Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Politics of Fear; Bank Regulators Blasted; Deadly Salmonella Outbreak
Aired January 28, 2009 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LOU DOBBS, HOST: Thank you, Wolf. Tonight the House of Representatives voting to support the president's so-called economic recovery or stimulus plan without any serious analysis. No one knows how many of these congressmen actually read the legislation, the politics of fear seeming to overtake the rhetoric of hope. We'll have complete coverage tonight.
And why does the president's economic package include nearly $400 million for research on climate change? We'll be taking a closer look on our special coverage, "Lou's Line-Item Veto" tonight.
And rising concern that the Obama administration is threatening the Second Amendment rights of Americans, a leading defender of our gun rights, Senator John Barrasso, is among our guests here, all of that, all the day's news, and much more, straight ahead, here.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT: news, debate, and opinion for Wednesday, January 28th. Live from New York, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening, everybody. The House of Representatives has voted a huge stimulus package through that could cost taxpayers more than $1 trillion, lawmakers passing that legislation by a vote of 244 to 188. What was supposed to be a bipartisan vote, not a single Republican voting to support this legislation?
The House voting for the legislation after President Obama issued another dire warning about the state of our economy. The president saying this nation is at what he called a perilous moment. Tonight the president calling upon the Senate to pass this legislation quickly as well, Dana Bash has our report from Capitol Hill.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DANA BASH, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For Barack Obama, victory in the first major test of his plan to heal the ailing economy.
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), HOUSE SPEAKER: We are passing historic legislation that honors the promises our new president made from the steps of the Capitol, promises to make the future better for our children and our grandchildren.
BASH: But the president's promise to end polarizing partisanship in Washington, not yet, not even close.
PELOSI: The bill...
BASH: Not a single Republican voted yes.
REP. JOHN CULBERSON (R), TEXAS: This four -- excuse me -- 647- page bill represents one of the worst abuses of power I think that we've probably ever seen.
BASH: Moderate Republicans like Mark Kirk from an Illinois district Mr. Obama won big says he can't support an 800-plus billion dollar bill he calls a social grab bag of excess spending.
REP. MARK KIRK (R), ILLINOIS: The president remains very popular. I like him. But up on Capitol Hill, details matter. And some of these details don't pass muster.
BASH: Details like $335 million for education on sexually transmitted diseases; $650 million for digital TV coupons; and $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts. Democrats who wrote the bill insist those projects do have economic benefits.
REP. DAVID OBEY (D), APPROPRIATIONS CHAIRMAN: People ask, well, what -- what does funding for the arts have anything to do with jobs? It's very simple. People in the arts field are losing their jobs just like anybody else.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm trying to work my way through this 647- page monster here...
BASH: But even some conservative Democrats, like Jim Cooper, called this economic plan a nightmare filled with pork barrel projects and blames his own Democratic leaders.
REP. JIM COOPER (D), TENNESSEE: And here we are in the first week of the most exciting new presidency in a half century and the old bulls are back, trying to conduct business as usual.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BASH: Now, Congressman Cooper in the end tonight, was one of 11 conservative Democrats to vote against this bill. The White House actually convinced most so-called blue dogs to vote for it by promising to have "pay as you go" budget rules, essentially trying to promise that they're going to keep the deficit down in the future. Now, as of now, what happens is it goes over to the Senate, Lou, and there it is even bigger, $900 billion. That is the bill they're work towards. And they will be debating all week next week, Lou.
DOBBS: We're going to get back, Dana, to that "pay as you go" promise from this administration. That's a fascinating promise. Dana, thank you. Stay with us as we bring in our colleagues, senior White House correspondent Ed Henry joining us now, our national political correspondent Jessica Yellin joining us. Good to see you both.
Let me, Ed, turn to you. This is a win for the president. But this may be a very expensive win because it is obviously a very partisan victory.
ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Lou, it is a win but it's winning ugly, as they say in sports. He wanted to bring at least some Republicans on board, instead did not have not a single Republican on board for his first major initiative is not good for this president, obviously. But moving forward, he did win.
He gets to go to the next stage. And as Dana said, they're going to make changes in the Senate. The process will move forward. He can hope that enough changes are made that more Republicans will start coming on board in the weeks ahead, but this is certainly not how he wanted to start it, Lou.
DOBBS: Jessica, your thoughts?
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, I just got off the phone with a White House official who says the Obama team was hoping to get at least 30 Republicans to sign on. Now that may seem high, but they were hoping for some sort of support.
The problem with this right now is Obama will own this stimulus no matter what, if he doesn't get more Republicans signed on in the Senate. And if it doesn't go well, the economy then becomes his problem. So he really does need to get as much support as he can. The question is why didn't he compromise more if he really wants this?
