Return to Transcripts main page

Lou Dobbs Tonight

U.S. Withdraws Ambassador to Syria; Illegal Immigrants Key Issue to L.A. Mayoral Race; Wal-Mart Fined for Violating Child Labor Laws

Aired February 15, 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 Tuesday, February 15. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, HOST: Good evening.

The Untied States today recalled its ambassador from Syria amid rising outrage over the assassination of a former Lebanese prime minister in Beirut. The State Department and the U.S. ambassador being recalled for consultations.

The United States has stopped short of blaming Syria for the assassination, but the White House today did blast Syria's military presence in Lebanon.

Senior White House correspondent John King has the report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The White House decision to recall the U.S. ambassador for urgent consultations is part of an aggressive new administration effort to isolate Syria.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Syria's continued presence in Lebanon is a destabilizing force in the region and a destabilizing force in Lebanon. And Syria's continued support for terrorism is a problem.

KING: Syria denies any role in Monday's assassination of former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri, but the Bush administration quickly seized on the murder to challenge Syria's longstanding claim that its troops are needed in Lebanon to provide security.

RICHARD BOUCHER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: The excuse, the reason, the rationale that's given for the security, for the Syrian presence really doesn't work.

KING: Before leaving Damascus, Ambassador Margaret Scobey delivered a blunt note, not only calling on Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon but also complaining it supports Hezbollah and other terror attacks on Israel, and allowed a supply line to insurgents in Iraq.

President Bush last year imposed economic sanctions on Syria, and U.S. officials say more are likely soon, perhaps including a ban on Syrian exports to the United States. BOUCHER: The longer we go on without seeing some significant progress in these areas, the more likely it becomes that we'll look to the various tools that we have.

KING: But finding allies in this tougher approach may not be easy. The European Union's chief diplomat says Syria's military presence in Lebanon is not reason enough to change relations.

JAVIER SOLANA, E.U. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS CHIEF: It depends on how the responsibilities on the -- the assassination of Mr. Hariri is resolved.

KING: The United States also objected to Russian plans to sell missiles to Syria, but Israel's prime minister says the sale is going forward.

ARIEL SHARON, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: This is a very dangerous thing if that were to be in the hands of a terrorist organization.

KING: And at the United Nations, the Security Council would not go as far as the White House wanted in putting new pressure on Syria.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KIN: A new council statement condemning the Hariri assassination urges all parties to implement previous Security Council resolutions that stress Lebanon sovereignty and its territorial integrity.

The United States and France wanted a direct reference to Syria and its troops. But Lou, they accepted less confrontational language so that they could get unanimous backing for that new statement -- Lou.

DOBBS: John, the recall of the ambassador, the statements today. There has been a balancing act, if you will, on the part of the Bush administration for the past year and a half on the issue of Syria, occasionally critical, occasionally supportive. Is this simply a part of that balancing act, or is this a shift now in the White House outlook?

KING: Well, the White House says it is a shift. And in part that balancing act in the past, because the Syrians on a few occasions were helpful when it came to Iraq, and certainly the administration was dedicating most of its time and effort on the war in Iraq.

The administration now says it's -- it is prepared to put a sustained spotlight on Syrian activities. Some say this also could be a signal to Iran, as well, that the administration is prepared to take a tougher diplomatic approach in the region.

But Lou, you have to get results for people to take that seriously, and so it will be interesting to see if the administration can drum up significant support for this tough new approach. For now it is working closely with France, an opponent, of course, of U.S. policy in Iraq, but whether it can recruit additional allies beyond that is still an open question. DOBBS: John, thank you. John King, our senior White House correspondent.

President Bush's choice as homeland security secretary today won the Senate's unanimous approval. Michael Chertoff, a former senior official in the Justice Department, a former federal judge, during his service, occasionally controversial at the Justice Department. Chertoff helped develop some of this country's antiterrorism policies following September 11.

One of the key issues facing the new homeland security secretary is the rising concern over border security and the invasion of illegal aliens into this country. Those concerns have become a top issue in a mayoral election in one of this country's largest cities. The candidates in the Los Angeles mayoral race today faced tough and persistent questions about their policies on illegal aliens.

Casey Wian reports from Los Angeles.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was billed as a conversation with the candidates for L.A. mayor. Illegal immigration dominated the debate. Host Doug McIntyre's (ph) opening question was about L.A.'s decision to recognize more foreign consular I.D. cards.

DOUG MCINTYRE, KABC RADIO: Knowing that Los Angeles is a target city for terror groups, why should the city of Los Angeles make a document that is only needed by illegal immigrants available so people can move freely about the city?

BERNARD PARKS, L.A. MAYORAL CANDIDATE: We voted for it, because it provides identification primary to people to open up savings accounts, bank accounts so they won't carry their money in a pocket, become victims of crime.

MAYOR JAMES HAHN, LOS ANGELES: It's the idea of having some form of identification. I wish the federal government did a better job of, you know, enforcing our borders. I wish that they would reimburse us for the costs of not doing that.

WIAN: Most candidates agreed and said illegal immigration is not a city issue, except Walter Moore, a virtual unknown challenging five seasoned politicians.

WALTER MOORE, L.A. MAYORAL CANDIDATE: Our city is aiding and abetting a large-scale violation of federal immigration laws. We need to let our police investigate, enforce and cooperate with federal immigration.

WIAN: Moore was the only candidate favoring police enforcement of immigration laws. City councilman Antonio Villaraigosa, leading in one poll, suggested giving money to Mexico and other countries as a way to reduce illegal immigration.

ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA, L.A. MAYORAL CANDIDATE: These people come for a job. They come for a better life. When you invest in those other countries, they stay there. It's not rocket science.

WIAN: After the debate, McIntyre took calls from listeners.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: With the exception of this fellow Moore, every other man I heard today sounds like they are on the payroll of Vicente Fox. It's outrageous.

WIAN: Perhaps one reason no candidate has anywhere near majority support.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WIAN: Election day in Los Angeles is March 8. If no one wins a majority, there will be a runoff between the two top vote getters in May -- Lou.

DOBBS: Casey, thank you very much. Casey Wian from Los Angeles.

The Labor Department has fined Wal-Mart for child labor violations, but some are calling the settlement a sweetheart deal for Wal-Mart. Under that agreement, the federal government must give Wal- Mart 15 days' notice before it begins any investigation into whether Wal-Mart has violated child labor laws.

Kitty Pilgrim reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Federal laws don't allow teenagers to operate hazardous loading equipment. The U.S. Labor Department fined Wal-Mart $135,000 for having teenagers doing just that.

Wal-Mart had to promise not to do it again in its 3,000 stores, and post the equipment with warning signs. But they also got what some say is a sweetheart deal. The government will give Wal-Mart 15 days' prior notice of any Labor Department investigation into such matters.

ROBERT REICH, FORMER LABOR SECRETARY: It effectively says to a company, well, if you are big enough and powerful enough, we will give you ample notice to hide any evidence of wrongdoing so that you're not going to get in trouble.

PILGRIM: But Labor Department officials cite similar arrangements made with Sears and Footlocker and defend the practice.

HOWARD RADZELY, SOLICITOR, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR: This is a typical agreement where we do give companies a period in which they can immediately correct the violation to get children out of harm's way. And then we follow that up with a thorough investigation, during which anything we find can be enforced and the company can be fined.

PILGRIM: Wal-Mart strenuously denies they have special treatment, saying, "Wal-Mart's agreement with the Department of Labor is similar to those reached with many other companies. There was nothing secret or special about it."

But political watchdog groups are harshly critical of the arrangement, saying it smacks of influence peddling in Washington.

LARRY NOBLE, CENTER FOR RESPONSIVE POLITICS: In 2004, they gave over $2 million in political contributions, making them the No. 1 giver in the retail industry. They're not going to make political contributions unless they think they're going to get something in return.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PILGRIM: Labor experts say what is critical is that Wal-Mart communicates to its managers how strictly they should enforce the laws. Managers are evaluated by their productivity and their profitability. And if the managers in a large retailer are tacitly allowed to bend the rules on youth employment, smaller retailers will be tempted to follow suit -- Lou.

DOBBS: Thank you very much, Kitty.

Congressman George Miller of California is calling upon the Labor Department's inspector general to investigate whether that settlement is a sweetheart deal for Wal-mart. The congressman joins us in just a moment to talk about why he says the deal puts American workers at risk.

A judge in Tennessee is demanding that foreign-born women learn English. Judge Barry Tatum in Lebanon, Tennessee, made the declaration during a hearing about a Mexican immigrant who failed to immunize her child.

It's not the first time that Judge Tatum has made such as order. His declarations have won the support of many in his community who say immigrants should make a larger, better effort to assimilate into American life.

Still ahead here, one of the country's biggest companies is hiring thousands of new workers and, incredibly, the company is doing so with the help of organizations that support amnesty for illegal aliens.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: My guest tonight is calling for an investigation into whether or Wal-Mart's secret settlement with the Labor Department is what he calls a sweetheart deal.

Congressman George Miller, Democrat of California, joins me now from Capitol Hill. We also invited the CEO and other representatives of Wal-Mart to join us here tonight, but the company declined.

Congressman, good to have you with us.

REP. GEORGE MILLER (D), CALIFORNIA: Thank you. DOBBS: You've called for an investigation. What is the likely outcome? How soon, if there is to be one, would you expect it to occur?

MILLER: Well, we would hope that the inspector general would heed our letter for an investigation and do it right away.

Obviously, they have set up a situation where Wal-Mart employees who may file a labor grievance now and in the future are in the situation where that labor grievance will be passed right on to Wal- Mart, bypassing essentially the Department of Labor as an independent arbiter.

