here. My district has lost thousands upon thousands of textile, furniture and other manufacturing jobs. If we had high tariffs and quotas on what came in with China, we could preserve some of those jobs in the United States.
Now, I don't want to blame it all on the manufacturers and the businesses. We also need a better business climate in the United States. In China, you don't have to worry about runaway lawsuits. We need tort reform in this country. We also need to have less overzealous regulatory agencies going after manufacturing firms. I can cite you specifics right here in the Fifth District of Virginia, where EPA and DEQ have been overzealous, in my opinion, when they should have been working with manufacturing firms. It's a combination of factors, but we need to preserve manufacturing in this country so that we can grow and stay the world's super power economically.
PILGRIM: Congressman Sanders, in 2000, when PNTR was put on China, it was with the understanding that China would join the World Trade Organization. Now we see China in flagrant violation of many of the principles of the WTO. Is it not up to the WTO to be enforcing regulations?
SANDERS: It is, but it is also up to the United States Congress to have the courage to stand up to corporate America, who pushed this agreement on us. It is incumbent upon the president of the United States to start standing up for the American worker, and say that all of the evidence suggests that our current trade relations with China are a disaster.
So I am very tired of seeing the increased boldness of corporate America -- you have the head of the Chamber of Commerce who, quote/unquote, "urges," he urges American companies to go abroad. You have the head of General Electric, who speaks with pride about how his company is moving to China. You have Bill Gates, the wealthiest man in America, speaking, just praising to the sky the authoritarian communist government of China.
And I think Congress has got to tell these guys who have received billions of dollars in corporate welfare from the American taxpayer, enough is enough, this is your country, start investing here.
PILGRIM: Congressman Goode, do you think that the president would recognize a bill that would repeal PNTR at this point?
GOODE: I believe if we could get more support, he would. I've been very pleased so far, and I want to salute Congressman Sanders for the bipartisan support he's gotten. There are a number of Republicans and Democrats on this resolution. PNTR with China passed by about 40 votes. That's not a huge margin. And if we could revisit the issue, I believe that the outcome might be different this time.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very much, gentlemen, for joining us tonight to explain it. Congressman Bernie Sanders and Congressman Virgil Goode, thank you.
SANDERS: Thank you.
PILGRIM: Still ahead, the results of tonight's poll, and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Now, the results of tonight's poll. Eighty-seven percent of you would support a measure like Proposition 200 in your state; 13 percent would not.
Finally tonight, in New York City, love is in the air this Valentine's Day, quite literally. Eight couples today were married or renewed their vows on the 80th floor of the Empire State Building. The couples were chosen through an annual letter-writing contest, and they now have free admission on their anniversary, which is Valentine's Day.
Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us tomorrow for our special report on culture in decline. Tomorrow, teens and drugs.
Then, a controversial proposal to give legal status to half a million illegal farm workers in this country. We'll talk with two of the lawmakers leading that effort.
And the incredibly inspiring story of an Army captain who became the first amputee to return to active duty.
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 February 14, 2005 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Monday, February 14. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty pilgrim.
KITTY PILGRIM, HOST: Good evening.
A massive bombing in Beirut, Lebanon, today. It wounded 100 people, killed nine, including a former prime minister with close ties to the United States.
There are fears the attack could spark a new civil war in Lebanon. The former prime minister, Rafik Hariri, resigned last October after a dispute with Syria, the main power broker in Lebanon.
Brent Sadler reports from Beirut.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRENT SADLER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The heart of Beirut brutally thrown back to the bloodshed of civil war years here, shattering a decade and a half of hard-won success to rebuild the international reputation of this once war-torn Middle East capital.
The blast was so powerful it sent shockwaves in a radius that were felt for miles around, striking fear and panic in the immediate aftermath of the explosion.
At the center of this carnage, the blazing wrecks of vehicles in the motorcade of former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri. The attack so strong it tore through Hariri's armor-plated convoy, killing the politician instantly, claiming the lives of other victims, both within the convoy and passersby.
Minutes after the explosion, some of Hariri's most trusted aides stumbled from the wreckage as emergency services fought their way through the debris, to extinguish flames that sent up a huge column of black smoke and to evacuate the dead and injured.
As the casualty toll rose, allies of Hariri, who was internationally credited with spearheading efforts to reconstruct Lebanon after its 15-year civil war, called his killing a merciless act of political assassination.
HANI HAMMOUD, HARIRI ADVISER: It's a doomsday for Lebanon. What we're witnessing today is not just the assassination of former Prime Minister Hariri. It is the assassination of Lebanon as a democracy. SADLER: Hariri supporters took to the streets in anguish and despair. Lebanon, in the throes of vicious political in fighting, resolving around Syria's dominant role over this fractious nation.
Political opponents of Syria have called it a crucial battle for Lebanese freedom, ahead of a general election, drawing encouragement from strong international pressure on Syria to change policy.
Hariri's killing was claimed by an unheard-of extremist group, citing his close ties to the ruling family of Saudi Arabia, a claim so far unsubstantiated.