DOBBS: Well I think there was an illusion -- and Dana Bash, you made it -- talking about -- one of the congressman talking about the popularity of this president. That popularity and political capital, so-called, is reminiscent of George W. Bush after he won in 2004 and squandered that political capital rather quickly. That has to be a concern here, is it not?
BASH: Certainly. There's no question, it's a concern. And, you know, over at the White House they basically say they have no choice. In fact, Barack Obama, when he was behind closed doors with Republicans yesterday, he said, I don't want to be doing this as my first bill. I don't want to be spending this kind of government money, taxpayer money, my first thing out of the gate here. But he thinks he has no choice.
However, speaking to what Jessica said, that's -- the reality is, he's facing it head on. And that is that as much as he said during the campaign he wants to change Washington, he's got to deal not just with Republicans who voted no but with his Democratic leaders right here in the Congress who basically didn't necessarily change enough in terms of how they approached this kind of big spending bill in order to get those Republicans and make Obama have that bipartisan vote.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Dana. Thank you, Ed, appreciate it. Thank you very much, Jessica. This so-called stimulus package will cost taxpayers at a minimum $1.2 trillion over a decade. The Congressional Budget Office says that total includes almost $350 billion of interest payments, $350 billion, congressional Democrats however ignoring the interest payments. They say the package will cost 819 billion. That was the most recent total, Democrats saying that includes 275 billion in tax cuts, a number much higher than the CBO's estimate at 212 as of yesterday. All of this is changing, by the way, day by day and there will be, according, again, to the Democratic leadership 544 billion of new spending in its plan.
Republicans, however, saying the package is just a massive boondoggle for liberal and left wing special interest groups, a wish list based on decades of frustrated liberal spending proposals that have not succeeded. We'd like to know what you think about our new government.
Here's tonight's poll question. A president that mimics President Bush with fearmongering in order to pass legislation, a Congress that doesn't read the legislation and a resulting deep partisan divide, do you believe this is change? Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'll have the results here later in the broadcast.
Later here, we'll continue going through the stimulus legislation line by line over the days and weeks ahead, making certain that you know what our Congress is doing, not doing, including what they're not reading when they vote. Tonight, we'll be telling you about nearly 400 million that's been allocated to climate change research. Stimulus, is it really? We'll find out.
Still ahead, rising concerns the Obama administration could threaten your freedom to buy and own guns. A leading defender of your Second Amendment rights is Senator John Barrasso. He'll be among our guests.
Also charges that a deadly salmonella outbreak in more than 40 states could have been prevented. We'll have details tonight and a special report.
And the Obama administration stimulus package, as I said, could cost taxpayers almost $1.5 trillion. Two congressional opponents of the legislation, one Republican, one Democrat, join me here next. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Breaking news tonight about another so-called rescue and recovery package. TARP, the original $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program passed just about five months ago, the Congressional Oversight Panel charged with supervising the program has startling new criticism of regulators themselves. Deborah Feyerick joins us now. She has our exclusive report -- Deborah.
DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well Lou, this is a report that came out just about 30 minutes ago. We got an advanced copy of it. It's a special report on regulatory reform. This is from the Congressional Oversight Panel monitoring the bailout money, the person in charge of that, Harvard Professor Elizabeth Warren.
Bottom line, this report finds the current mess should come as no surprise to anyone. The panel blames what's happening on three things. First of all, deregulation, the growth of unregulated parallel shadow markets is the second, also unrestricted marketing of complex consumer financial products. Now without basic well regulated financial systems the result, as we all know now, a kind of market gambling along with swindles and fraud, pretty strong language in this particular report.
The panel says the worst part of this current crisis could have been averted had regulators been paying attention to three key areas. The first, companies that were considered too big to fail should have been much better regulated with a lot more oversight. Two, companies should never have been given AAA ratings without more transparency. That, in turn, would have protected pension funds and financial institutions from being misled into making what have now been turned out to be very dangerous investments, also better regulation of products being sold to consumers.
Had there been even basic consumer protection laws in place, the panel finds that the excesses in mortgage lending could have been stopped so there would have been no toxic assets which now threaten the global economy and Lou, a lot of areas of reform, eight areas specifically, all of them dealing with risk management, transparency. Also this AAA rating, but really one of the big findings is they want to create a global financial sort of system that regulates all of this so it never happens again.
DOBBS: And that is of course an agenda item. It's an ideological one, and utterly ridiculous because they demonstrated that these (INAUDIBLE) reduce everyone to -- into debris when there's not regulation of the home market. And that's what we've experienced in the country with a Congress that doesn't even read legislation that it passes. Deborah, thank you very much -- outstanding job, bringing us up -- right up to date. Thank you.