So people's rights are being compromised on a daily basis. So we would hope the inspector general would give some real urgency to our request for an inspection of this deal.

DOBBS: You've singled out Wal-Mart, but, as we have reported here tonight, Foot Locker, other companies are also being provided the very same privilege, if you will. Does that also concern you?

MILLER: What concerns me here is the character of the employer, not the size, not the industry, but the character of the employer. You have -- with Wal-Mart, you have a repeat offender, a habitual repeat offender on labor violations, on overtime, on job discrimination, on illegal aliens, on discrimination, on advancement that have impacted tens of thousands of workers, the Wal-Mart employees.

To then now take this labor settlement and draft that into a nationwide agreement where Wal-Mart will get to attend to the labor grievances against it by its employees -- I think there's nothing in Wal-Mart's record to suggest that they have earned that kind of right.

I don't know the labor records of Foot Locker and Sears and others that have been involved in this, but, in this particular case, we have an egregious record against working men and women in this country.

DOBBS: Congressman Miller, let's step back just for a second and say that Wal-Mart has committed a violation. They are given notice by the Department of Labor. They correct it in that two-week period. That's a good thing, is it not?

MILLER: Well, that could be a good thing. We have compliance agreements throughout all different kinds of the agencies in the government, but in this case...

First of all, when were they going to tell the employees of Wal- Mart that this agreement had been arrived at, and when were they going to tell the employees what kind of labor agreements are covered? It appears from the e-mail in the Labor Department and the agreement that it covers all labor violations.

And it also -- the question is -- you send a complaint to the Department of Labor, and you forward them this complaint, and, the next thing you know, they're sending it to the home office. There's a real chilling effect here on these workers. These workers don't have a union, they don't have an organization to protect them, many of them are low-income, and this is...

DOBBS: Or are below legal age, in some cases.

MILLER: In this case, they're below legal age...

DOBBS: Congressman...

MILLER: ... or they're not in this country legally.

DOBBS: Congressman, in that regard, let's take a look at a statement from Wal-Mart today reacting to your call for an investigation and criticism of Wal-Mart.

"Congressman Miller has very strong ties to organized labor, and this is just another example of him trying to discredit us on their behalf, thinking people will see it for what it is."

Your reaction?

MILLER: Well, first of all, there's no organized labor in Wal- Mart. They can -- they don't have any unions in Wal-Mart. Organized labor gets nothing out of this.

This was brought to me by people in the Department of Labor that said there's something very wrong here when you look at the record of this employer, you look at the record of grievances against it.

And now they take this settlement where the -- you know, they don't admit or deny anything, but they settle for $135,000 and they bootstrap that into a nationwide agreement where they get first cut at the complaints of their employees.

DOBBS: Well, let me ask you this. Because we are in a situation in this country, in our economy, in our society in which corporate America -- and U.S. multinationals, in particular -- have unprecedented political power, influence in your party, influence in the Republican Party, domination on Capitol Hill and certainly the White House, organized labor is an impotent force by all measures here today. What countervailing influence is there for the middle class, for working men and women in this country period?

MILLER; Well, there's -- you know, there's public officials like myself who are concerned about the middle class, about their standard of living and their ability to have wages and hours and working conditions that allow them to support their familiar and provide health care and education.

There's labor organizations that watch out for these people. But, every time one of these labor organizations approaches a Wal- Mart, they fire the workers who are involved it. They make their life very difficult. We just saw, I believe it is in Canada, where they got a right to organize and Wal-Mart closed the whole store. So what chance do these people have? Now they have the inside track in the Department of Labor, the last independent party between Wal-Mart's employment practices and their employees, and that's now been taken away because the home office gets the first cut at your grievance. These are -- these people have no real protections in these jobs.

What does that tell them about filing a grievance, that people in the home office are going to look for this, they're going to tell your supervisor, your store manager, and they're going to come looking for you.

DOBBS: Congressman George Miller, we thank you for being here.

MILLER: It's not fair.

DOBBS: We'll follow, of course, the response from the inspector general, the Department of Labor to your call for an investigation. Thank you.

MILLER: Thank you.

DOBBS: An amazing story of survival tonight out of Colorado where six people suffered only minor injuries after plunging 400 feet into a ravine while in a mini van.

The group was driving in the Colorado Rockies when they hit black ice on the road. They slid toward a drop-off where there was no guard rail, and their vehicle, of course, went over the ledge. Luckily, all six were wearing their seat belts.

Only one passenger was carried out on a stretcher and was briefly -- briefly -- hospitalized. The rest incredibly and fortunately walked away with only some bruises.

Coming up next, American "Culture in Decline." Teenagers abusing one new drug at an alarming rate. Our special report is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: In our series of special reports this week, we focus on "Culture in Decline." Drug use among teenagers is in decline overall, but the use and availability of certain dangerous drugs is on the rise. Teenagers are abusing and becoming addicted to prescription drugs like OxyContin at alarmingly young ages and at alarmingly high rates.

Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Maggie started using marijuana when she was 10 years old. She moved up to OxyContin and other prescription drugs, then later became hooked on methamphetamine and even harder drugs.

MAGGIE, 16, RECOVERING DRUG ADDICT: And I really didn't care whether I lived or died or whether my friends lived or died, as long as I was high and -- that's all I really cared about, was drugs.

SYLVESTER: She is now a 16-year-old student at Sobriety High, a school for recovering teen addicts in Minnesota. Her story may sound extreme, but a surprising 51 percent of all high school seniors report having tried an illicit drug in their lifetime, according to a University of Michigan study. In fact, American students have one of the highest rates of illegal drug use in the world.

PROF. LLOYD JOHNSTON, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: They have a lot of discretionary income. Many teens work and they also get allowances, of course, so they have the opportunity to use and they have the means to use.

SYLVESTER: Use of marijuana, cocaine, heroin and ecstasy have been trending downward in the last three years, but use of prescription drugs, like OxyContin, is up. One in 20 high school seniors reported abusing the drug last year. More teens are also using steroids, made popular by professional athletes, and an increasing number of eighth graders are experimenting with inhalants.

CRAIG SWANSON, SOBRIETY HIGH: I think the numbers tell us that about four out of 10 kids that experiment with a drug, who are experimenting at 14 or under, become addicted. That's 40 percent.

SYLVESTER: Sobriety High has an 80 percent success rate, but it catches just a mere fraction of the teenagers in Minnesota addicted to drugs.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SYLVESTER: Funding for drug prevention programs has been cut by a third in President Bush's 2006 budget. Among the programs on the chopping block: school-based drug prevention programs. States and cities will be asked to pick up more of the costs of these programs -- Lou.

DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much.

Lisa Sylvester from Washington.

This is the biggest night of the year for serious, serious dog lovers. The 129th Annual Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show concluding tonight here in New York City, celebrating the best of the breeds. More than 2,500 dogs from 165 breeds are competing in the show. Chihuahuas, other dogs. You're looking at a smooth-coat Chihuahua named Webster who competed in the toy category. The best in show award will be handed out tonight.

Next, one of the country's best-known companies is teaming up with organizations who want to legalize illegal aliens.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Here now for more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs. DOBBS: In just a moment here, two members of Congress who want to give more rights to half a million -- at least half a million -- illegal aliens in this country by granting them legal status. They'll be our guests next.

But, first, these important stories tonight.

A 15-year-old South Carolina boy tonight has been sentenced to 30 years in prison for killing his grandparents. The jury rejected defense arguments the boy was influenced by the antidepressant Zoloft at the time of the murders.

In another high-profile court case, defrocked priest Paul Shanley was sentenced for up to 15 years in prison for sexually abusing a boy in his parish decades ago. The 74-year-old priest was convicted last week on two counts of rape and two counts of indecent assault on a child.

And the Food and Drug Administration today announced it's creating an independent drug safety oversight board to monitor drugs on the market after they've been approved. Senator Chuck Grassley calling for that board for some time now and today having his way. The FDA has faced mounting criticism for reacting too slowly to reports on dangerous drugs, including Vioxx and Celebrex. Those drugs were linked to an increased risk of heart attack and stroke.

Home Depot, this country's biggest home improvement retailer, today announced plans to hire 20,000 new workers. What makes this initiative different is that Home Depot says it prefers to hire Spanish-speaking workers for those jobs. And even more surprising, Home Depot's partners in the campaign include groups that advocate amnesty for illegal aliens and U.S. driver's licenses for illegals.

Bill Tucker reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL TUCKER, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Home Depot is no stranger to marketing to the Hispanic marketplace. The home of the Los Angeles Major League soccer team is sponsored by Home Depot. Home Depot also sponsors the Mexican national soccer team.

And now the company is taking its relationship with the Hispanic community in a new direction. Home Depot wants to create 20,000 new jobs this year, and it's partnering with an array of Hispanic groups, hoping that they will help recruit the Hispanic bilingual workers.

DENNIS DONOVAN, HOME DEPOT: We see this as a real opportunity to work with these prominent Hispanic organizations, to tap into their strong networks of relationships and local offices that will not only help us fill our jobs, but also create employment opportunities.

TUCKER: The groups in turn will promote Home Depot.

ALFONSO MARTINEZ, HISPANIC ASSOCIATION ON CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY: One of the obvious outcomes of this is that Home Depot will earn the trust of the Hispanic community, which is such an important aspects for corporations reaching out to the Hispanic community.

Reporter: That alliance is made up of the ASPIRA association, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, SER-Jobs for Progress National, and the National Council of La Raza.