MICHAEL YOUNG, LEBANON POLITICAL ANALYST: The fact of the matter is that whoever killed Rafik Hariri, the fact of the matter, is that I think it's the Syrians who will pay the political price, whether they killed him or not.
SADLER: Hariri's allies and opposition leaders held a crisis meeting, blaming both Syria and the Lebanese authority for the assassination, warning that Lebanon could be on the verge of an abyss.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SADLER: The Syrian leadership under President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus has denounced the bomb attack that killed Hariri and has also completely denied any involvement, saying the attack was aimed to destroy Lebanese unity and to destabilize the country at the same time as this country is trying to move forward, says Syria, to a democratic state -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Brent, any clues emerge today on who might be responsible and how are they pursuing this investigation?
SADLER: No, the calculations of who might be responsible are still taking place. Obviously, accusations have been made by the opposition here towards Syria. There are other opponents of the opposition within Lebanon blaming perhaps Syria -- the hand of Israel, rather.
In addition to that, we do know that the military authorities here have now been put on a general state of mobilization. All leave has been canceled. This is Valentine's Day night here. Lebanon is normally a city that parties -- Beirut is normally a city that parties on nights like this. I can tell you, Kitty, there's palpable fear in the Lebanese capital, and the city is deserted right now.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much. Brent Sadler.
Well, the White House today condemned the attack in the strongest possible terms. The White House did not blame Syria for the attack, but it says the assassination is a reminder that Lebanon is under Syrian occupation.
Senior White House correspondent John King reports -- John.
JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And Kitty, the reaction here quite interesting, the administration immediately saying it wants an international oversight, anyway, of any investigation into this assassination.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice calling the U.N. Secretary- General Kofi Annan, asking for immediate U.N. Security Council involvement in this, not only in the investigation, but Secretary Rice, as you see the pictures of the aftermath of the killing here, calling for Security Council debate on Resolution 1559, which calls for Syria to withdraw all its forces from Lebanon.
Here at the White House, the press secretary, Scott McClellan saying it is too soon in the investigation to say who is to blame, and he said there was no evidence of -- direct evidence of Syrian involvement. But he said Syrian, for certain, is in the view of this White House, is responsible for the uncertain political climate in Lebanon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The United States will consult with other governments in the region. And on the Security Council today they brought measures that can be taken to punish those responsible for this terrorist attack, to end the use of violence and intimidation against the Lebanese people, and to restore Lebanon's independence, sovereignty, and democracy by freeing it from foreign occupation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Now, President Bush met with Mr. Hariri here at the White House almost three years ago. Now the White House called him someone who was a tireless advocate for an independent and prosperous Lebanon.
And again, this is at the time the administration is singling out Syria for criticism after this assassination at a time it already has some sanctions in place against Syria. Administration officials say additional sanctions are being considered. That debate started some time ago, of course, because of what the administration says is inadequate efforts by Syria to enforce its borders, both during the Iraq war and during the ensuing insurgency.
The Bush administration again, Kitty, quickly making its displeasure unclear and it's quite mindful. This is an administration often skeptical of the role of the United Nations, immediately calling for Security Council debates -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: John, Lebanon is not the only crisis that's claiming the attention of the Bush administration today. There were top-level talks in Washington today about North Korea's escalating nuclear weapons program. What's the latest on that, John?
KING: South Korea's foreign minister, both at the State Department for meetings with Secretary Rice and here at the White House for meetings with National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley.
Secretary Rice over the weekend also called her counterpart in China, the foreign minister there. The administration's top priority now is to keep all of the parties in the so-called six-party talks -- Russia, China, Japan and South Korea -- to keep diplomatic pressure on North Korea.
There's some debate in Washington about stricter economic sanctions or, some say, a quarantine against North Korea imposed by the United States. Officials say as that is being considered the most important point, Kitty is trying to pressure North Korea to come back to the bargaining table. In that end, South Korea and China, of course, are critical.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much. John King.
Well, a test of an experimental missile defense system today ended in failure. The program is designed to protect this country from an attack by a rogue state such as North Korea.
The Missile Defense Agency said an interceptor missile failed to launch as planned from a base in a Pacific Ocean. This was the second failure in two months.
The Pentagon is building two interceptor bases: one in California, another in Alaska, and so far six interceptor missiles have been deployed in Alaska, and two in California.
President Bush today asked Congress for another $82 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Seventy-five billion dollars of that will pay for military operations, including training for Iraqi police and troops.
Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr has our report -- Barbara.
BARBARA STARR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello to you, Kitty. Well, as you say, the whole package, $82 billion, the great majority of it, $75 billion, going to the Pentagon. And most of that is actually going to continue to go to the war in Iraq, which is costing over $1 billion a week to run.
But there are some other interesting tidbits for the Pentagon in this $82 billion supplemental request. One of them is it's now getting to be time to pay for new equipment, equipment that is worn- out and pretty much stretched to the limit from the war. So there's a request for about $12 billion to repair and refurbish worn-out equipment.