As we reported, The House of Representatives tonight passed that huge stimulus bill. The opponents say it is filled with unnecessary and irresponsible spending. In a moment, I'll be talking with one of the few Democrats who oppose the legislation, Congressman Gene Taylor of Mississippi, but first I'm joined by Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana. He chairs the Republican Conference in the House of Representatives -- Congressman, good of you to be here.
REP. MIKE PENCE (R), INDIANA: You bet, Lou.
DOBBS: Not a single Republican voted for this legislation.
PENCE: Well that's right, every single Republican in the House of Representatives decided to stand with the American people and reject this so-called stimulus bill. I mean you know Lou, this was -- this was a partisan bill, exclusively written by the Democratic leadership in the House. Democrats, as I told the president yesterday, Democratic leadership completely ignored the president's call for the best ideas from both sides of the aisle. And they brought a bill to the floor -- and I -- I'm proud of the House Republicans who took a stand for our alternative, which would be...
DOBBS: Let me...
PENCE: ... not a massive wish list of liberal spending, but tax relief for working families, small businesses and family farms.
DOBBS: Congressman, let me show our viewers what we're talking about.
PENCE: Yeah.
DOBBS: Six hundred, forty-seven pages, as of the last count.
PENCE: Right.
DOBBS: I have been saying -- and I want you to correct me just straight up if you think I'm wrong. But I've said that I doubt there's a handful of Republicans or Democrats who have read this. How wrong am I?
PENCE: Well, you know, I don't know a handful. I know that House Republicans carefully unpacked this bill and were just horrified by what we saw.
DOBBS: Yeah.
PENCE: I mean you've cited it repeatedly on this show with great accuracy, $400 million for climate research. How is that going to create jobs in Indiana, Lou? Fifty million dollars for the National Endowment for the Arts; with all due respect, that's not going to take people from the unemployment line back into the factory line.
So you know Republicans took a stand here. We know how Congress can act to get the economy moving again. And it's not by, you know, passing a massive, catch-all wish list of liberal spending priorities with token tax relief. It's about passing a bill that aggressively gives the American people, families and small businesses more of their money. And that's what Republicans took a stand for tonight.
DOBBS: You know I appreciate the Republican partisan position, Congressman, that tax cuts are a great idea. We, despite huge tax cuts, have watched over the past eight years, under the Bush administration, Republican ownership of both Congress and the White House, watched manufacturing in this country be destroyed.
We're not hearing a discussion in this Congress from either party the importance of reforming our trade practices. Because without that reform in my humble opinion it won't matter how much money is thrown at this issue. We're not hearing a discussion of how this country is going to subsidize and incentivize manufacturing and bring back good middle class jobs...
PENCE: Right.
DOBBS: ... to the mainstream of America.
PENCE: Well...
DOBBS: The Republicans are going to have to answer more than...
PENCE: Yeah.
DOBBS: ... cut taxes as to those issues.
PENCE: Well but come on, Lou, for real.
DOBBS: Well I am for real, believe me.
PENCE: I know you're for real, that's why we love you. Look, America has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. We've got companies fleeing this country, relocating overseas. What we've got to do is look at the whole picture. But look, you know me. I was the first one to be critical...
DOBBS: Absolutely.
PENCE: ... of Republicans when they didn't watch the bottom line, when they were growing government, and Speaker Pelosi -- and I respect her greatly, but Speaker Pelosi said...
DOBBS: Right.
PENCE: ... today they were taking the country in a new direction and I said respectfully on the floor, I thought we were just trying to pass a bill to create jobs.
DOBBS: Right.
PENCE: The Democrats have all the rest of the session of Congress...
DOBBS: Well I think you made...
PENCE: ... to work on their priorities...
DOBBS: Congressman Pence, I think...
PENCE: ... and these ideas, but...
DOBBS: I think you make...
PENCE: ... this is about creating jobs.
DOBBS: I think you make a great point and I think you're also correct -- I should point out that the congressman is absolutely correct talking about he was also bucking his own party and president on these very same issues. The unfortunate part is, in my judgment, we're not seeing a discussion of the real issues, which I -- frankly I expected more of the White House, I certainly expected more of both parties in Congress. But I'm eternally hopeful I guess is one of my many failings.
PENCE: Well we're hopeful. You know the president came by this week. We had a frank and serious discussion. We appreciate President Obama's bipartisan spirit and we welcome more. DOBBS: And we appreciate your being with us. Thank you very much, Congressman Pence.
Joining me now, Congressman Gene Taylor of Mississippi, a leading member of the blue dog Democratic Coalition, a coalition of fiscally conservative Democrats, who says he will not support a plan that raises the federal budget deficit, period -- Congressman, great to have you with us.
