Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Interview With Illinois Senator Richard Durbin; Bush Administration Pushes Free Trade
Aired September 12, 2007 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight: Deported illegal alien Elvira Arellano is at it again. She is using her son as a pawn to try to impose illegal alien amnesty on the American people.
Also, the White House launches a new campaign to force Congress to accept its so-called free trade agenda, at the expense of our middle class.
And the Bush administration wants to allow Mexican trucks unlimited access to our roads. But that hit a roadblock in the Senate. Among our guests, Senator Dick Durbin. Today, his committee heard alarming testimony about the safety of toy imports from communist China -- all of that, much more, straight ahead tonight.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT: news, debate, and opinion for Tuesday (sic), September 12.
Live from New York, sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Kitty Pilgrim.
PILGRIM: Good evening, everybody.
The Democratic leadership in the Senate today said plans to withdraw 30,000 of our troops from Iraq by next summer are -- quote -- "unacceptable."
Senate Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid said such a reduction is neither a drawdown, nor a change in mission. The White House, though, insisted U.S. troops in Iraq are changing their mission. President Bush is expected to strongly defend his war strategy in a prime-time speech to the nation tomorrow night.
We begin with a report from Dana Bash on Capitol Hill -- Dana.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DANA BASH, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Kitty, Democrats hit the Iraq's policy hard today, hoping to get out ahead of his speech tomorrow night and set the stage for yet another Iraq war debate in the Senate next week.
(voice-over): Democrats are engaged in a full-court press to debunk the notion that President Bush's plan to bring the extra 30,000 surge troops home by next summer is any shift in strategy.
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: His plan is neither a drawdown, nor a change in mission that we need. SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Again, we're told that progress is upon us. Again, we're asked to hold our breath a little longer.
SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (D-NY), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Taking credit for this troop reduction is like taking credit for the sun coming up in the morning.
BASH: In the nine months since taking control of Congress, Senate Democrats have been unable to find enough Republican votes to force a change in war policy, and the frustrated Democratic leader issued a challenge.
REID: So I call on the senate republicans to not walk lockstep as they have with the president for years in this war.
BASH: Despite that tough talk, behind the scenes, Democrats who just this summer insisted on a hard withdrawal deadline are now bowing to reality, scrambling for compromise with Republicans. And there are signs more Republicans may vote for a concrete withdrawal plan.
Republican Lisa Murkowski told CNN she had been against timelines until General Petraeus outlined his plan to bring 30,000 troops home. "It is, in fact, kind of a soft timeline," Murkowski said. "I will tell you it's caused me to step back from what I have said in the past."
Senators in both parties are bouncing around half-a-dozen ideas for consensus, including setting a goal instead of a deadline for bringing combat troops home. But without a withdrawal date, Democrats risk losing votes from senators in their own party, especially presidential candidates.
OBAMA: It appears clear to me that the president is not going to compromise, short of the Congress forcing him to accept a shorter timetable. And, absent that, we're essentially engaging in a bunch of symbolic action here.
BASH (on camera): But Democratic leaders are under so much pressure to pass Iraq legislation, they're much more willing to cut deals and do what it takes to show voters some success in forcing a change in the president's war policy -- Kitty.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Dana Bash reporting from Capitol Hill.
The White House today declared that Democrats are trying to ignore the successes of the surge. White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said U.S. strategy in Iraq is working in ways that have surprised many in this country.
Ed Henry reports from the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On his last day at the White House podium, the Tony Snow Show came to a close with the same old mix of certainty that things are getting better in Iraq and yet uncertainty about when it will over.
TONY SNOW, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: To say you don't know when a war is going to end doesn't mean that you don't think it is going to end.
HENRY: Much like the show began 16 months ago.
SNOW: As the Iraqis become more capable to assume the lead combat roles and take over primary combat responsibilities, things obviously are going to change, but we're going to have to wait to see when that actually happens.
HENRY: Snow's personal appearance has changed noticeably since then because of his courageous battle with cancer. What's remained constant is his spinning the war with theatrics.
SNOW: All right. I give up. I give up.
HENRY: He plowed ahead, however, struggling to answer how a president who has insisted timelines for withdrawing troops would help the enemy now has a timeline to withdraw up to 30,000 troops by next summer, or how the administration can claim success when they're bringing the U.S. footprint down to 130,000 troops, the same as it was in December 2006.
SNOW: You don't have the same country you had in 2006. You're assuming that nothing has changed. The whole -- what General Petraeus is saying is that you are able to move forces out as a result of success, not simply -- this is not an exercise to get to a number.
HENRY: Pressed on Democratic charges that Mr. Bush has an open- ended commitment in Iraq, Snow punched back.
SNOW: What I'm arguing is, you might want to take the blinders off and take a look at what's going on, because there have been significant improvements.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HENRY: Snow said the president has been through more than 30 -- more than 20 drafts, rather, of Thursday's big-prime time speech to the nation that will be from the Oval Office. A lot of tinkering perhaps because Mr. Bush knows with some gains on security, but little progress from the Iraqi government, there's going to a tough sales job ahead -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: That's the truth. Thanks very much, Ed Henry.