Also another $3 billion for armored vehicles, which of course were of such great controversy earlier this year, and to get the Iraqi forces up and running more quickly, about another $5.7 billion.
To get the U.S. Army up and running more quickly, another $5 billion for what they call around here transformation. But that's basically restructuring some of those old Army divisions into lighter, more mobile, more rapidly deployable units. That has been one of the great lessons in the war on Iraq for the U.S. Army, that it has to get moving a lot faster. There are other pieces in this supplemental that are going to other programs outside the Pentagon. We will tell you quickly. About $950 million for aid for tsunami victims. Another $350 million for the Palestinians, all of this, Kitty, this $82 billion supplemental request on top of the $2.5 trillion budget the president sent to Congress last week -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: All right. Thanks very much.
Barbara Starr.
In Iraq today, an American soldier was killed in a bomb attack on a U.S. patrol near the City of Baqubah. Three other soldiers were wounded.
Three Iraqi National Guardsmen were killed in a separate bomb attack in Baqubah itself. Several civilians were wounded in that attack.
And, in northern Iraq, insurgents blew up part of an oil pipeline near the City of Kirkuk.
Now all of these attacks come as Iraqi politicians begin negotiations to form a new government after the elections.
The United Nations today congratulated Iraq on its successful elections and offered to help Iraq's new government when it's formed.
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said, "The United Nations is deeply committed to playing a full part in the next stage in the transition." Annan said, "The United Nations will spare no effort to meet the expectations of the Iraqi people through this critical period in their country's history."
The United Nations, of course, was unable to provide more than a few dozen people to help organize the Iraqi elections, and, so far, it is unclear if or what role the United Nations can play now that the Iraqi people have made their choice.
Well, next, a 50-year-old boy who could go to prison for 30 years for a double murder. His defense team says a common prescription drug is to blame.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Jury deliberations began today in the murder trial of 15-year-old Chris Pittman. Pittman is accused of shooting his grandparents to death.
In closing arguments, the defense claimed that prescription antidepressants destroyed Pittman's ability to think clearly. The prosecution argued the drug should not be a factor.
Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There's no question 12-year-old Chris Pittman killed his grandparents. He confessed.
LUCINDA MCCLELLAN, LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENT: "I got the shotgun out of the cabinet. I went in their room. I just aimed at the bed. I shot four times."
COHEN: The question is why. Voices in his head, he said.
DR. LANETTE ATKINS, DEFENSE PSYCHIATRIST: Echoes from inside his head saying, "Kill. Kill. Do it. Do it."
COHEN: The defense said an antidepressant drug, Zoloft, sent the boy spinning out of control. Relatives said it changed the child.
MELINDA RECTOR, PITTMAN'S AUNT: He says, "It's like I'm burning under my skin, and I can't put it out."
DANIELLE PITTMAN FINCHUM, PITTMAN'S OLDER SISTER: He was constantly up and down, in and out of the house. He was just crazy.
COHEN: Chris, now 15, was diagnosed with depression. In some cases, the government says, these antidepressants can lead to an increased risk of suicidal behavior by younger patients, but the FDA has not linked drugs like Zoloft to violence against others.
DR. JAMES BALLENGER, PROSECUTION PSYCHIATRIST: You know, I think he did it because he was very mad, very angry.
COHEN: The prosecution said Chris killed his grandparents in a fit of anger for disciplining him. They said he burned down the house in an effort to cover up the crime.
DR. PAMELA CRAWFORD, PROSECUTION PSYCHIATRIST: It shows that not only he knew it was wrong, but he knew that it was legally wrong to do this, that he knew there would be some consequence.
COHEN: In the end, this battle of the psychiatrists is left to 12 ordinary citizens to settle, to look into the mind of a boy and to try to sort out his thinking.
JUDGE DANIEL PIEPER, TRIAL JUDGE: Who can tell me the facts in People v. Kiley (ph)?
COHEN: Teaching a law class, this is the way the trial judge explained the law and the question given this jury.
PIEPER: An act does not make one guilty unless the mind is guilty. That is unless the intent is criminal.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COHEN: The jurors have been deliberating for about three hours. They just sent a note to the judge saying they wanted one more hour, and, if they didn't come up with a verdict, then they would wind down for the evening and then come back in the morning -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Elizabeth, one quick point. Now we know that Zoloft was approved for adults, but was it ever approved for treating depressed children?
COHEN: It was never approved for treating depressed children, Kitty, and that's been a big issue, the defense has tried to make it a big issue. So that's on the one hand.
On the other hand, it's been prescribed "off-label" to millions and millions of adolescents and kids. That's the way it works. It doesn't have to be approved for kids to be used in kids, but that's been a big issue, especially because of the dosage. There is no approved dosage for depressed children.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very much.
Elizabeth Cohen.