La Raza's involvement raises some eyebrows, because it is a politically active group on illegal immigration issues.

MARK KRIKORIAN, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: It is a purely political organization and, frankly, a pretty radical one. And it seems an odd choice for Home Depot, if their objective really is just to get the word out among Hispanic legal immigrants and citizens that they want to see more job applications.

TUCKER: La Raza admits this is the beginning of what it hopes is a long relationship.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TUCKER: The Home Depot says the jobs that it creates are open to everyone. And the company does note that just last year it announced two similar hiring initiatives with the American Association of Retired People to bring in senior citizens and, Lou, also with the Department of Defense to bring in veterans and their spouses.

DOBBS: To be clear, has Home Depot said under no circumstances will it be hiring illegal aliens?

TUCKER: Yes.

DOBBS: That's a pretty good start right there. Bill Tucker, thank you.

President Bush supports a plan to legalize millions of illegal aliens in the country. Now two leading members of Congress want to grant legal status to at least half a million illegal farm workers.

The Ag Jobs Bill was first introduced in the Senate in 2003, placed on the calendar in 2004, but last year's Senate vote was delayed until after the presidential election.

Now, Senator Larry Craig of Idaho has reintroduced the bill in the Senate. Congressman Howard Berman of California will reintroduce the measure in the House. They join us tonight from Capitol Hill.

Gentlemen, good to have you with us.

SEN. LARRY CRAIG (R), IDAHO: Lou, good to be here.

REP. HOWARD BERMAN (D), CALIFORNIA: Same.

DOBBS: Let me begin with you, if I may, Senator. Half a million undocumented workers, illegal aliens, migrant workers in this country. Why in the world should they be given legal status, move to the front of any line?

CRAIG: Well, Lou, there are between eight and 12 million undocumented illegal workers in this country. And I think it's incumbent upon us to reform the immigration laws and to try to identify who those people are and determine whether they should be here, whether they're felons or all of that, and to recognize that in agriculture there could be well more than a half a million.

And we would want them to come forward, and for coming forward, we would give them an opportunity to earn a legal status. Not give it to them, not grant it to them automatically, but ask them to toil for five or six years in the fields of America, or 360-plus days, if you will, to gain a status so they could continue to work.

DOBBS: Five or six years or how many days?

CRAIG: About 360 days is what it would represent. What we recognize is that is very important is that about 72 to 78 percent of the work force in American agriculture today that picks your food and brings it out of the field and processes it and takes it to your retail shelves are undocumented workers. It's a tragedy, and it is a bad law that has driven this.

DOBBS: Congressman Berman is one of those fellows who, in his youth, worked alongside those workers, actually in Senator Craig's home state. I know how hard these people work. I know the sacrifices they make, and I understand their motivation.

But at the same time how can you justify changing immigration law for one group of people within this country illegally?

BERMAN: Because, as a result of miserable wages, terrible conditions, back-breaking work, and a pattern of recruitment by growers and farm labor contractors over the past 30 years, the U.S. workers and the U.S. citizens have left the field of agricultural work. And I believe that you and your listeners all know that the notion that we're going to get U.S. workers back into agricultural labor is a myth.

The present situation is intolerable. It's exploitation. We don't know who's here. They're using false identification. And a system that has them come forward, requires them to continue to work in seasonal agriculture as a condition of getting their status adjusted, and preserves a food security, a food and agricultural industry in this country which would disappear if you could somehow deport those people, is in the public interest.

DOBBS: Congressman, Senator Craig, let me ask you. I mean, because you all talk as if this world is just one little fine strip at a time.

The fact is that American agriculture was supposed to industrialize and mechanize its crop-gathering and harvesting 35 years ago. There's nothing that Congress has done to incentivize it.

We provide $20 billion a year in agricultural subsidies, and you're going to say to us that that money should be used to support the granting of legal status to illegal aliens without an entire reform of the immigration law in this country and to move half a million people ahead so you can drive the interest of the very people, Congressman Berman, that you said have been effectively exploiting these people and not paying fair wages.

We have a system in this country, gentlemen, that I think you need -- I would just love to hear you rationalize agriculture in this country. Hard working men and women, U.S. citizens as well as migrant workers, many of whom, as you suggest, are illegal.

How the world can you justify this system? How can you continue to tinker with only an element of it?

CRAIG: Lou, it's interesting that you demonstrate by that statement you know very little about American agriculture. Have you ever picked apples out of a tree or cherries out of a tree? Or crops out of...

DOBBS: Congressman Craig, since you said it that way, let me tell you exactly what I've done. I've picked beets. I have carried potatoes. I've sacked them. I've stacked them. I have cut hay. I have stacked it, and I have carried it.

CRAIG: Then Lou...

DOBBS: And Congressman, I -- and I've harvested beans.

CRAIG: Lou, why would you suggest that we can mechanize all of that?

DOBBS: Now wait a minute. Congressman, you just made a statement rather accusatory. Now would you like to share with us your agricultural experience?

CRAIG: I think it was not accusatory and I think you deserve a response.

DOBBS: It was not accusatory, Senator. I asked you a simple question.

CRAIG: Well, the AFL-CIO and United Farm Workers and about 400 agricultural organizations came together to create what Howard Berman and I have introduced. We have a bipartisan and a very broad cross- section of American interest involved in this.

Why? Because we have a broken law. You can condemn agriculture if you want to.

DOBBS: I don't condemn it, Senator. As a matter of fact, I think you're condemning it.

CRAIG: No, I don't think I'm accusing anybody of anything.

DOBBS: Yes you are. You're condemning it, because you're not willing to answer a simple question. Why aren't you approaching agriculture in this country holistically? Take care of the farmer. Take care of the laborer. Take care of the consumer.

CRAIG: I'll let Howard talk to you about that.

DOBBS: I'm sorry? I'm sorry?

CRAIG: Howard, try him on.

BERMAN: Lou, I'm a city boy, but I think ...

DOBBS: Well, sir, apparently is Senator Craig.

CRAIG: No, I've farmed and ranched most of my life, Lou.

BERMAN: Your calculation is wrong.

DOBBS: Well, then give us -- give us your experience.

BERMAN: Let me just finish the sentence. The subsidies, by and large, don't go to perishable fruit and vegetables, labor-intensive agricultural industries. They go to the highly mechanized grains. That's where the huge -- and cotton that doesn't use a lot of labor and is not labor-intensive.

The people who are working in perishable fruits and vegetables are, as Senator Craig said, 70 percent to 80 percent undocumented.

The present situation, as you have just said, is intolerable. We have to do something. Give me a better solution and I'll take a look at it, but the present situation cannot stand.

DOBBS: Well, I just find it extraordinary. Senator Craig, let me give you...

CRAIG: Sure.

DOBBS: ... in all openness and warmth and humility an opportunity to tell us your experience in agriculture, because I think it's important.

CRAIG: Well, I appreciate that. First of all, I farmed and ranched all of my life up until about 1985. I was born and raised on a farm and ranch. We didn't hire Hispanic workers. We did the work ourselves.

Just below us in the row-crop industry and the kind of agriculture industry that Howard has so clearly explained to you, that is still a hand, backbreaking, intensive kind of agriculture that employs about 1.6 million of the work force.

DOBBS: You've picked beans. You have picked potatoes and sacked them, I'm sure.

CRAIG: No, I've not. No, I have not.

DOBBS: Because that's really backbreaking. The apple picking -- you're a cowboy, so I'll tell you what. There are not many migrant workers working in the cattle business.

CRAIG: You're right. There are not.

DOBBS: And I worked for a fellow there in your state by the name of Jack Simplot (ph).

CRAIG: I know Jack well.

DOBBS: At the Peco (ph) Ranch, running about 10,000 head of cattle. We didn't have many migrant workers there. They're in the field.

CRAIG: Not on that particular industry.

DOBBS: Right.

CRAIG: But on the potato side of the Simplot (ph) operation, there were a good many.

DOBBS: Absolutely. Absolutely. Now my question is this: with $20 billion in subsidies to the agriculture industry in this country, why would you continue to perpetuate the fiction that the poor farmer, the poor rancher, is totally dependent on migrants labor? The fact -- let me finish.

The consumer in this country gets the best bargain in the world for our food, on every level.

CRAIG: That they do. That they do.

DOBBS: Now, you're going to make a decision about one element of it. Why not start looking at agriculture honestly? Why do we have to continue to hear this stuff out of Washington with one element after another?

Talk about border security, talk about identification, talk about immigration reform, but supporting further support by the taxpayer of the agriculture industry is just wrong-headed.

CRAIG: OK, Lou, you've made your political statement.

DOBBS: It's not a political statement. It's neither Republican nor Democrat.

CRAIG: Now wait a moment. My turn, Lou, my turn. My turn.

DOBBS: Well, it's your turn.

CRAIG: It's a very accusatory statement. I'll tell you what we'll do. We'll get out the militia. We'll get out the National Guard. We'll round up all 1.6 million ag workers and take them out of the country.

And then we'll go to New York City, and we'll say to the poor and the downtrodden there, you come work for agriculture for $8, $10, $12 an hour. Leave your children home. Travel the migrant circuit for the year and harvest the crops of American agriculture and see what happens to the supermarket shelves.

My guess is you'll not buy a fresh piece of fruit after that scenario. That's a reality we deal with here. Lou, I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm saying...

DOBBS: Let's talk about right or wrong.

CRAIG: I'm saying -- I'm saying...

DOBBS: That's precisely the issue here, right or wrong.

CRAIG: I'm saying -- well, Lou, you can be accusatory and you can make your political statements. Find us a solution.