Now, one day after completing his Capitol Hill testimony, General David Petraeus again accused Iran of meddling in Iraq. The general told our Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr that there is no question Iranian weapons are used to kill our troops. Now, Barbara Starr joins me now with more on what General Petraeus had to say -- Barbara.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kitty, General Petraeus likes to say he's a realist, not an optimist, when it comes to Iraq. And that is the man we sat down with earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
STARR (voice-over): After a national press conference and two days of congressional testimony, a visibly tired General David Petraeus sat down with CNN to discuss not just the war, but how the troops are doing and how much more combat they can take.
GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS, COMMANDING GENERAL OF THE MULTI-NATIONAL FORCE-IRAQ: Well, it's a tough call, Barbara. And, candidly -- and I know I'm not carrying a rucksack these days, but I have actually been deployed, I think it's coming up on about four out of the last six years. So, my family is familiar with certainly at least the separation piece of this.
We're particularly concerned, frankly, about the younger members of the force.
STARR: As he routinely travels and meets troops in Iraq, he gets their views firsthand.
PETRAEUS: No one has been happy about the 15-month tour, and they make no bones about it. I don't make any bones about it.
STARR: In fact, he says, the stress of the long tour is part of the reason he has recommended sending some of the surge troops home. But he doesn't waver from the view the U.S. can't let Iraq become a terror safe haven.
PETRAEUS: Certainly, that's one of those areas in which we would have enormous concern were our objectives not achieved in that country, also concerns about potential Iranian influence, a humanitarian disaster of enormous proportions.
STARR: He says there have been recent communications from senior al Qaeda leaders to al Qaeda members in Iraq, and Iran remains a threat.
PETRAEUS: We have no question whatsoever about Iranian weapons being used to kill our soldiers. In fact, we have the remnants of .240-millimeter rocket that hit one of our camps yesterday and caused a number of -- caused -- wounded a number of our soldiers.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
STARR: Kitty, while general Petraeus says he does see security progress in Iraq, he says the situation remains very fragile and in fact he says it all could still crack apart -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Barbara Starr. Well, Iran's ambassador to Iraq today said U.S. assertions that Tehran is arming Shiite terrorists are -- quote -- "irresponsible and unreal" -- unquote.
The ambassador described the Petraeus-Crocker testimony to Congress as theatrical. And he made his remarks in an exclusive interview with CNN's Michael Ware in Baghdad.
Michael Ware joins us now live from Baghdad.
And, Michael, what exactly did the ambassador say about Iran's links to the Shiite groups in Iraq?
MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kitty, obviously, he denied those links.
He says, yes, we had connections with every group in this country. But we're not supplying them weapons.
Indeed, he threw down the gauntlet to the United States. He said, if we're supplying weapons to these Shia militias, prove it. He said, we have seen no evidence from America through channels, and invited Washington to provide evidence through the Swiss Embassy in Tehran.
He then turned the tables and said, well, as a matter of fact, Iran has evidence of America arming and supporting militias opposed to the government in Iran itself, speaking of Kurdish and Baluch separatist groups.
He said, we're ready to give that evidence to the Swiss Embassy. Are you ready to give us your evidence? He is saying there is none that exists. He said, the occupation has to end. President Bush's strategy to bring the terrorists in here and kill them is working. He said it's turned into a terrorist safe haven. And he said, don't touch the Maliki government. Iran is under an obligation to protect it, and we will.
He also said, American must abandon the policy of bringing back the murders of the Baath Party. He is referring to the successful Anbar tribes program. And he finished off by saying, we don't want conflict, but we're not afraid of it -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Yes, that's a disturbing comment. What did he say specifically about the Petraeus-Crocker testimony on Capitol Hill, Michael?
WARE: Well, he said that that was, as you said, theatrics. He said it was -- basically, it was lacking substance and it was a matter of wild accusations, in his view, despite whatever evidence has been mounted.
And he says it was designed purely for a domestic audience. He said it was serving particular interests. And he found it easy just to bat the allegations away, defying America to prove that he is wrong. And, Kitty, what this really does, it gives America a taste of what it's really in for here in Iraq. General Petraeus flagged Iran. Iran really is the name of the game now. They're certainly the long game. You're always going to have an al Qaeda problem, but shifting the Sunni Baathist, that has helped that.
Iran still owns this country. And Iran is saying, we have got everything in our favor. We don't owe you a thing.
And they're not offering America any assistance whatever. Indeed, they are promising that , we will step in and arm and equip the Shia-dominated Iraqi government, if you don't. Just get out of the region, let us fix it, is what he says.
PILGRIM: Michael, there are reports that I wanted to ask you about that U.S. officials are stepping up their efforts to form a pact with some of the Iraqi Shiite militia groups, specifically Muqtada al- Sadr's group, which holds a very dominant position in Baghdad and has links to Iran.
Are you hearing these reports and what do you make of these stories?