President Bush today nominated Lester Crawford as commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. Crawford has served as acting FDA commissioner since March of 2004 when the agency has been under fire over drug safety concerns. Crawford's nomination must be confirmed by the Senate.
Well, former Major League Baseball player Jose Canseco has said some of the biggest stars in his sport used steroids. His controversial new book went on sale today. Last night in a television interview, Canseco said he would never have been a Major League Baseball player if he hadn't used steroids.
Michelle Bonner records.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHELLE BONNER, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): After retiring from baseball in 2002, Jose Canseco said one day he would write a tell-all book. That day has come. During an interview about his new book with "60 Minutes," Canseco claimed he used steroids with former Oakland teammate Mark McGwire.
JOSE CANSECO, FORMER MLB PLAYER: Mark and I weren't really in the sense of buddy buddies. We were more acquaintances than actually anything else. But there are certain subjects that we could talk about, like obviously steroids and so forth.
MIKE WALLACE, "60 MINUTES": And he was a user, if you will?
CANSECO: Absolutely.
WALLACE: With you?
CANSECO: Yes.
BONNER: McGwire has consistently denied ever using steroids. Canseco also went on to name Jason Giambi, Rafael Palmero, Juan Gonzalez, and Ivan Rodriguez as former teammates who used steroids.
WALLACE: So you were an eyewitness to seeing Palmero, Gonzalez, Rodriguez...
CANSECO: I injected them. Absolutely.
WALLACE: What?
CANSECO: I injected them. Absolutely.
WALLACE: You injected them?
CANSECO: Yes.
BONNER: All three of those players have denied the accusations. Jason Giambi during his testimony before a grand jury reportedly admitted to using steroids. The grand jury is investigating a California company for the illegal distribution of steroids. Although some question Canseco's credibility, not everyone is ready to completely dismiss his allegations.
KEN ROSENTHAL, THE SPORTING NEWS: You can look at his credibility two ways.
One, he's not credible. He's a guy who is an outcast in the sport out. He's out to make a buck. He's clearly looking to bring people down for his own benefit.
At the same time, this is a person who was a firsthand witness to all the steroid use in the late '80s, early '90s and into the 2000s. He was right in the middle of everything, and you would think that he would have some idea of who did what.
And they can have denial after denial, and I don't think anyone should believe anyone at this point. The credibility of everyone in this sport is lacking.
BONNER: Baseball's brightest star Barry Bonds was not named in Canseco's book, but remains in the spotlight on this story.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Bonds testified to a grand jury that he unknowingly used steroids, thinking he was talking flaxseed oil and a rubbing balm.
The seven-time MVP could break Hank Aaron's all-time home run record this season, so the questions will continue to be asked.
ROSENTHAL: I don't think there's a light at the end of the tunnel for baseball anytime soon. You have Bonds this year. When he approaches Ruth and approaches Aaron, people are going to wonder is this real or is it something else?
BONNER: Michelle Bonner, CNN, Atlanta.
(END VIDEOTAPE) PILGRIM: Next, our special report on American "Culture in Decline." Why American students are learning less and caring less about the Constitution.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: We begin a series of special reports this week on our "Culture in Decline," specifically the decline of our youth culture. Tonight, an alarming number of high school students in this country lack even a basic understanding of history and the Constitution.
Casey Wian reports from Los Angeles.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ED BERGER, BEMA COMMUNITY COLLEGE: This is the branch of the president. Here is the Justice Department.
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Ed Berger teaches a U.S. Constitution course at Pima Community College in Tucson, Arizona. Two-thirds of his students plan to become teachers themselves. When they began his class, Berger says only 10 of the 35 had even a basic understanding of the Constitution.
BERGER: When we talk about three branches of our government, when we talk about early on the Bill of Rights and the first 10 amendments, it is unfortunately pretty shallow. Students come to a college without any real background of our government.
WIAN: Or our history. A recent Education Department study found only 11 percent of 12th-grade students were proficient in history. Fifty-seven percent of them had less than a basic knowledge.
When it comes to understanding the foundation of our democracy, the First Amendment, most high school students don't care. Nearly three-fourths of 100,000 students surveyed by the University of Connecticut say they don't know how they feel about the First Amendment or admit they take its guarantees of freedom of expression, religion and assembly for granted.
Hodding Carter is the president of The Knight Foundation, which funded the study.
HODDING CARTER III, PRESIDENT & CEO, THE KNIGHT FOUNDATION: What it indicated was that they were either ignorant or unconcerned about both the First Amendment generally and its implications for press freedom specifically.
WIAN: In fact, only about half believe newspapers should be allowed to publish without government approval of stories. Educators blame the lack of interest or knowledge of civics on several things, including grade inflation, overemphasis of test scores, and failure to teach the relevance of the Constitution.
ALEXANDER ASTIN, UCLA HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH INSTITUTION: There's been a tremendous emphasis on grading and getting the right grades to get into the right college, rather than what am I learning, why am I learning it, and why is it important to me.
WIAN: The absence of a challenge also contributes to student apathy.