Howard and I have offered up a solution. We're asking our colleagues to take a look at it. We've got broad-based support from American agriculture and from American farm workers.

I agree with Howard. It has been not a process that we were proud of. And now we're trying to correct it. You're talking in a condemning way. I think that is grossly unfair. Come work with us to solve a problem, not to condemn it.

DOBBS¨ Congressman, you get the last word.

BERMAN: I agree with Senator Craig.

DOBBS: I thought you might.

CRAIG: Thank you, Howard.

DOBBS: Well, I disagree with you both on it. Because -- I think your heart's in the right place.

BERMAN: Do you have a better idea, though, Lou? Do you have a better idea?

DOBBS: I've got a couple, but you know what, the folks aren't going to listen to this one right now, because we're out of time. I'm going to share it with you, and then we'll talk about it in the days ahead, if you want to hear it.

BERMAN: OK.

DOBBS: You've got to be sincere. You really want to hear it, don't you, Senator?

BERMAN: I really want to -- I want the best idea.

DOBBS: You got it.

CRAIG: Lou, we would come back on and give you the last word, how's that?

DOBBS: You've got a deal.

CRAIG: All right.

DOBBS: Thank you both for being here.

We want to hear from you on this important issue. Do you support legislation that would grant illegal farm workers in this country legal status? Yes or no? Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results later.

Next, the inspiring story of the first amputee to return to active military duty on his way to Iraq.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: We report here as extensively as possible about the many heroes in our military who have been wounded in combat and Iraq and Afghanistan. Tonight, the astonishing story of an Army captain who lost a foot in a land mine explosion in Iraq, and who is returning to the battlefield for a second tour.

Captain David Rozelle shares his story in his new book, "Back in Action: An American Soldier's Story of Courage, Faith and Fortitude." And you can underline "courage, faith and fortitude."

Captain David Rozelle is here with us tonight.

Captain, thanks for being here.

CAPT. DAVID ROZELLE, AUTHOR, "BACK IN ACTION": Thanks for having me. I'm glad to be here.

DOBBS: An extraordinary life that you're leading, extraordinary service in Iraq. Tell our audience how you lost your right foot.

ROZELLE: I was traveling down a dirt road on the way to teach the first police academy in Heet (ph), Iraq, which was the area that I was in charge of. And en route, along that alternate route of the dirt road there, I hit a land mine in a Humvee, and it destroyed my foot, basically took the right front end off the Humvee. And fortunately, we were going slow enough where it didn't take the rest of me up in the air as well.

DOBBS: In the book, you speak of a cookie cutter hole coming through the center of the Humvee. Those traveling with you in the Humvee, they escaped unhurt.

ROZELLE: Amazingly, because I had just stopped and started going again. We were not traveling at a speed where it would have detonated and gone off right underneath us. Fortunately, we slowed down and we were able to take it fairly easy, so most of the blast went up to the vehicle. And, you know, there was barely a scratch on the other two men. So we were very lucky.

DOBBS: Your book, in which you -- the captain's wife and young son hearing about it for the first time, it's a remarkable chapter. What was your reaction? What was your thoughts as you had to tell your wife this had occurred? ROZELLE: The hardest thing for me was -- was not having her there and her not knowing, and that I could have died. To imagine her being notified and going through that process would have been horrific.

But then to have to tell my wife that I was injured. You know, that's really something I struggled with when I was laying there, until she said the words, "I know," and it just allowed me just release and made it OK, because she already knew.

And the Army does the right thing. They let the wives know the right way with the right people and have the right professionals there to help out. And we're very lucky right now.

DOBBS: And your wife gave a pretty good tribute to the squadron leader's wife, too.

ROZELLE: Yes.

DOBBS: Your -- those who have not known a man or woman who's lost a leg or limb, people don't realize, I think, in many cases just how much guts you've got to have to deal with it, to bring -- to deal with the prosthetic.

The people -- the people I've known who have had to deal with this, they've had to struggle against the way in which the amputation took place, the way in which it heals. Sometimes it's an extraordinary year-after-year process.

Tell us how quickly, how difficult, how much work it was to deal with that prosthetic.

ROZELLE: Walter Reed actually went back and studied me, because I was one of the first guys, the top 10 -- or first 10, not top 10, to actually become an amputee.

And I was about six months ahead of schedule the entire time, whether it was, you know, getting back to skiing again, to running again, to starting to do triathlons. And then within 14 months of my injury to do a triathlon, so -- I mean, then, you know, and then run the New York Marathon.

So -- so absolutely my sports rehabilitation is the thing that got me back on the feet the fastest and really was the thing that prepared me to come back into active service and within a year of my injury take another cavalry troop and be prepared within the next two weeks to receive orders to again go to Iraq.

DOBBS: You make the point that you wanted to be fit for duty again. You've established that. You've done that.

ROZELLE: Yes, sir.

DOBBS: Not necessarily to go back to Iraq. You'll be back, as I understand it, at the beginning of next month? Is that...

ROZELLE: That's fairly accurate. The beginning of March is as well as we can say right now.

And, you know, an American soldier, you know, prays for peace but prepares for war. And you know, we shouldn't be perceived as a -- as a war mongering force, because these young men and women out here that are serving their country, they want to provide freedom for the people of Iraq, and they're committed to it.

And you know, I certainly -- I'm certainly not excited about going back, but it does bring full circle my injury, my recovery, and to help out the troops that are there forward now.

DOBBS: Captain, we thank you for your service, your bravery, your example.

ROZELLE: Thank you.

DOBBS: And for being here. We wish you all the very best.

ROZELLE: My pleasure.

DOBBS: Thank you.

We'll continue in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: A federal appellate panel today said two reporters should be jailed for refusing to reveal their confidential sources. Judith Miller of "The New York Times" and Matt Cooper of "TIME" magazine have been ordered to serve 18 months in jail unless they agree to testify at a grand jury investigation into the leak of a CIA agent's name.

A three-judge panel today upheld the lower court decision that the reporters are not protected by the First Amendment.

I'm joined now by Judith Miller, reporter for "The New York Times."

Judith, good to have you here. I know you've got to be disappointed in this decision, along with Matt Cooper, and all of us who are concerned about the rights of the public to know. Are you surprised by today's decision?

JUDITH MILLER, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Well, I guess maybe I'm just very optimistic, but I was hopeful that at least we would have had one of the three judges who would see the law our way. But it was -- they were thoughtful decisions, but of course I'm disappointed, but not really surprised.

DOBBS: To be clear for our audience, you did not publish on the Valerie Plame story.

MILLER: No.

DOBBS: You -- and it makes it remarkable. Matt Cooper, in point of fact, did participate and agree to cooperate in testimony before the grand jury, and then that was extended, and at point at which he objected to further -- further involvement, I'll put it that way, or refusing to reveal his sources.

What can be done now?

MILLER: Well, now we just have to appeal, and the papers -- our respective papers, "TIME" and "The New York Times," fully intend to do that. We'll go through this legal drama. The play will continue. And we will hope that either the full appellate court or the Supreme Court will eventually see the law our way.

DOBBS: You have basically 45 days to appeal. You will be appealing.

MILLER: Yes.

DOBBS: And is there a definite grounds upon which to appeal? Or is it simply -- explain that process if you would, quickly.

MILLER: Well, I think -- you know, fortunately or unfortunately, I'm not a lawyer.

DOBBS: Right.

MILLER: But I think the grounds that we're going to ask the judges to consider is, is there really a privilege that's very similar to a clergyman's privilege or a doctor's privilege or a spouse's privilege, or as of 1996, a psychotherapist privilege not to appear before grand juries? And in each case the society has decided that...

DOBBS: I would -- I would say to you as a journalist. I have a troubling -- because I feel we're in a craft, not a profession. So I have a little trouble with clergy. I have a little trouble with physicians as comparables, if you will. But a social worker I think comes close, perhaps.

The fact is, with 31 states with shield laws or some sort of protection.

MILLER: Thirty-nine actually.

DOBBS: Can the federal government -- can the federal government act in time to be helpful to you and to Matt Cooper and to the craft?

MILLER: I don't know if they really can, but I do know this. Raising these issues now, Lou, will focus the attention of the Congress, we hope, on the need for a shield law, so that this kind of situation doesn't arise again.

Right now we have a situation in which 49 states have said journalists really shouldn't have to reveal their confidential sources before grand juries. The federal standard is now 30 years old. And what we're saying is federal law ought to be consistent with what the states want.

DOBBS: I would like, if you would, to show our audience today's opinion, judgment from the -- from the appellate court, and the part pertaining to you from one of the panel judges.

MILLER: Well, one of the judges ruled that he was balancing the prosecutor's need to have information against the public's right to know. And he said, with respect to Miller, and then he did this, and this, and then.

DOBBS: Zoom in on this. Showing you blank pages in a court opinion.

MILLER: And this -- in a court opinion. And then regarding Cooper, and once again there are more pages. Nine pages of his decision are redacted. They're not there...

DOBBS: In your case, you didn't publish, and we don't know why the judge decided as he did.

MILLER: Exactly. I'm in a position where I may be going to jail for reasons that the judges wouldn't tell me.

DOBBS: Judith Miller, we thank you for being here.

MILLER: Thank you for having me.

DOBBS: And we wish you the best.

MILLER: Thanks, Lou.

DOBBS: Still ahead here, the results of our poll tonight and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow. Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight overwhelming. Ninety-one percent of you say you do not support legislation that would grant illegal farm workers in this country legal status.