WARE: Well, that's been going on for well over a year that I personally know of. And I actually have reason to believe it's been going on, under various American leadership here, from Ambassador Negroponte to Ambassador Khalilzad, and now under Ambassador Crocker.
The U.S. administration, whether it admitted it at the time or not, has been reaching out. And, in fact, the American Embassy has essentially set up a Muqtada desk quite some time ago. Its sole objective is to reach out to Muqtada, find out what it is that he wants and see if America can outbid Iran and win him over.
At the same time, it's like for ways to put pressure on him. But they have been dealing with Muqtada's organization for a long time, like they had been with the Sunni insurgents, when they said they weren't, and a whole host of other people -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: you know, you bring up the reaching out to the Sunnis in Anbar Province. It is a sort of parallel effort, you could say.
But the short-term is for stability but long term, does this not open the door for Iranian influence?
WARE: Oh, absolutely. It opens the door and, yet, this is America's hedge against it.
Now, engaging the Sunni insurgents, what we're talking about here are the men who commanded Saddam's army and intelligence apparatus. Now, four years ago, they offered America a deal after the invasion. America rejected that. It took four years of war before both sides could agree, and we're now seeing the benefits of that.
These guys never liked al Qaeda. They offered to kill al Qaeda in '03. America said no. Now they say yes. And it's proving very effective. It serves American interests in a number of arenas, not just al Qaeda. It's also a stick with which to beat the Iraqi government. They're terrified of this program. So, it's trying to prod them into real action.
And these guys are rabidly anti-Iranian. They fought them in the '80s when America was their ally. They are willing to do it again. And America is using these Baathist insurgents as a hedge against Iranian influence. That's why the Iranian ambassador pointed to it so strongly and said stop doing this or there is going to be big trouble.
And he says, and if you continue to undermine the Maliki government -- and he cited this as an example -- there is going to be severe costs and it will effect U.S. security, he said -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Michael Ware. Thanks, Michael.
Well, the military tonight reported two more U.S. combat deaths in Iraq. Two Marines were killed in Al Anbar Province. That's west of Baghdad; 33 of our troops have been killed in Iraq so far this month.
Still to come, the pro-amnesty lobby at it again. Casey Wian will have the report.
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kitty, supporters of deported illegal alien Elvira Arellano became unruly on Capitol Hill today. Some were detained. Others say they will continue to push for illegal alien amnesty -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Casey. That report is coming up.
Also, White House efforts to allow Mexican trucks access to the entire United States, will those efforts hit a roadblock?
And, buyer, beware, troubling testimony on Capitol Hill about the safety of toys imported from communist China. We will have a special report.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: The Senate last night voted to cut off money for the program allowing Mexican trucks open access to U.S. highways.
Now, senators concerned about the plan called that vote a victory for the American people and public safety.
As Lisa Sylvester reports, administration officials criticized the vote. They called it a victory for protectionism.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Bush administration's trucking pilot program hit a rough road in the Senate. Senators voted 74 to 24 to cut off funding for the demonstration project that began last week. Senator Byron Dorgan who led the fight to kill the program said the vote would turn the tide on the rush to dismantle U.S. safety standards.
SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D), NORTH DAKOTA: This is about safety. We have developed standards in this country to provide basic safety for the American people, and if you want to obliterate those standards, go ahead, but it won't be with my support and it won't be with my vote.
SYLVESTER: The program's proponents argue the United States was obligated to allow the Mexican trucks in as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement, and it would be a money-saver.
SEN. JON KYL (R), ARIZONA: It is much more efficient and much cheaper for American consumers if those Mexican trucks can travel in the United States.
SYLVESTER: But Senator Sherrod Brown said the only savings would come to large multinational corporations, with consumers and drivers getting the short stick.
SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D), OHIO: In both chambers in this Congress, we write trade deals that ignore consumers and coddle corporations and produce massive trade deficits and ensure unsafe imports and export U.S. jobs.
SYLVESTER: Consumer watchdog groups, labor unions and environmentalists lobbied against the program, noting Mexico's safety standards fall well short of the United States'.
ROBERT SHULL, PUBLIC CITIZEN: After the administration just barreled ahead with the pilot program, for the Senate to stand up and say enough is enough, we have to guarantee safety, that was really good news.
SYLVESTER: The federal agency overseeing the program issued a statement after the vote, calling it "a sad victory for the politics of fear and protectionism and a disappointing defeat for U.S. consumers and U.S. truck drivers."
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: The House of Representatives passed a similar amendment to the transportation appropriations bill in late July. Those two bills will now head to the conference committee.
Now, the president has threatened to veto the legislation, not because of the trucking provision, but because of the cost, $4 billion more than the president requested -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Lisa Sylvester.
Well, deported former illegal alien Elvira Arellano today continued her campaign for amnesty for herself and millions of other illegal aliens in the United States. And Arellano's 8-year-old son was in Washington brought there by open-border and amnesty advocates used as a pawn to lobby for illegal aliens.