(on camera): A UCLA survey of incoming college freshmen nationwide found that 43 percent were frequently bored in class during their senior year in high school. That's up from just 29 percent two decades ago.
Casey Wian, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Well, tonight's thought is on education. "Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education."
Next, a growing effort to crack down on the benefits for illegal aliens in this country. States are taking action.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
PILGRIM: In a moment, Arkansas' latest effort to crack down on benefits for illegal aliens. The Arkansas state senator who proposed the legislation is my guest.
But, first, tonight's headlines.
In Spain, the largest fire in Madrid's history has destroyed a skyscraper that stands more than 30 stories high. There are now fears that the building could collapse. Officials say the fire was probably sparked by an electrical short-circuit.
Prosecutors say a man who opened fire in a Kingston, New York, mall had a fascination with the 1999 Columbine High School shooting. The 24-year-old suspect is accused of wounding two people before giving up when he ran out of ammunition. The man is being held without bail and could face 25 years in prison.
Verizon Communications tonight is buying MCI for $6.7 billion. It's the third major telephone industry merger in two months. This move could mean the lost of some 7,000 jobs.
Some lawmakers on Capitol Hill are launching a campaign to stop President Bush from presenting a controversial agreement to Congress. The Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico is very different from those we have with 20 other countries, and opponents say it could bankrupt Social Security.
Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BILL TUCKER, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico is like none other. America has totalization agreements with 21 countries. Not one of those agreements allows for workers to claim benefits for work done while in a country illegally. Paying out benefits to people who haven't paid into the system means extra cost. And that has senior citizen's groups worried.
FLORA GREEN, THE SENIORS COALITION: The totalization agreement as it is presently being addressed does nothing, in my viewpoint, to protect us as American citizens, as recipients of Social Security income, and this is something that's got to be changed.
TUCKER: Totalization agreements serve two main purposes. They protect a worker's retirement eligibility in their home country, and they eliminate the need for the worker to pay Social Security taxes in two countries when American workers go abroad or foreign workers come to work in the United States. Some estimates put the cost of the agreement with Mexico as high as $350 billion. Proponents say the deal makes sense given America's unique relationship with its southern neighbor.
IAN VASQUEZ, CATO INSTITUTE: Mexico is one of the United States' leading trade partners and we have much more integration with Mexico than we do with most other countries, so it makes sense to have a comprehensive agreement.
TUCKER: But it does not make sense to a growing number in Congress. Congressman Rohrabacher is a co-sponsor of a bipartisan bill that is asking the president to not complete the agreement.
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R), INTL. RELATIONS CMTE.: It is totally insane for this administration to be talking about reforming Social Security and bolstering it for our own people, while at the same time negotiating an agreement with Mexico that would make illegal immigrants into our country eligible to collect Social Security for all that time they were here illegally.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: While this agreement with Mexico is unique, so too is the approval process. Congress doesn't have to approve the deal for it to go into effect. Instead, Kitty, Congress must actively disapprove an act to block the bill in order to keep it from going into effect as it has been negotiated.
PILGRIM: Well, it's certainly getting a good bit of attention right now. Thanks very much, Bill Tucker.
Well, a national effort is under way to crack down on benefits for illegal aliens in this country. Lawmakers in Arkansas have proposed new legislation that's modeled on Arizona's Proposition 200. Now like the Arizona law the Arkansas legislation would require proof of citizenship in order to vote and to receive state benefits. Arkansas state Senator Jim Holt proposed the legislation in his state and he joins me tonight from Little Rock. Thanks for which for being here, sir.
JIM HOLT (R), ARKANSAS STATE SENATE: Thank you, Kitty, for having me. I appreciate it.
PILGRIM: Do you expect this to pass? What are the odds?
HOLT: I think the odds are pretty well right now. Right now we're going through the education process. The first salvo that was fired already saying that this bill is racist and it's bigoted and of course it's quite the contrary. My cousins are Latino, I have several which are Latino. My wife is the great grand-daughter of a Russian immigrant. So of course that has nothing to do with the issue. The issue has to do with compassion and justice for the taxpayers of Arkansas. And not only that, it has to do with those 600,000 legal people who are trying to get here -- the immigrants who are trying to get here legally. And that's something that we need to address.
PILGRIM: But this salvo that you call it was leveled on you by the governor of Arkansas. Do you think that he will have enough political leverage to actually block this?
HOLT: Well, we'll have to wait and see. I don't think so. I think the people of Arkansas -- once again we have an issue like it was in Arizona. It's either the state of Arkansas or the people of Arkansas, and I just choose to be on the people's side.
PILGRIM: Why did you decide to introduce legislation rather than have a citizens' initiative?
HOLT: Well, if it doesn't pass this session, we will launch a citizens' initiative. We have a representative republic, and that's what we need to realize as legislators that we need to hear the voice of the people. And when I have Mexican citizens that are here as legal residents telling me we have a problem with illegal immigration and benefits that are being drawn from the state, that's something we need to address and I intend to do that.