By the way, Congressman Berman, Senator Craig, our guests here tonight, have agreed to be back with us the next couple of nights to discuss this issue.

Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us tomorrow. For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" coming up next on CNN.

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 15, 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 Tuesday, February 15. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, HOST: Good evening.

The Untied States today recalled its ambassador from Syria amid rising outrage over the assassination of a former Lebanese prime minister in Beirut. The State Department and the U.S. ambassador being recalled for consultations.

The United States has stopped short of blaming Syria for the assassination, but the White House today did blast Syria's military presence in Lebanon.

Senior White House correspondent John King has the report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The White House decision to recall the U.S. ambassador for urgent consultations is part of an aggressive new administration effort to isolate Syria.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Syria's continued presence in Lebanon is a destabilizing force in the region and a destabilizing force in Lebanon. And Syria's continued support for terrorism is a problem.

KING: Syria denies any role in Monday's assassination of former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri, but the Bush administration quickly seized on the murder to challenge Syria's longstanding claim that its troops are needed in Lebanon to provide security.

RICHARD BOUCHER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: The excuse, the reason, the rationale that's given for the security, for the Syrian presence really doesn't work.

KING: Before leaving Damascus, Ambassador Margaret Scobey delivered a blunt note, not only calling on Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon but also complaining it supports Hezbollah and other terror attacks on Israel, and allowed a supply line to insurgents in Iraq.

President Bush last year imposed economic sanctions on Syria, and U.S. officials say more are likely soon, perhaps including a ban on Syrian exports to the United States. BOUCHER: The longer we go on without seeing some significant progress in these areas, the more likely it becomes that we'll look to the various tools that we have.

KING: But finding allies in this tougher approach may not be easy. The European Union's chief diplomat says Syria's military presence in Lebanon is not reason enough to change relations.

JAVIER SOLANA, E.U. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS CHIEF: It depends on how the responsibilities on the -- the assassination of Mr. Hariri is resolved.

KING: The United States also objected to Russian plans to sell missiles to Syria, but Israel's prime minister says the sale is going forward.

ARIEL SHARON, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: This is a very dangerous thing if that were to be in the hands of a terrorist organization.

KING: And at the United Nations, the Security Council would not go as far as the White House wanted in putting new pressure on Syria.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KIN: A new council statement condemning the Hariri assassination urges all parties to implement previous Security Council resolutions that stress Lebanon sovereignty and its territorial integrity.

The United States and France wanted a direct reference to Syria and its troops. But Lou, they accepted less confrontational language so that they could get unanimous backing for that new statement -- Lou.

DOBBS: John, the recall of the ambassador, the statements today. There has been a balancing act, if you will, on the part of the Bush administration for the past year and a half on the issue of Syria, occasionally critical, occasionally supportive. Is this simply a part of that balancing act, or is this a shift now in the White House outlook?

KING: Well, the White House says it is a shift. And in part that balancing act in the past, because the Syrians on a few occasions were helpful when it came to Iraq, and certainly the administration was dedicating most of its time and effort on the war in Iraq.

The administration now says it's -- it is prepared to put a sustained spotlight on Syrian activities. Some say this also could be a signal to Iran, as well, that the administration is prepared to take a tougher diplomatic approach in the region.

But Lou, you have to get results for people to take that seriously, and so it will be interesting to see if the administration can drum up significant support for this tough new approach. For now it is working closely with France, an opponent, of course, of U.S. policy in Iraq, but whether it can recruit additional allies beyond that is still an open question. DOBBS: John, thank you. John King, our senior White House correspondent.

President Bush's choice as homeland security secretary today won the Senate's unanimous approval. Michael Chertoff, a former senior official in the Justice Department, a former federal judge, during his service, occasionally controversial at the Justice Department. Chertoff helped develop some of this country's antiterrorism policies following September 11.

One of the key issues facing the new homeland security secretary is the rising concern over border security and the invasion of illegal aliens into this country. Those concerns have become a top issue in a mayoral election in one of this country's largest cities. The candidates in the Los Angeles mayoral race today faced tough and persistent questions about their policies on illegal aliens.

Casey Wian reports from Los Angeles.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was billed as a conversation with the candidates for L.A. mayor. Illegal immigration dominated the debate. Host Doug McIntyre's (ph) opening question was about L.A.'s decision to recognize more foreign consular I.D. cards.

DOUG MCINTYRE, KABC RADIO: Knowing that Los Angeles is a target city for terror groups, why should the city of Los Angeles make a document that is only needed by illegal immigrants available so people can move freely about the city?

BERNARD PARKS, L.A. MAYORAL CANDIDATE: We voted for it, because it provides identification primary to people to open up savings accounts, bank accounts so they won't carry their money in a pocket, become victims of crime.

MAYOR JAMES HAHN, LOS ANGELES: It's the idea of having some form of identification. I wish the federal government did a better job of, you know, enforcing our borders. I wish that they would reimburse us for the costs of not doing that.

WIAN: Most candidates agreed and said illegal immigration is not a city issue, except Walter Moore, a virtual unknown challenging five seasoned politicians.

WALTER MOORE, L.A. MAYORAL CANDIDATE: Our city is aiding and abetting a large-scale violation of federal immigration laws. We need to let our police investigate, enforce and cooperate with federal immigration.

WIAN: Moore was the only candidate favoring police enforcement of immigration laws. City councilman Antonio Villaraigosa, leading in one poll, suggested giving money to Mexico and other countries as a way to reduce illegal immigration.

ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA, L.A. MAYORAL CANDIDATE: These people come for a job. They come for a better life. When you invest in those other countries, they stay there. It's not rocket science.

WIAN: After the debate, McIntyre took calls from listeners.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: With the exception of this fellow Moore, every other man I heard today sounds like they are on the payroll of Vicente Fox. It's outrageous.

WIAN: Perhaps one reason no candidate has anywhere near majority support.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WIAN: Election day in Los Angeles is March 8. If no one wins a majority, there will be a runoff between the two top vote getters in May -- Lou.

DOBBS: Casey, thank you very much. Casey Wian from Los Angeles.

The Labor Department has fined Wal-Mart for child labor violations, but some are calling the settlement a sweetheart deal for Wal-Mart. Under that agreement, the federal government must give Wal- Mart 15 days' notice before it begins any investigation into whether Wal-Mart has violated child labor laws.

Kitty Pilgrim reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Federal laws don't allow teenagers to operate hazardous loading equipment. The U.S. Labor Department fined Wal-Mart $135,000 for having teenagers doing just that.

Wal-Mart had to promise not to do it again in its 3,000 stores, and post the equipment with warning signs. But they also got what some say is a sweetheart deal. The government will give Wal-Mart 15 days' prior notice of any Labor Department investigation into such matters.

ROBERT REICH, FORMER LABOR SECRETARY: It effectively says to a company, well, if you are big enough and powerful enough, we will give you ample notice to hide any evidence of wrongdoing so that you're not going to get in trouble.

PILGRIM: But Labor Department officials cite similar arrangements made with Sears and Footlocker and defend the practice.

HOWARD RADZELY, SOLICITOR, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR: This is a typical agreement where we do give companies a period in which they can immediately correct the violation to get children out of harm's way. And then we follow that up with a thorough investigation, during which anything we find can be enforced and the company can be fined.

PILGRIM: Wal-Mart strenuously denies they have special treatment, saying, "Wal-Mart's agreement with the Department of Labor is similar to those reached with many other companies. There was nothing secret or special about it."

But political watchdog groups are harshly critical of the arrangement, saying it smacks of influence peddling in Washington.

LARRY NOBLE, CENTER FOR RESPONSIVE POLITICS: In 2004, they gave over $2 million in political contributions, making them the No. 1 giver in the retail industry. They're not going to make political contributions unless they think they're going to get something in return.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PILGRIM: Labor experts say what is critical is that Wal-Mart communicates to its managers how strictly they should enforce the laws. Managers are evaluated by their productivity and their profitability. And if the managers in a large retailer are tacitly allowed to bend the rules on youth employment, smaller retailers will be tempted to follow suit -- Lou.

DOBBS: Thank you very much, Kitty.

Congressman George Miller of California is calling upon the Labor Department's inspector general to investigate whether that settlement is a sweetheart deal for Wal-mart. The congressman joins us in just a moment to talk about why he says the deal puts American workers at risk.

A judge in Tennessee is demanding that foreign-born women learn English. Judge Barry Tatum in Lebanon, Tennessee, made the declaration during a hearing about a Mexican immigrant who failed to immunize her child.

It's not the first time that Judge Tatum has made such as order. His declarations have won the support of many in his community who say immigrants should make a larger, better effort to assimilate into American life.

Still ahead here, one of the country's biggest companies is hiring thousands of new workers and, incredibly, the company is doing so with the help of organizations that support amnesty for illegal aliens.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: My guest tonight is calling for an investigation into whether or Wal-Mart's secret settlement with the Labor Department is what he calls a sweetheart deal.

Congressman George Miller, Democrat of California, joins me now from Capitol Hill. We also invited the CEO and other representatives of Wal-Mart to join us here tonight, but the company declined.

Congressman, good to have you with us.

REP. GEORGE MILLER (D), CALIFORNIA: Thank you. DOBBS: You've called for an investigation. What is the likely outcome? How soon, if there is to be one, would you expect it to occur?

MILLER: Well, we would hope that the inspector general would heed our letter for an investigation and do it right away.

Obviously, they have set up a situation where Wal-Mart employees who may file a labor grievance now and in the future are in the situation where that labor grievance will be passed right on to Wal- Mart, bypassing essentially the Department of Labor as an independent arbiter.