Casey Wian has our report. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WIAN (voice-over): Elvira Arellano spoke to U.S. reporters through the border fence during a cross-border rally in Tijuana and San Diego.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She's only a mother that is looking for a better life for her son.
WIAN: The twice deported former fugitive illegal alien wants permission to return to the United States.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're asking for there to be no more raids, no more deportations.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just because Elvira Arellano was unfortunately, unjustly deported, the battle is not over.
WIAN: Meanwhile, Arellano's 8-year-old U.S. citizen son, Saulito, is in Washington, D.C. He scrambled up the steps of the Supreme Court, but will soon join his mother in Mexico to begin school.
Supporters are filing a class-action lawsuit, seeking to allow the illegal alien parents of U.S. citizen children to remain in the United States. They also lobbied Congress so aggressively, at least two protesters were taken into custody after an altercation with Capitol Hill police.
Walter Coleman is pastor of the Chicago church where the Arellanos sought sanctuary for a year.
REVEREND WALTER COLEMAN, ADALBERTO METHODIST CHURCH: The failure of the Congress to act has left 20 million people, that is 12 million undocumented, four million U.S. citizen children, four million legal and citizen spouses and extended family, have left them in a reign of terror, have left them really in an attempt at ethnic cleansing.
WIAN: Another group of amnesty advocates protested outside the Social Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices in Chicago. The Bush administration was scheduled to send out 140,000 Social Security number no-match letters this month, warning employers they had 90 days to resolve the discrepancies or fire improperly documented workers.
CARL ROSEN, UNITED ELECTRICAL WORKERS: We're here today to tell Social Security not to send out these new no-match letters. And we're here to tell them further that, if they do, they better be prepared for a large demonstration by many, many workers. Their no-match database is filled with literally millions of errors.
WIAN: A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Bush administration from sending the notices. Even so, the labor and immigrant rights groups claim workers are being fired because of older no-match letters.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WIAN: A spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security says the administration will vigorously challenge the judge's ruling and expects to prevail. As for a timetable to send out those letters, he says the wheels of justice some time turn slowly -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Casey, the rhetoric is absolutely incendiary on this. Ethnic cleansing? A reverend saying this is ethnic cleansing, it's unbelievable?
WIAN: It really is unbelievable. And I can't imagine that those protesters, who were on their way to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office, taped a letter to the door of her office, can't imagine they made any friends in Capitol Hill with that demonstration.
They basically overran the Capitol Hill Police for a brief period of time. They lost control of the situation briefly -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much, Casey Wian.
Well, up next, the Bush administration continues to push its free trade agenda, at the expense of our middle class. We will have a special report on that.
Also, the government's attempt to crack down on employers who hire illegal aliens, that is delayed.
And we will be joined by the president of one of the largest Hispanic groups, also a constitutional lawyer. And they are on opposite sides of this argument.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Oil prices today hit an all-time high. Worries about supplies pushed crude oil over $80 a barrel. That's for the first time ever.
Meanwhile, the U.S. dollar plummeted to an all-time low against the euro. And it now takes $1.39 to buy one euro.
The Bush administration continues to aggressively push its free trade agenda at the expense of our middle class. The commerce secretary today said pending free trade agreements with Peru, Colombia, and Panama present so-called great opportunities for the United States.
But, as Bill Tucker reports, after years of signing off on these free trade deals, some in Congress are now saying not so fast.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Peru's economy is smaller than the size of post-Katrina Louisiana, Colombia's the size of North Carolina, and Panama's economy the size of North Dakota's. Despite the relative small size of the economies, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez wants to ratify free trade agreements with those countries.
CARLOS GUTIERREZ, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE: We're working with Congress to do these as quickly as possible.
TUCKER: Not everyone in Congress is as enthusiastic. Some would like to slow down the process to better review the benefits of the agreements to the U.S. and its workers. But they can't. Trade agreements are currently subject to a rule known as fast track, where Congress cannot amend the agreements. They can only give it a vote of yes or no.
BROWN: Trade agreements are the only place in the entire Senate where you always only need 50 votes, where debate is restricted, where a senator can't put a hold on something to slow it down or actually to kill it in some cases, because the administration and the moneyed interests in this city, in Washington, are so enamored of these trade agreements.
TUCKER: Just how much of a market the economy represents for American products is not clear. Not only are they small; they're poor; 54 percent of Peru's population lives in poverty, 49 percent of Colombia's, and 37 percent of Panama's. In that, say critics of the administration's trade policies, should raise questions about the purpose of those agreements.
LORI WALLACH, GLOBAL TRADE WATCH: None of the Bush NAFTA expansions to Peru, Panama, Colombia are about creating new markets for U.S. exports. What they are about is setting up foreign investor rules that will create incentive to offshore U.S. jobs overseas and that limit things like our food safety standards when the products come back. That is what these agreements are really about, lower wages, fewer good jobs, and unsafe imports.
TUCKER: Commerce Secretary Gutierrez is leading a bipartisan congressional group for a three-day tour of the countries.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: The group left today. The purpose of the visit is to give congressional representatives a chance to see and ask questions for themselves.