PILGRIM: How many illegal aliens do you expect are in Arkansas?
HOLT: Well, there are some reports -- of course, no one really ever knows, but it's been reported as far -- I've heard as little as 40,000, as of 2000 -- Census 2000, all the way up until now I've heard up to 125,00 to 250,000. So no one really knows for sure, of course, Kitty.
PILGRIM: Arkansas isn't a border state. Is it really that big on the consciousness of the citizens?
HOLT: It's huge, especially in my district in northwest Arkansas, it's gigantic. As I went around the state just running for U.S. Senate people wherever I went told me we have to address this issue.
PILGRIM: Now, President Bush has tried to initiate a guest worker type of program. What's your opinion on that, and how does that dovetail with anything you're trying to do? HOLT: Well, it goes back to the issue of this. People that are here legally already, what does that say to them? What does that say when we're trying to wait and become legal citizens of America and Arkansas. What does that say to them? It says you're a fool if you wait in line, and this is about the respect of law and justice, and we're going to have to -- as far as Bush's plan, the proposal for the guest worker program, I have not read it. I would have to read it before I'll be able to give you an accurate comment on that.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very for being with us. Jim Holt, thank you.
HOLT: Thank you.
PILGRIM: And that brings us to the subject of tonight's poll, would you support a measure like Proposition 200 in your state? Yes or no. Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'll bring you the results later in this show.
Let's take a look at some of your e-mail. We love to do that. Many of you wrote about a new bill in Congress that would give illegal aliens working on our farms legal status.
Donna of Chicago, Illinois writes, "is Congress going to have special amnesty bills for illegal hotel workers and illegal construction workers? We Americans say no to any and all forms of amnesty. Will it take losing your jobs, Senators, for you to face the facts and act accordingly?"
Well, Fred Hoffman of Gold Canyon, Arizona writes, "giving illegal aliens that are already here legal status will only send a message to those still wanting to come that they, too, can become legal citizens."
Jack Webber of Washington. "The entire illegal alien debate often is based on the false premise that they do work that Americans won't, pay minimum wages and provide livable safe working conditions and American labor would flock to agricultural jobs. As a consumer I'm willing to pay higher food prices knowing that those employed in the industry aren't being perpetually exploited."
We love hearing from you. Email us at loudobbs@CNN.com.
In Washington, another member of President Bush's new cabinet was sworn in today. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales vowed that his first allegiance will always be to the constitution. President Bush said Gonzales has his, quote, "complete confidence."
On Capitol Hill, the Senate began debate on another cabinet nominee, homeland security nominee Michael Chertoff is expected to be confirmed in a Senate vote tomorrow.
Well, this Valentine's Day brought disappointment for many couples in Venice. There were no romantic gondola rides to take after the city's gondoliers went on strike. The gondoliers are protesting a law prohibiting gondola rides in Venice's famed canals during the morning rush hour. While some tourists expressed their disappointment, others said they would have no trouble discovering the legendary romance of that city without a gondola ride.
Next, should the United States believe North Korea's claim that it has nuclear weapons? A former ambassador to South Korea and China is my guest next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) * PILGRIM: The United States today firmly ruled out offering North Korea any economic incentives to end its nuclear weapons program. North Korea has declared for the first time that it has nuclear weapons and it has also withdrawn from six-country talks about its nuclear program. And my next guest says North Korea has no plans to take on the United States. He says Pyongyang is just playing a game.
James Lilley is a former ambassador to South Korea and China. He is now a senior fellow at American Enterprise Institute. Thanks very much for joining us this evening.
JAMES LILLEY, FORMER AMBASSADOR TO CHINA AND SOUTH KOREA: Thank you, Kitty, for asking me.
PILGRIM: I wanted to get your interpretation on something today. South Korea's unification minister said today it's too early to declare North Korea a nuclear power. It's hard to figure out where they were going with this, given that North Korea claimed that they do have nuclear weapons. How do you interpret this?
LILLEY: Well, the day before, their foreign minister said we will not tolerate nuclear weapons on the peninsula, a very tough statement. So the unification minister comes in after him and waters it down somewhat, because the South Koreans really feel that these guys are their brothers. It's like having a drunken relative, who's impoverished, who's running around with a loaded .45 automatic. And they say it's better to sober him up and feed him than knock the gun out of his hand right off the bat.
So they're trying to soothe it into North Korea. That's their tactic.
PILGRIM: I call on your expertise in China to tell us where do you think the Chinese stand in all this. Don't they have the most influence?
LILLEY: The Chinese have a lot of influence. They supply a good percentage of the food and the oil that goes to North Korea that props up the regime. This gives them great leverage. How they use this remains to be seen.
This recent shock that the North Koreans have delivered has done the one thing the North Koreans did not want to happen. It's driven the various powers around them together. We're now closer to China and South Korea than we have been for a long time. And I think we should work with them very carefully to develop a concrete program to deal with the common program within the six-party framework. Bring the North Koreans back, don't bribe them this time. There are disincentives for not coming back, not incentives for coming back. And that's something we have to work out with our friends and allies.