So people's rights are being compromised on a daily basis. So we would hope the inspector general would give some real urgency to our request for an inspection of this deal.

DOBBS: You've singled out Wal-Mart, but, as we have reported here tonight, Foot Locker, other companies are also being provided the very same privilege, if you will. Does that also concern you?

MILLER: What concerns me here is the character of the employer, not the size, not the industry, but the character of the employer. You have -- with Wal-Mart, you have a repeat offender, a habitual repeat offender on labor violations, on overtime, on job discrimination, on illegal aliens, on discrimination, on advancement that have impacted tens of thousands of workers, the Wal-Mart employees.

To then now take this labor settlement and draft that into a nationwide agreement where Wal-Mart will get to attend to the labor grievances against it by its employees -- I think there's nothing in Wal-Mart's record to suggest that they have earned that kind of right.

I don't know the labor records of Foot Locker and Sears and others that have been involved in this, but, in this particular case, we have an egregious record against working men and women in this country.

DOBBS: Congressman Miller, let's step back just for a second and say that Wal-Mart has committed a violation. They are given notice by the Department of Labor. They correct it in that two-week period. That's a good thing, is it not?

MILLER: Well, that could be a good thing. We have compliance agreements throughout all different kinds of the agencies in the government, but in this case...

First of all, when were they going to tell the employees of Wal- Mart that this agreement had been arrived at, and when were they going to tell the employees what kind of labor agreements are covered? It appears from the e-mail in the Labor Department and the agreement that it covers all labor violations.

And it also -- the question is -- you send a complaint to the Department of Labor, and you forward them this complaint, and, the next thing you know, they're sending it to the home office. There's a real chilling effect here on these workers. These workers don't have a union, they don't have an organization to protect them, many of them are low-income, and this is...

DOBBS: Or are below legal age, in some cases.

MILLER: In this case, they're below legal age...

DOBBS: Congressman...

MILLER: ... or they're not in this country legally.

DOBBS: Congressman, in that regard, let's take a look at a statement from Wal-Mart today reacting to your call for an investigation and criticism of Wal-Mart.

"Congressman Miller has very strong ties to organized labor, and this is just another example of him trying to discredit us on their behalf, thinking people will see it for what it is."

Your reaction?

MILLER: Well, first of all, there's no organized labor in Wal- Mart. They can -- they don't have any unions in Wal-Mart. Organized labor gets nothing out of this.

This was brought to me by people in the Department of Labor that said there's something very wrong here when you look at the record of this employer, you look at the record of grievances against it.

And now they take this settlement where the -- you know, they don't admit or deny anything, but they settle for $135,000 and they bootstrap that into a nationwide agreement where they get first cut at the complaints of their employees.

DOBBS: Well, let me ask you this. Because we are in a situation in this country, in our economy, in our society in which corporate America -- and U.S. multinationals, in particular -- have unprecedented political power, influence in your party, influence in the Republican Party, domination on Capitol Hill and certainly the White House, organized labor is an impotent force by all measures here today. What countervailing influence is there for the middle class, for working men and women in this country period?

MILLER; Well, there's -- you know, there's public officials like myself who are concerned about the middle class, about their standard of living and their ability to have wages and hours and working conditions that allow them to support their familiar and provide health care and education.

There's labor organizations that watch out for these people. But, every time one of these labor organizations approaches a Wal- Mart, they fire the workers who are involved it. They make their life very difficult. We just saw, I believe it is in Canada, where they got a right to organize and Wal-Mart closed the whole store. So what chance do these people have? Now they have the inside track in the Department of Labor, the last independent party between Wal-Mart's employment practices and their employees, and that's now been taken away because the home office gets the first cut at your grievance. These are -- these people have no real protections in these jobs.

What does that tell them about filing a grievance, that people in the home office are going to look for this, they're going to tell your supervisor, your store manager, and they're going to come looking for you.

DOBBS: Congressman George Miller, we thank you for being here.

MILLER: It's not fair.

DOBBS: We'll follow, of course, the response from the inspector general, the Department of Labor to your call for an investigation. Thank you.

MILLER: Thank you.

DOBBS: An amazing story of survival tonight out of Colorado where six people suffered only minor injuries after plunging 400 feet into a ravine while in a mini van.

The group was driving in the Colorado Rockies when they hit black ice on the road. They slid toward a drop-off where there was no guard rail, and their vehicle, of course, went over the ledge. Luckily, all six were wearing their seat belts.

Only one passenger was carried out on a stretcher and was briefly -- briefly -- hospitalized. The rest incredibly and fortunately walked away with only some bruises.

Coming up next, American "Culture in Decline." Teenagers abusing one new drug at an alarming rate. Our special report is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: In our series of special reports this week, we focus on "Culture in Decline." Drug use among teenagers is in decline overall, but the use and availability of certain dangerous drugs is on the rise. Teenagers are abusing and becoming addicted to prescription drugs like OxyContin at alarmingly young ages and at alarmingly high rates.

Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Maggie started using marijuana when she was 10 years old. She moved up to OxyContin and other prescription drugs, then later became hooked on methamphetamine and even harder drugs.

MAGGIE, 16, RECOVERING DRUG ADDICT: And I really didn't care whether I lived or died or whether my friends lived or died, as long as I was high and -- that's all I really cared about, was drugs.

SYLVESTER: She is now a 16-year-old student at Sobriety High, a school for recovering teen addicts in Minnesota. Her story may sound extreme, but a surprising 51 percent of all high school seniors report having tried an illicit drug in their lifetime, according to a University of Michigan study. In fact, American students have one of the highest rates of illegal drug use in the world.

PROF. LLOYD JOHNSTON, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: They have a lot of discretionary income. Many teens work and they also get allowances, of course, so they have the opportunity to use and they have the means to use.

SYLVESTER: Use of marijuana, cocaine, heroin and ecstasy have been trending downward in the last three years, but use of prescription drugs, like OxyContin, is up. One in 20 high school seniors reported abusing the drug last year. More teens are also using steroids, made popular by professional athletes, and an increasing number of eighth graders are experimenting with inhalants.

CRAIG SWANSON, SOBRIETY HIGH: I think the numbers tell us that about four out of 10 kids that experiment with a drug, who are experimenting at 14 or under, become addicted. That's 40 percent.

SYLVESTER: Sobriety High has an 80 percent success rate, but it catches just a mere fraction of the teenagers in Minnesota addicted to drugs.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SYLVESTER: Funding for drug prevention programs has been cut by a third in President Bush's 2006 budget. Among the programs on the chopping block: school-based drug prevention programs. States and cities will be asked to pick up more of the costs of these programs -- Lou.

DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much.

Lisa Sylvester from Washington.

This is the biggest night of the year for serious, serious dog lovers. The 129th Annual Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show concluding tonight here in New York City, celebrating the best of the breeds. More than 2,500 dogs from 165 breeds are competing in the show. Chihuahuas, other dogs. You're looking at a smooth-coat Chihuahua named Webster who competed in the toy category. The best in show award will be handed out tonight.

Next, one of the country's best-known companies is teaming up with organizations who want to legalize illegal aliens.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Here now for more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs. DOBBS: In just a moment here, two members of Congress who want to give more rights to half a million -- at least half a million -- illegal aliens in this country by granting them legal status. They'll be our guests next.

But, first, these important stories tonight.

A 15-year-old South Carolina boy tonight has been sentenced to 30 years in prison for killing his grandparents. The jury rejected defense arguments the boy was influenced by the antidepressant Zoloft at the time of the murders.

In another high-profile court case, defrocked priest Paul Shanley was sentenced for up to 15 years in prison for sexually abusing a boy in his parish decades ago. The 74-year-old priest was convicted last week on two counts of rape and two counts of indecent assault on a child.

And the Food and Drug Administration today announced it's creating an independent drug safety oversight board to monitor drugs on the market after they've been approved. Senator Chuck Grassley calling for that board for some time now and today having his way. The FDA has faced mounting criticism for reacting too slowly to reports on dangerous drugs, including Vioxx and Celebrex. Those drugs were linked to an increased risk of heart attack and stroke.

Home Depot, this country's biggest home improvement retailer, today announced plans to hire 20,000 new workers. What makes this initiative different is that Home Depot says it prefers to hire Spanish-speaking workers for those jobs. And even more surprising, Home Depot's partners in the campaign include groups that advocate amnesty for illegal aliens and U.S. driver's licenses for illegals.

Bill Tucker reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL TUCKER, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Home Depot is no stranger to marketing to the Hispanic marketplace. The home of the Los Angeles Major League soccer team is sponsored by Home Depot. Home Depot also sponsors the Mexican national soccer team.

And now the company is taking its relationship with the Hispanic community in a new direction. Home Depot wants to create 20,000 new jobs this year, and it's partnering with an array of Hispanic groups, hoping that they will help recruit the Hispanic bilingual workers.

DENNIS DONOVAN, HOME DEPOT: We see this as a real opportunity to work with these prominent Hispanic organizations, to tap into their strong networks of relationships and local offices that will not only help us fill our jobs, but also create employment opportunities.

TUCKER: The groups in turn will promote Home Depot.

ALFONSO MARTINEZ, HISPANIC ASSOCIATION ON CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY: One of the obvious outcomes of this is that Home Depot will earn the trust of the Hispanic community, which is such an important aspects for corporations reaching out to the Hispanic community.

Reporter: That alliance is made up of the ASPIRA association, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, SER-Jobs for Progress National, and the National Council of La Raza.

La Raza's involvement raises some eyebrows, because it is a politically active group on illegal immigration issues.