Ironically, while that group is in Central and South America, a group of workers from Panama will be in Washington, Kitty. And they are here not in support of the Panamanian free trade agreement, but to protest it and stand against it with members of Congress.
PILGRIM: Interesting stuff.
Thanks very much.
Bill Tucker.
Well, coming up, a federal judge is blocking new rules to crack down on illegal immigration. Now two leading advocates of the opposite sides of the argument will join us to discuss it.
Also, Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama blast the Bush administration's plan for Iraq.
Do they have a plan of their own?
And anger and frustration in the first Congressional hearing on the safety of Chinese toy imports. The lawmaker who chaired that hearing, Dick Durbin, is our guest.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Alarming testimony on Capitol Hill today about serious failures in product safety. Now, Senators demanded answers and change from toy makers, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, retailers and Communist China.
Christine Romans has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Over the course of three hours on Capitol Hill, a litany of safety failures. It is not illegal to sell recalled toys. Fines are too small to be a deterrent. The acting chairwoman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission couldn't say what percentage of imported toys is even inspected. She tangled with Senators over whether her agency has been aggressive enough.
NANCY NORD, CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION: Our very tiny agency has been trying to work aggressively within our statutory constraints and within our resource constraints.
ROMANS: And there are concerns that safety promises have not been kept.
THOMAS MOORE, CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION: In August of '98, the toy manufacturers of America pledged to eliminate lead from their products. Yet, here we are nearly 10 years later, facing the same problems.
ROMANS: Even the world's largest toy maker, with a reputation for safety, admits it couldn't control its Chinese supply chain.
ROBERT ECKERT, CEO, MATTEL: Our systems were circumvented and our standards were violated. We were let down and we let you down.
ROMANS: Mattel says 65 percent of its toys are made in China. Toys"R"Us' CEO says 75 to 80 percent of the dolls, trains and action figures it sells are made in China. Both companies laid out strategies for protecting consumers.
But Senator Sam Brownback said manufacturers are asking for trouble by concentrating so much production in China -- a developing economy with lower standards.
ECKERT: We impose our standards regardless of what someone else does.
SEN. SAM BROWNBACK (R), KANSAS: But it didn't work.
ECKERT: Well, in the case of -- you're speaking specifically to lead paint testing...
BROWNBACK: Yes.
ECKERT: We didn't test sufficiently to test catch that product.
ROMANS: Still, the industry strongly defended its record and its Chinese suppliers.
CARTER KEITHLEY, PRESIDENT, TOY INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION: Toy-related injuries in the U.S. are extremely rare. Our proposals are not specific to toys made in any particular area of the world.
ROMANS: Yet hundreds of millions of dollars of toys have been recalled just in the past few months.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
ROMANS: Sally Greenberg from the Consumers Union testified toy manufacturers have been too trusting of their Chinese suppliers. She says that is dangerous in a country with no free press, endemic corruption and no real regulatory framework -- Kitty.
PILGRIM: These lapses in toy safety are indefensible any way you look at it.
Thanks very much.
Christine Romans.
That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll -- who do you believe is responsible for the safety of U.S. toys, the U.S. government, American toy companies, Chinese manufacturers?
Cast your vote at loudobbs.com.
We'll bring you the results a little bit later in the broadcast.
Senator Dick Durbin, who chaired today's hearing on toy safety, joined me earlier. And I asked him if bureaucracy, incompetence, lack of responsibility on the part of our government agencies are making the problem worse.
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D), ILLINOIS: I was really disappointed with the answers to the questions that I asked of Chairman Nord at the Consumer Products Safety Commission. They were very specific about the standards of safety that we're expecting from the Chinese.
You know, we know that this agency has been notoriously understaffed. It doesn't have the resources, the laboratory, even the building that they need. But equally important, they need leadership from the commission, where people are aggressively setting out to protect American families and consumers. I didn't see that today.
PILGRIM: You know, speaking of the laboratory, you asked Ms. Nord to describe the conditions. The CPSC laboratory is in utter disarray.
Do you think that they're capable of keeping American consumers safe with this kind of a chaotic situation in their labs?
DURBIN: I can just tell you that what they call a laboratory wouldn't pass any high school laboratory test. It is basically a work table with toys stacked up on it. One man -- one person has a responsibility for the safety of all the toys imported into the United States of America -- trillions of dollars worth of products.
And the bottom line is this agency has not been well funded. It has not been taken seriously. And, sadly, it's been populated by a lot of people who want to look the other way when we run into these safety issues.
PILGRIM: You know, I was also struck by Mr. Eckert's testimony, the head of Mattel. And he acknowledged a few of their vendors violated the rules. That seems like a gross understatement, given the magnitude of the recalls that have gone on.
DURBIN: Well, I'll say this about the toy industry and toy retailers. I've been encouraged by the response. You know, it is not uncommon to run into corporate denial, a kind of a defensive posture, tossing around phrases like "junk science" and dismissing the charges.