PILGRIM: The great discussion today in all the papers is the attempt to perhaps isolate North Korea, set up some kind of a quarantine. What do you think of that strategy?
LILLEY: Well, no, I don't think you're really going to isolate them. What you're going to do in this toolkit, as I see, is you are going to go after their illegal activities. They're into narcotics. They're into counterfeiting. They're into weapons smuggling, into nuclear proliferation. We've got to stop those. Legitimate trade deals, they can go ahead with, if they have them. They can go ahead with them.
What we're going to do is to stop their blatant illegal activities. And I think that's perfectly logical, because the worst danger in all of this is these people in North Korea putting some kind of weapons of mass destruction, biological, chemical, or nuclear, in the hands of a terrorist.
PILGRIM: North Korea has not been shy of selling missiles all around the world. How do you assess the potential threat of them selling some kind of nuclear material to terrorists?
LILLEY: Oh, I think they have already tried to do it in Libya. They have got some hexofluoride, uranium hexofluoride, which they detected, which isn't totally conclusive, but it shows that they were probably shipping some kind of nuclear weapons material to Libya before the Libyans went straight.
Yes, they're involved with terrorist organizations all over the world. They're involved in triads, in the Mafia, all these groups. They work with them to distribute their products, so they can, after setting up these channels, they can use them and divert weapons material.
They really haven't done it, as far as we know, to any great extent yet, but there's some evidence that they've been involved.
PILGRIM: The military option is not off the table, certainly for bargaining purposes. How do you assess the capacity for the United States to pursue a military option if necessary?
LILLEY: There's no military option. I'm sorry. If you started to bomb North Korea, they would kill half the people in Seoul, and this would be five, six million people. You can't have that happen. They've got you checkmated on the military option.
What you have to do is to stop any military adventurism on their part by deterrence. We can do this with sea, air power and missiles. We don't have to have ground troops. South Korea has 600,000 ground troops. Their military options are very, very limited right now.
PILGRIM: Ambassador Lilley, thanks very much for your expertise on this very important issue. Thank you. LILLEY: Thank you for asking me, Kitty.
PILGRIM: OK. Coming up next, is the U.S. economy driving economic growth, or falling behind? Our special report is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Our nation's trade deficit with the rest of the world surged to a record $617 billion last year, and the Washington spin on those numbers is that they show the United States is the engine of global economic growth. But critics say the U.S. is rapidly becoming the caboose. Christine Romans reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In Baltimore harbor, the ships stream in loaded with imports. Most leave empty. This, we're told, is a sign of great American economic strength. Powerful American consumers are gobbling up cheap imports and supporting the rest of the world.
REP. BENJAMIN CARDIN (D), MARYLAND: Five out of six ships that come in full of cargo from China leave empty, and that one ship that has cargo, the leading export product is waste products and scrap metal. So certainly I don't think that's what we want to be known for.
ROMANS: What we're known for is a voracious appetite for cheap, imported goods.
Last year's trade deficit topped $600 billion. The gap with China, a staggering $162 billion. Never has any country had such a lopsided balance sheet.
Put simply, factories in China have replaced factories at home.
Defenders of U.S. trade policy say manufacturing defined America's strength in the last century. Technology and services are the American advantage in this one. But last year, the U.S. ran a deficit in tech products, and the surplus in services shrank to the lowest level since 1991.
PETER MORICI, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: We're losing ground in high technology products. We have a trade deficit there. We're exporting services jobs. The labor force is shrinking. By all measurable standards, the U.S. economy is contracting in very disheartening and disturbing ways.
ROMANS: Not disturbing or disheartening at the Treasury Department, where the trade debt was hailed as a sign the U.S. is creating more disposable income, or on Wall Street, where critics of record and rising debt are often dismissed as alarmists.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: Yet more and more people are warning that the U.S. is living on credit, credit extended by foreign central banks. They say not only have we given China and others the shirt off our backs, we've given them the looms and the directions on how to keep making shirts and completely put us out of business.
PILGRIM: You know, wrapped in all of this discussion is sort of a tacit blaming of the American consumer for buying so much of this Chinese product.
ROMANS: Blaming of the American consumer, and lauding at the same time, saying, oh, look at the American consumer, it's so powerful, it's the responsibility of consumers to lift up the rest of the world with our buying.
One analyst says that's economic contortionism, to think that the lowly American consumer is responsible for driving world growth. Longer term, this has got to be a trend that reverses, but in the meantime, it doesn't seem like a lot of policymakers are very concerned about the long term, very concerned instead about the short term. And for the short term, it's OK for us to just keep bringing stuff in and bringing it in.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Christine Romans.
Well, as Christine reported, our trade deficit with China topped a record $162 billion last year. My guests say Congress is partly to blame for that, speaking of blaming. Five years ago, lawmakers passed permanent normal trade relations with China. Congressman Bernie Sanders and Congressman Virgil Goode are co-sponsoring legislation that would repeal the so-called PNTR, those trade things with China. And thank you both for joining us tonight.