MARK KRIKORIAN, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: It is a purely political organization and, frankly, a pretty radical one. And it seems an odd choice for Home Depot, if their objective really is just to get the word out among Hispanic legal immigrants and citizens that they want to see more job applications.

TUCKER: La Raza admits this is the beginning of what it hopes is a long relationship.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TUCKER: The Home Depot says the jobs that it creates are open to everyone. And the company does note that just last year it announced two similar hiring initiatives with the American Association of Retired People to bring in senior citizens and, Lou, also with the Department of Defense to bring in veterans and their spouses.

DOBBS: To be clear, has Home Depot said under no circumstances will it be hiring illegal aliens?

TUCKER: Yes.

DOBBS: That's a pretty good start right there. Bill Tucker, thank you.

President Bush supports a plan to legalize millions of illegal aliens in the country. Now two leading members of Congress want to grant legal status to at least half a million illegal farm workers.

The Ag Jobs Bill was first introduced in the Senate in 2003, placed on the calendar in 2004, but last year's Senate vote was delayed until after the presidential election.

Now, Senator Larry Craig of Idaho has reintroduced the bill in the Senate. Congressman Howard Berman of California will reintroduce the measure in the House. They join us tonight from Capitol Hill.

Gentlemen, good to have you with us.

SEN. LARRY CRAIG (R), IDAHO: Lou, good to be here.

REP. HOWARD BERMAN (D), CALIFORNIA: Same.

DOBBS: Let me begin with you, if I may, Senator. Half a million undocumented workers, illegal aliens, migrant workers in this country. Why in the world should they be given legal status, move to the front of any line?

CRAIG: Well, Lou, there are between eight and 12 million undocumented illegal workers in this country. And I think it's incumbent upon us to reform the immigration laws and to try to identify who those people are and determine whether they should be here, whether they're felons or all of that, and to recognize that in agriculture there could be well more than a half a million.

And we would want them to come forward, and for coming forward, we would give them an opportunity to earn a legal status. Not give it to them, not grant it to them automatically, but ask them to toil for five or six years in the fields of America, or 360-plus days, if you will, to gain a status so they could continue to work.

DOBBS: Five or six years or how many days?

CRAIG: About 360 days is what it would represent. What we recognize is that is very important is that about 72 to 78 percent of the work force in American agriculture today that picks your food and brings it out of the field and processes it and takes it to your retail shelves are undocumented workers. It's a tragedy, and it is a bad law that has driven this.

DOBBS: Congressman Berman is one of those fellows who, in his youth, worked alongside those workers, actually in Senator Craig's home state. I know how hard these people work. I know the sacrifices they make, and I understand their motivation.

But at the same time how can you justify changing immigration law for one group of people within this country illegally?

BERMAN: Because, as a result of miserable wages, terrible conditions, back-breaking work, and a pattern of recruitment by growers and farm labor contractors over the past 30 years, the U.S. workers and the U.S. citizens have left the field of agricultural work. And I believe that you and your listeners all know that the notion that we're going to get U.S. workers back into agricultural labor is a myth.

The present situation is intolerable. It's exploitation. We don't know who's here. They're using false identification. And a system that has them come forward, requires them to continue to work in seasonal agriculture as a condition of getting their status adjusted, and preserves a food security, a food and agricultural industry in this country which would disappear if you could somehow deport those people, is in the public interest.

DOBBS: Congressman, Senator Craig, let me ask you. I mean, because you all talk as if this world is just one little fine strip at a time.

The fact is that American agriculture was supposed to industrialize and mechanize its crop-gathering and harvesting 35 years ago. There's nothing that Congress has done to incentivize it.

We provide $20 billion a year in agricultural subsidies, and you're going to say to us that that money should be used to support the granting of legal status to illegal aliens without an entire reform of the immigration law in this country and to move half a million people ahead so you can drive the interest of the very people, Congressman Berman, that you said have been effectively exploiting these people and not paying fair wages.

We have a system in this country, gentlemen, that I think you need -- I would just love to hear you rationalize agriculture in this country. Hard working men and women, U.S. citizens as well as migrant workers, many of whom, as you suggest, are illegal.

How the world can you justify this system? How can you continue to tinker with only an element of it?

CRAIG: Lou, it's interesting that you demonstrate by that statement you know very little about American agriculture. Have you ever picked apples out of a tree or cherries out of a tree? Or crops out of...

DOBBS: Congressman Craig, since you said it that way, let me tell you exactly what I've done. I've picked beets. I have carried potatoes. I've sacked them. I've stacked them. I have cut hay. I have stacked it, and I have carried it.

CRAIG: Then Lou...

DOBBS: And Congressman, I -- and I've harvested beans.

CRAIG: Lou, why would you suggest that we can mechanize all of that?

DOBBS: Now wait a minute. Congressman, you just made a statement rather accusatory. Now would you like to share with us your agricultural experience?

CRAIG: I think it was not accusatory and I think you deserve a response.

DOBBS: It was not accusatory, Senator. I asked you a simple question.

CRAIG: Well, the AFL-CIO and United Farm Workers and about 400 agricultural organizations came together to create what Howard Berman and I have introduced. We have a bipartisan and a very broad cross- section of American interest involved in this.

Why? Because we have a broken law. You can condemn agriculture if you want to.

DOBBS: I don't condemn it, Senator. As a matter of fact, I think you're condemning it.

CRAIG: No, I don't think I'm accusing anybody of anything.

DOBBS: Yes you are. You're condemning it, because you're not willing to answer a simple question. Why aren't you approaching agriculture in this country holistically? Take care of the farmer. Take care of the laborer. Take care of the consumer.

CRAIG: I'll let Howard talk to you about that.

DOBBS: I'm sorry? I'm sorry?

CRAIG: Howard, try him on.

BERMAN: Lou, I'm a city boy, but I think ...

DOBBS: Well, sir, apparently is Senator Craig.

CRAIG: No, I've farmed and ranched most of my life, Lou.

BERMAN: Your calculation is wrong.

DOBBS: Well, then give us -- give us your experience.

BERMAN: Let me just finish the sentence. The subsidies, by and large, don't go to perishable fruit and vegetables, labor-intensive agricultural industries. They go to the highly mechanized grains. That's where the huge -- and cotton that doesn't use a lot of labor and is not labor-intensive.

The people who are working in perishable fruits and vegetables are, as Senator Craig said, 70 percent to 80 percent undocumented.

The present situation, as you have just said, is intolerable. We have to do something. Give me a better solution and I'll take a look at it, but the present situation cannot stand.

DOBBS: Well, I just find it extraordinary. Senator Craig, let me give you...

CRAIG: Sure.

DOBBS: ... in all openness and warmth and humility an opportunity to tell us your experience in agriculture, because I think it's important.

CRAIG: Well, I appreciate that. First of all, I farmed and ranched all of my life up until about 1985. I was born and raised on a farm and ranch. We didn't hire Hispanic workers. We did the work ourselves.

Just below us in the row-crop industry and the kind of agriculture industry that Howard has so clearly explained to you, that is still a hand, backbreaking, intensive kind of agriculture that employs about 1.6 million of the work force.

DOBBS: You've picked beans. You have picked potatoes and sacked them, I'm sure.

CRAIG: No, I've not. No, I have not.

DOBBS: Because that's really backbreaking. The apple picking -- you're a cowboy, so I'll tell you what. There are not many migrant workers working in the cattle business.

CRAIG: You're right. There are not.

DOBBS: And I worked for a fellow there in your state by the name of Jack Simplot (ph).

CRAIG: I know Jack well.

DOBBS: At the Peco (ph) Ranch, running about 10,000 head of cattle. We didn't have many migrant workers there. They're in the field.

CRAIG: Not on that particular industry.

DOBBS: Right.

CRAIG: But on the potato side of the Simplot (ph) operation, there were a good many.

DOBBS: Absolutely. Absolutely. Now my question is this: with $20 billion in subsidies to the agriculture industry in this country, why would you continue to perpetuate the fiction that the poor farmer, the poor rancher, is totally dependent on migrants labor? The fact -- let me finish.

The consumer in this country gets the best bargain in the world for our food, on every level.

CRAIG: That they do. That they do.

DOBBS: Now, you're going to make a decision about one element of it. Why not start looking at agriculture honestly? Why do we have to continue to hear this stuff out of Washington with one element after another?

Talk about border security, talk about identification, talk about immigration reform, but supporting further support by the taxpayer of the agriculture industry is just wrong-headed.

CRAIG: OK, Lou, you've made your political statement.

DOBBS: It's not a political statement. It's neither Republican nor Democrat.

CRAIG: Now wait a moment. My turn, Lou, my turn. My turn.

DOBBS: Well, it's your turn.

CRAIG: It's a very accusatory statement. I'll tell you what we'll do. We'll get out the militia. We'll get out the National Guard. We'll round up all 1.6 million ag workers and take them out of the country.

And then we'll go to New York City, and we'll say to the poor and the downtrodden there, you come work for agriculture for $8, $10, $12 an hour. Leave your children home. Travel the migrant circuit for the year and harvest the crops of American agriculture and see what happens to the supermarket shelves.

My guess is you'll not buy a fresh piece of fruit after that scenario. That's a reality we deal with here. Lou, I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm saying...

DOBBS: Let's talk about right or wrong.

CRAIG: I'm saying -- I'm saying...

DOBBS: That's precisely the issue here, right or wrong.

CRAIG: I'm saying -- well, Lou, you can be accusatory and you can make your political statements. Find us a solution.

Howard and I have offered up a solution. We're asking our colleagues to take a look at it. We've got broad-based support from American agriculture and from American farm workers.