The toy industry and the toy retailers have taken the opposite approach. They've accepted the challenge and they know they have to, because American families and consumers need to have a dose of confidence before they are going to turn around and buy toys for this holiday season.
PILGRIM: We certainly applaud your efforts in holding these hearings. But it really is very glaringly obvious to the American public that lead has been banned in toys for 30 years and yet it's still turning up in American-produced toys.
How is that defensible, by any toy maker?
DURBIN: It's indefensible. For 30 years, we've have banned lead, and yet we still find it, primarily in products coming out of China. And I have to say, it isn't because lead paint is cheaper in China, it's because their workers are paid so little.
There are no environmental standards. There are very few government inspectors. And so as a result, you may get a cheaper toy, but it's going to be made under conditions which most American families wouldn't want to see.
PILGRIM: Senators Pryor and Klobuchar today have suggested perhaps legislation banning lead. But we already have rules in effect.
So would this do anything different? DURBIN: It's almost impossible to ban all lead. But I think establishing federal standards -- strict standards -- is a step in the right direction. And Senator Pryor of Arkansas is moving toward a reauthorization of the Consumer Products Safety Commission. We need to put some teeth, some bark and some bite in this agency, as Sally Greenberg at Consumers Union said.
We have to give them the authority and the tools and then demand the people to enforce the law.
PILGRIM: We have also been talking with officials in China. And the head of China's consumer product safety agency today vowed that the toys made in China will be safe in the Christmas season. We're so close to the Christmas season, some of these toys, presumably, have been manufactured already.
Do you think that the toys from China will be safe this Christmas season?
DURBIN: I can tell you that it's a misleading statement for the Chinese to say that, because the toys that we're likely to see on shelves in this holiday season were made a long time ago. They're sitting in warehouses and on ships. They're on their way to the stores.
What we need to do is to be honest about the toys on the shelves. And that means that the companies, the toy stores, as well as the manufacturers, have to accept the responsibility for testing. They've got to convince American consumers these toys are safe for their kids.
And, unfortunately, they do it in a climate of suspicion.
PILGRIM: Thanks very much for being with us today, Senator Durbin.
Thank you, sir.
DURBIN: Thank you, Kitty.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
PILGRIM: Coming up, Democratic candidates challenge the White House over troop withdrawals from Iraq. We'll have the details on that.
Also, protests over a government plan to crack down on employers of illegal alien workers. We will have a very lively debate on this issue.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Now, the presidential candidates went back on the campaign trail today. Iraq was the issue of the day. But it was not the only issue facing the candidates. Now joining me now to discuss the candidates, Iraq, some of the latest polls, the GOP infighting, also a fundraising embarrassment, two members of the best political team on television join us, our senior political correspondent, Candy Crowley, and our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider.
First, though, let's, for the benefit of our viewers, bring up what Senator Clinton had to say about Iraq.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (D), NEW YORK: Tomorrow, the president will go before the American people to announce that he is going to withdraw 30,000 troops from Iraq by next summer. We need to tell the president that is simply too little, too late.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), ILLINOIS: The important principle is this, that having put an additional 30,000 troops in, we now are still in the same position that we essentially were in June of 2006. We're at the same levels of violence. We're at the same levels of dysfunctionality when it comes to the Iraqi government. And the American people, at some point, have a right to ask from their leadership in Washington and from the president, when is enough enough?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PILGRIM: Now, as expected, Candy, this testimony on Capitol Hill puts Iraq front and center in the campaign trail.
What do you make of the rebuttals by Clinton and Obama?
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think with 87 percent of the Democratic Party opposed to the war, they were very predictable. I think this was a chance for the two of them to use sort of the wake of the Petraeus hearings to get out there in front of the president and to challenge him. This is the sort of thing, obviously, that the party wants to hear.
Now, the question, of course, is what happens when the Senate begins to vote, possibly next week, on some Iraq amendments?
PILGRIM: And, Bill, this also puts them on the hot seat of coming up with alternatives, correct?
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes. But they're saying they do have alternatives. Barack Obama spelled out an alternative of moving at least one brigade -- I think it was one or two brigades every month -- to move faster than President Bush has proposed. What they're saying is he's speaking to the nation tomorrow night, we're going out before he even speaks and tell you that we've got our own plans. PILGRIM: You know, Senator McCain is also on the trail, continuing to back up the administration's policy in Iraq.
And what he is calling on, what he calls a No Surrender Tour.
What's the political logic for this?
Let's listen to Senator McCain in Iowa today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: By generally any measurement, there's been significant progress. And those are hard to dispute. I know there will be people who will dispute those facts. But on the ground in Anbar Province and Baghdad and many other areas, there's still a lot of challenges and a lot of difficulties, but I have no doubt whatsoever that we're being quite successful.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PILGRIM: Candy, how does this position Mr. McCain at this point?
CROWLEY: Well, I mean, let's face it, this is the only position he can take at this point. He is riding this tiger. He has to stay on it.