REP. VIRGIL GOODE (R), VIRGINIA: Nice to be with you.
REP. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: Thank you.
PILGRIM: So you believe it should be repealed. Why? And let's start with you, Congressman Goode?
GOODE: I think it should be repealed because China is capturing the world's manufacturing. The United States used to be the manufacturing giant in the world. Manufacturing creates wealth. It creates jobs. We need those jobs in the United States and not in China.
PILGRIM: Congressman Sanders, how much would repealing this, how many jobs would we benefit from?
SANDERS: Look, the reality right now is the middle class in this country is collapsing, poverty is increasing. The new jobs that are being created are by and large low-wage jobs, with minimal benefits. And what we're doing is not only shipping good-paying, blue-collar manufacturing jobs to China; we're beginning to start hemorrhaging high-tech information technology jobs. There are many IT experts in America who predict that within 10 or 20 years, China will be the information technology center of the world. What kind of good jobs are going to be there for our kids and our grandchildren if we keep exporting those jobs?
PILGRIM: Fair enough question. The average U.S. tariff on Chinese goods is about 3.8 percent. If you increase that or if you -- there's been some discussion of raising it to 27 percent on certain products because of currency imbalances with the Chinese. What does that tariff do for American jobs?
SANDERS: Well, in my view, what it tells corporate America, that you cannot simply throw American workers out on the street, run to China, hire people at 30 cents an hour, and bring those products back into this country. I'm sick and tired of seeing American workers thrown out on the street rather than have corporate America start creating decent-paying jobs in this country rather than China. And establishing a new trade relationship, based on fair trade principles with China, would go a long way to create decent-paying jobs in this country.
PILGRIM: Congressman Goode, do you think that the tariff would address the wage imbalance?
GOODE: It wouldn't. Wouldn't really address the wage imbalance totally, but it would help keep American jobs here. My district has lost thousands upon thousands of textile, furniture and other manufacturing jobs. If we had high tariffs and quotas on what came in with China, we could preserve some of those jobs in the United States.
Now, I don't want to blame it all on the manufacturers and the businesses. We also need a better business climate in the United States. In China, you don't have to worry about runaway lawsuits. We need tort reform in this country. We also need to have less overzealous regulatory agencies going after manufacturing firms. I can cite you specifics right here in the Fifth District of Virginia, where EPA and DEQ have been overzealous, in my opinion, when they should have been working with manufacturing firms. It's a combination of factors, but we need to preserve manufacturing in this country so that we can grow and stay the world's super power economically.
PILGRIM: Congressman Sanders, in 2000, when PNTR was put on China, it was with the understanding that China would join the World Trade Organization. Now we see China in flagrant violation of many of the principles of the WTO. Is it not up to the WTO to be enforcing regulations?
SANDERS: It is, but it is also up to the United States Congress to have the courage to stand up to corporate America, who pushed this agreement on us. It is incumbent upon the president of the United States to start standing up for the American worker, and say that all of the evidence suggests that our current trade relations with China are a disaster.
So I am very tired of seeing the increased boldness of corporate America -- you have the head of the Chamber of Commerce who, quote/unquote, "urges," he urges American companies to go abroad. You have the head of General Electric, who speaks with pride about how his company is moving to China. You have Bill Gates, the wealthiest man in America, speaking, just praising to the sky the authoritarian communist government of China.
And I think Congress has got to tell these guys who have received billions of dollars in corporate welfare from the American taxpayer, enough is enough, this is your country, start investing here.
PILGRIM: Congressman Goode, do you think that the president would recognize a bill that would repeal PNTR at this point?
GOODE: I believe if we could get more support, he would. I've been very pleased so far, and I want to salute Congressman Sanders for the bipartisan support he's gotten. There are a number of Republicans and Democrats on this resolution. PNTR with China passed by about 40 votes. That's not a huge margin. And if we could revisit the issue, I believe that the outcome might be different this time.
PILGRIM: All right. Thank you very much, gentlemen, for joining us tonight to explain it. Congressman Bernie Sanders and Congressman Virgil Goode, thank you.
SANDERS: Thank you.
PILGRIM: Still ahead, the results of tonight's poll, and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Now, the results of tonight's poll. Eighty-seven percent of you would support a measure like Proposition 200 in your state; 13 percent would not.
Finally tonight, in New York City, love is in the air this Valentine's Day, quite literally. Eight couples today were married or renewed their vows on the 80th floor of the Empire State Building. The couples were chosen through an annual letter-writing contest, and they now have free admission on their anniversary, which is Valentine's Day.
Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us tomorrow for our special report on culture in decline. Tomorrow, teens and drugs.
Then, a controversial proposal to give legal status to half a million illegal farm workers in this country. We'll talk with two of the lawmakers leading that effort.
And the incredibly inspiring story of an Army captain who became the first amputee to return to active duty.
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