I agree with Howard. It has been not a process that we were proud of. And now we're trying to correct it. You're talking in a condemning way. I think that is grossly unfair. Come work with us to solve a problem, not to condemn it.

DOBBS¨ Congressman, you get the last word.

BERMAN: I agree with Senator Craig.

DOBBS: I thought you might.

CRAIG: Thank you, Howard.

DOBBS: Well, I disagree with you both on it. Because -- I think your heart's in the right place.

BERMAN: Do you have a better idea, though, Lou? Do you have a better idea?

DOBBS: I've got a couple, but you know what, the folks aren't going to listen to this one right now, because we're out of time. I'm going to share it with you, and then we'll talk about it in the days ahead, if you want to hear it.

BERMAN: OK.

DOBBS: You've got to be sincere. You really want to hear it, don't you, Senator?

BERMAN: I really want to -- I want the best idea.

DOBBS: You got it.

CRAIG: Lou, we would come back on and give you the last word, how's that?

DOBBS: You've got a deal.

CRAIG: All right.

DOBBS: Thank you both for being here.

We want to hear from you on this important issue. Do you support legislation that would grant illegal farm workers in this country legal status? Yes or no? Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results later.

Next, the inspiring story of the first amputee to return to active military duty on his way to Iraq.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: We report here as extensively as possible about the many heroes in our military who have been wounded in combat and Iraq and Afghanistan. Tonight, the astonishing story of an Army captain who lost a foot in a land mine explosion in Iraq, and who is returning to the battlefield for a second tour.

Captain David Rozelle shares his story in his new book, "Back in Action: An American Soldier's Story of Courage, Faith and Fortitude." And you can underline "courage, faith and fortitude."

Captain David Rozelle is here with us tonight.

Captain, thanks for being here.

CAPT. DAVID ROZELLE, AUTHOR, "BACK IN ACTION": Thanks for having me. I'm glad to be here.

DOBBS: An extraordinary life that you're leading, extraordinary service in Iraq. Tell our audience how you lost your right foot.

ROZELLE: I was traveling down a dirt road on the way to teach the first police academy in Heet (ph), Iraq, which was the area that I was in charge of. And en route, along that alternate route of the dirt road there, I hit a land mine in a Humvee, and it destroyed my foot, basically took the right front end off the Humvee. And fortunately, we were going slow enough where it didn't take the rest of me up in the air as well.

DOBBS: In the book, you speak of a cookie cutter hole coming through the center of the Humvee. Those traveling with you in the Humvee, they escaped unhurt.

ROZELLE: Amazingly, because I had just stopped and started going again. We were not traveling at a speed where it would have detonated and gone off right underneath us. Fortunately, we slowed down and we were able to take it fairly easy, so most of the blast went up to the vehicle. And, you know, there was barely a scratch on the other two men. So we were very lucky.

DOBBS: Your book, in which you -- the captain's wife and young son hearing about it for the first time, it's a remarkable chapter. What was your reaction? What was your thoughts as you had to tell your wife this had occurred? ROZELLE: The hardest thing for me was -- was not having her there and her not knowing, and that I could have died. To imagine her being notified and going through that process would have been horrific.

But then to have to tell my wife that I was injured. You know, that's really something I struggled with when I was laying there, until she said the words, "I know," and it just allowed me just release and made it OK, because she already knew.

And the Army does the right thing. They let the wives know the right way with the right people and have the right professionals there to help out. And we're very lucky right now.

DOBBS: And your wife gave a pretty good tribute to the squadron leader's wife, too.

ROZELLE: Yes.

DOBBS: Your -- those who have not known a man or woman who's lost a leg or limb, people don't realize, I think, in many cases just how much guts you've got to have to deal with it, to bring -- to deal with the prosthetic.

The people -- the people I've known who have had to deal with this, they've had to struggle against the way in which the amputation took place, the way in which it heals. Sometimes it's an extraordinary year-after-year process.

Tell us how quickly, how difficult, how much work it was to deal with that prosthetic.

ROZELLE: Walter Reed actually went back and studied me, because I was one of the first guys, the top 10 -- or first 10, not top 10, to actually become an amputee.

And I was about six months ahead of schedule the entire time, whether it was, you know, getting back to skiing again, to running again, to starting to do triathlons. And then within 14 months of my injury to do a triathlon, so -- I mean, then, you know, and then run the New York Marathon.

So -- so absolutely my sports rehabilitation is the thing that got me back on the feet the fastest and really was the thing that prepared me to come back into active service and within a year of my injury take another cavalry troop and be prepared within the next two weeks to receive orders to again go to Iraq.

DOBBS: You make the point that you wanted to be fit for duty again. You've established that. You've done that.

ROZELLE: Yes, sir.

DOBBS: Not necessarily to go back to Iraq. You'll be back, as I understand it, at the beginning of next month? Is that...

ROZELLE: That's fairly accurate. The beginning of March is as well as we can say right now.

And, you know, an American soldier, you know, prays for peace but prepares for war. And you know, we shouldn't be perceived as a -- as a war mongering force, because these young men and women out here that are serving their country, they want to provide freedom for the people of Iraq, and they're committed to it.

And you know, I certainly -- I'm certainly not excited about going back, but it does bring full circle my injury, my recovery, and to help out the troops that are there forward now.

DOBBS: Captain, we thank you for your service, your bravery, your example.

ROZELLE: Thank you.

DOBBS: And for being here. We wish you all the very best.

ROZELLE: My pleasure.

DOBBS: Thank you.

We'll continue in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: A federal appellate panel today said two reporters should be jailed for refusing to reveal their confidential sources. Judith Miller of "The New York Times" and Matt Cooper of "TIME" magazine have been ordered to serve 18 months in jail unless they agree to testify at a grand jury investigation into the leak of a CIA agent's name.

A three-judge panel today upheld the lower court decision that the reporters are not protected by the First Amendment.

I'm joined now by Judith Miller, reporter for "The New York Times."

Judith, good to have you here. I know you've got to be disappointed in this decision, along with Matt Cooper, and all of us who are concerned about the rights of the public to know. Are you surprised by today's decision?

JUDITH MILLER, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Well, I guess maybe I'm just very optimistic, but I was hopeful that at least we would have had one of the three judges who would see the law our way. But it was -- they were thoughtful decisions, but of course I'm disappointed, but not really surprised.

DOBBS: To be clear for our audience, you did not publish on the Valerie Plame story.

MILLER: No.

DOBBS: You -- and it makes it remarkable. Matt Cooper, in point of fact, did participate and agree to cooperate in testimony before the grand jury, and then that was extended, and at point at which he objected to further -- further involvement, I'll put it that way, or refusing to reveal his sources.

What can be done now?

MILLER: Well, now we just have to appeal, and the papers -- our respective papers, "TIME" and "The New York Times," fully intend to do that. We'll go through this legal drama. The play will continue. And we will hope that either the full appellate court or the Supreme Court will eventually see the law our way.

DOBBS: You have basically 45 days to appeal. You will be appealing.

MILLER: Yes.

DOBBS: And is there a definite grounds upon which to appeal? Or is it simply -- explain that process if you would, quickly.

MILLER: Well, I think -- you know, fortunately or unfortunately, I'm not a lawyer.

DOBBS: Right.

MILLER: But I think the grounds that we're going to ask the judges to consider is, is there really a privilege that's very similar to a clergyman's privilege or a doctor's privilege or a spouse's privilege, or as of 1996, a psychotherapist privilege not to appear before grand juries? And in each case the society has decided that...

DOBBS: I would -- I would say to you as a journalist. I have a troubling -- because I feel we're in a craft, not a profession. So I have a little trouble with clergy. I have a little trouble with physicians as comparables, if you will. But a social worker I think comes close, perhaps.

The fact is, with 31 states with shield laws or some sort of protection.

MILLER: Thirty-nine actually.

DOBBS: Can the federal government -- can the federal government act in time to be helpful to you and to Matt Cooper and to the craft?

MILLER: I don't know if they really can, but I do know this. Raising these issues now, Lou, will focus the attention of the Congress, we hope, on the need for a shield law, so that this kind of situation doesn't arise again.

Right now we have a situation in which 49 states have said journalists really shouldn't have to reveal their confidential sources before grand juries. The federal standard is now 30 years old. And what we're saying is federal law ought to be consistent with what the states want.

DOBBS: I would like, if you would, to show our audience today's opinion, judgment from the -- from the appellate court, and the part pertaining to you from one of the panel judges.

MILLER: Well, one of the judges ruled that he was balancing the prosecutor's need to have information against the public's right to know. And he said, with respect to Miller, and then he did this, and this, and then.

DOBBS: Zoom in on this. Showing you blank pages in a court opinion.

MILLER: And this -- in a court opinion. And then regarding Cooper, and once again there are more pages. Nine pages of his decision are redacted. They're not there...

DOBBS: In your case, you didn't publish, and we don't know why the judge decided as he did.

MILLER: Exactly. I'm in a position where I may be going to jail for reasons that the judges wouldn't tell me.

DOBBS: Judith Miller, we thank you for being here.

MILLER: Thank you for having me.

DOBBS: And we wish you the best.

MILLER: Thanks, Lou.

DOBBS: Still ahead here, the results of our poll tonight and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow. Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight overwhelming. Ninety-one percent of you say you do not support legislation that would grant illegal farm workers in this country legal status.

By the way, Congressman Berman, Senator Craig, our guests here tonight, have agreed to be back with us the next couple of nights to discuss this issue.

Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us tomorrow. For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" coming up next on CNN.

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