What they are now trying to do within the McCain campaign is sell his leadership on this issue and on others saying, you know, look, you may not agree with him -- keeping in mind, of course, that three quarters of Republicans do agree with him. But he, nonetheless, has shown leadership in this. He is stuck with what he believes. So this is becoming -- you know, Iraq is becoming a leadership issue as far as John McCain is concerned.
PILGRIM: Will this become his strongest issue, Bill?
Will this be his only really strong issue?
SCHNEIDER: Well, it isn't going to be immigration in the Republican Party, I can tell you that. He's calculating that he with ride General Petraeus' coat tails among Republicans. I don't think General Petraeus' testimony made a bit of difference with Democrats and probably not even Independents. But I think that Republicans may have seen this as a strong statement. Their support for the war has been pretty strong throughout this year and it probably was shored up by what they heard from General Petraeus.
So McCain is making the calculation that he's going to try to ride those coattails.
And you know who else is going to try to ride those coattails?
President Bush.
PILGRIM: Yes, well, that makes perfect sense. You know, let's take a look at some polls. Iraq is not the only issue candidates are dealing with. The national polls, they show that basically Fred Thompson is neck and neck with Giuliani in the national polls.
What do you make of this, Candy?
CROWLEY: Well, I make of it that he had a week when he pretty much dominated the political agenda, even though Republicans had a debate during that time. It was sort of the roll out to his announcement and then what happened after when he went out and did some events. So it's partly that.
But it's also partly that people have been waiting for him to get into this race, which is pretty unsettled as far as Republicans go. And so there is a place for him.
And the question is, does he maintain that poll number?
PILGRIM: And when you look at the national poll numbers, Bill, weigh in a little bit on this. When you look at national poll numbers, that really is not the exact mirror of what's happening in the states.
You're seeing quite a split out there, aren't you?
SCHNEIDER: You're seeing a two level -- a split level campaign. The national campaign has Thompson and Giuliani as frontrunners. But the frontrunners in Iowa and New Hampshire is -- that is the candidate who's coming in fourth nationally, Mitt Romney, because he's been campaigning in those two early voting states. He's put a lot of money into those states. He's cultivated conservative voters in those states, who have a lot of questions about his record but, yet, you know, that's the votes he's going after.
It shows that there's a local campaign and a national campaign. They're very different and a lot of candidates, not just Republicans like Romney, are counting on early victories to change the national polls.
PILGRIM: And where do we stand with the Democrats on the national versus the state polls?
SCHNEIDER: Well, Hillary Clinton is ahead in the national polls and she's ahead in all of the early states. But it's a very tight race in Iowa. That's a key state where Hillary Clinton and John Edwards and Barack Obama are all very, very close to each other. They are hoping that they can pull an upset in Iowa and defeat Hillary Clinton, in which case she's going to have to make a comeback somewhere.
PILGRIM: Candy, any thoughts on the Democrats?
CROWLEY: Well, I think Bill is absolutely right. I mean the national polls are interesting, but the fact of the matter is that the states matter. And if John Edwards or Barack Obama can pull something off in Iowa, all bets are off at that point. Hillary Clinton begins to look vulnerable and they can roll from there. PILGRIM: All right, thanks very much, Candy Crowley, Bill Schneider.
Thank you.
Up next, the government's plan to crack down on employers who hire illegal aliens. That plan is on hold. Two advocates with opposite points of view debate the planned crackdown. We'll be right back with that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: A federal judge is blocking new rules that would crack down on employers of illegal aliens in this country. Now, the Social Security Administration planned to mail out thousands of letters asking employers to verify the status of their employees. And this judge's ruling comes after a lawsuit by a number of groups, including the AFL-CIO and the ACLU.
Joining me now for more on the debate over the no match letters, from St. Louis we have Kris Kobach, the constitutional law professor at the University of Missouri.
And from Los Angeles, we have John Trasvina, president and general counsel of the Mexican Legal Defense & Education Fund.
Gentlemen, thanks for being here.
KRIS KOBACH, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR: My pleasure.
JOHN TRASVINA, PRESIDENT, MEXICAN LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND: Thank you.
PILGRIM: So basically you have no match letters going out that say these Social Security numbers don't match these names and there's a ruling that blocks the letters from going out. Now, these letters have been going on literally for years. The only difference is that the letters contain now a penalty sentence that gives 90 days for employers to come up with a match.
Why suddenly block this?
Let's start with you, John.
TRASVINA: Well, no match is no substitute for effective immigration reform. And you're right, those letters have gone out for years. And they have also said -- Social Security has said it, the Justice Department has said it and ICE has said it, that these are not letters that indicate that the worker is here illegally.
By the wave of a hand, the ICE Department tried to change that in August. They were held up by the courts for very good reasons. It doesn't get, you know, it causes discrimination because a lot of workers who are legally here, U.S. citizens, are caught up in this no match mess.
PILGRIM: But certainly...
TRASVINA: And that's why they've been held up.
PILGRIM: Let me interrupt. Certainly a U.S. citizen who has a no match on their name for Social Security would also want that straightened out.
TRASVINA: They'd want that straightened out, but it's very difficult. Imagine going in front of either the SSA computers or the ICE computers trying to straighten out something -- trying to prove a negative. It's very difficult for prove they're United States citizens...
KOBACH: Well...
TRASVINA: ...unless they have access to their birth certificate and other documents.
KOBACH: It's not...
PILGRIM: Kris, let me get you in on this.
You really are -- you say this is a road map for finding illegal workers. And it also makes good common sense to try to get people to match their Social Security numbers with their employers.
KOBACH: Yes, let's not fall for the false argument that somehow these are a bunch of U.S. citizens who are going to get tripped up by this. The vast majority of the 8.7 million no matches that occur every year are illegal aliens.
And what a surprise -- 8.7 million is approximately the estimated population of unauthorized aliens working in the United States illegally.
Now, the gist of what the judge did -- let's remember, the judge didn't rule on this yet. The judge, she simply said I'm going to freeze the status quo. The letters won't go out because I think there will be greater harm to the plaintiffs than harm to the United States. Now, she was wrong, I think, in that, because a lot of U.S. citizens are out of jobs because the two agencies are not cooperating.
But the gist of the plaintiffs' argument is a really -- a really flimsy one. But their case basically is that Congress did not intend these two agencies, ICE and Social Security, did not intend these two agencies to cooperate with each other. You know, that's madness. Congress clearly wants federal agencies to cooperate. We saw what happened on 9/11 when the anti-terrorism agencies weren't sharing information. This is common sense.
PILGRIM: That argument certainly defies common sense.
Let me just bring out what the Social Security Administration said about this. The deputy commissioner said this creates a major backlog for the administration. It creates quite a backlog. And here's what they say: "SSA conduct of business would be harmed by delaying sending out these no match letters. So this basically interrupts the functioning of government.
What do you have to say about that, John?
TRASVINA: Well, that's right. The ICE Department jumped the gun. And they didn't coordinate their various respective agendas. And they should have done that. That's the problem with the rule. We are now faced with a lot of uncertainty.
KOBACH: but there was no...
TRASVINA: The government can't control what employers will do. What employers will do is, because of this uncertainty, because they don't trust the effectiveness of ICE, they'll be firing workers if they get these no match letters.
The letters are not effective for those people who are caught up in the system. And it may be 8.7 million on one end, Kris, but that's over 100,000 -- 150,000, 160,000 American workers, U.S. workers, who are going to get unnecessarily thrown into uncertainty. And that's not right.
KOBACH: well...
TRASVINA: It's not the way to solve our immigration problem. The way to solve it is to do what the administration failed to do...
KOBACH: actually, on the contrary...
TRASVINA: ...and the Democrats failed to do, which is get visas for workers who can do the jobs in the United States.
KOBACH: On the contrary...
PILGRIM: Kris, before you answer that, let me just bring up what the Department of Homeland Security says. And, obviously, to every viewer of this broadcast, as a security issue, it is a very big issue.
So they say: "The lawsuit is an obvious attempt to impede the Department's ability to enforce our immigration laws. It is completely without merit. We intend to fight it vigorously. The rule assures employers that they -- if they follow the procedures laid out, they can avoid liability. Those employers who disregard no match letters in the future should expect serious consequences."
That's the kind of tough talk that Americans would probably want from the Department of Homeland Security in terms of having unauthorized people in the country.
KOBACH: Right. This is the big complaint that everybody on both sides, in theory, agrees, and that is our employment of unauthorized aliens is the big magnet that draws illegal immigration to the United States. So here you have, finally, SSA and Homeland Security working together and taking a reasonable step, saying, OK, look at these 8.7 million cases. Let's get these rectified and if there are some U.S. citizens, let them settle it. But if they're illegal aliens, they are not supposed to be working.
PILGRIM: we have to...
TRASVINA: (INAUDIBLE)...
PILGRIM: Gentlemen, we have to cut it off there.
Kris Kobach, John Trasvina, thank you very much. A debate that will continue.
Thank you, gentlemen.
TRASVINA: thank you.
KOBACH: thank you.
PILGRIM: still ahead, the results of tonight's poll.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK.
BLITZER: I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.
Coming up at the top of the hour in THE SITUATION ROOM, Fidel Castro says the U.S. is not telling the whole truth about 9/11 and the ailing leader says he knows what really happened. I'll ask the third highest ranking Cuban official about Castro's conspiratorial theories.
In Iran, it's a hugely popular TV show. But some wonder how, especially since it concerns something Iran's president doesn't believe ever happened -- the Holocaust.
And many people are outraged over an act caught on tape. An officer paid to serve and protect threatens and harasses a driver. You're going to see the amazing tape. You'll hear how the driver fought back.
All that coming up in THE SITUATION ROOM.
More LOU DOBBS TONIGHT, right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PILGRIM: Sixty percent of you say American toy companies are responsible for the safety of U.S. toys.
Thanks for being with us.
"THE SITUATION ROOM" starts right now with Wolf Blitzer.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