REP. GENE TAYLOR (D), MISSISSIPPI: Hey, Lou, nice being with you and I want you to know on my notes, and I'm going to ask him to check this that I had repealed NAFTA as one of the low-cost things that we can do to stimulate the American economy. Repeal most favored nation status for China. And I think you're right on.
I mean there are a lot of things we can be doing. Take away the insurance -- the insurance industry is exempt from antitrust laws. They can raise your rates, cut your coverage, call each other up, conspire to do so. There are a lot of things Congress can be doing to stimulate our economy, put money -- put jobs on the street that don't cost $800 billion.
DOBBS: Well good for you and I think absolutely rational and appropriate and obviously even thoughtful. And you're one of few congressmen and women in this -- in both parties who have actually been looking at the issue who actually has an understanding of the legislation. What in the world -- blue dogs, by our count, eight of 49 voted against this legislation.
What is going on? And this "pay as you go" promise to the blue dogs from the White House? How in the world can you pay as you go if you're going to run up $2 trillion in budget deficits?
TAYLOR: Lou, President Obama ran on change. This isn't change. George Bush during the height of the war cut taxes, increased spending, doubled the national debt on his watch.
DOBBS: Right.
TAYLOR: And this is just more of the same, in my opinion. And, again, that's -- I came here trying to balance the budget and to put it in perspective, the nation borrowed $800 billion between the Revolutionary War through Gerald Ford's presidency. In one vote, the nation's going to borrow another 800 billion. This is nuts.
DOBBS: Yeah, borrow another 800 billion and by the estimates of the Congressional Budget Office, have to pay about $350 billion in interest over a decade. Where are we headed here? Is there going to be any sensibility at all in that House of Representatives that requires the leadership, both political parties, to actually read the legislation, to have a public policy debate, and refuse to be fearmongered, as they were by President Bush back in September of last year, and now by President Obama in January of this year?
TAYLOR: Well, Lou, we have a Democratically-controlled house, a Democratically-controlled Senate, a Democratic president and quite honestly you have a bully pulpit that I don't have. I would ask you to use that bully pulpit to call on that Democratic Congress to repeal NAFTA, to repeal most favored nation status for China.
We've talked before. It took us two years to build the mine- resistant vehicles that are saving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan because of a lack of an American industrial base. And so we have to do it, if for no other reason for national defense, but certainly all the plus is in the jobs that it creates and the money that stays here in our nation where it should.
DOBBS: Well, as you know, I join you in that thought and I...
TAYLOR: So I'm asking for your help.
DOBBS: Amen. You got it. I appreciate it. Congressman Gene Taylor, we thank you very much.
TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
DOBBS: In "Lou's Line-Item Veto" tonight, we'll be focusing on the money slated for that climate change research that the congressman just referred to, Congressman Taylor talking about that $400 million line-item. Well what can all that money actually do? What will it do to stimulate our economy? How many jobs will it create? We'll find out in "Lou's Line-Item Veto".
Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa today launching an investigation into reports that the National Science Foundation and its employees have been using government computers to view pornographic Web sites while on the job, in one extraordinary case, Politico.com reporting that a senior official reportedly spent as much as 20 percent of his work hours, or one full day a week, viewing sexually explicit sites or porno, and having inappropriate chats with various women. Investigators calculate the time lost for that one employee to be nearly $60,000. Senator Grassley says this is cheating taxpayers outright.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHARLES GRASSLEY (R), IOWA: It is disconcerting when you have an agency that gives out $6 billion and you also have that same agency getting three billion on top of that in the stimulus package that we would have this lack of concern about managing the taxpayer's dollars.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Well the senator has asked very nicely, I'm sure, the National Science Foundation to provide his office with more information on the case by tomorrow. There have been some half-dozen investigations and reports on it. So we'll let you know how that goes. We'll have a further report.
We have an example tonight of what we on this broadcast call our "national gut check" and America deciding to take a stand on issues important to this nation. Today, President Obama met with 13 of the country's business CEOs and business leaders and talked about the need for jobs and the economy. The president, we want to point out, talked directly with the CEOs instead of talking to their lobbyists or their business associations who fancy themselves rather powerful entities like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable.
The president showing the guts to go directly to the CEOs and the CEOs having the guts to talk and stand up and talk directly with the president, well, that's pretty impressive. And for that, we say well done, Mr. President, and business may be about ready to turn in a new direction. Let us hope.
Up next, gun owners concerned about the threat of a new assault on their Second Amendment rights to buy and own guns. We'll have a special report.
And did health officials ignore evidence, obvious evidence that led to a deadly salmonella outbreak? We'll have that special report here next. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The Food and Drug Administration tonight expanding its recall of peanut butter in the deadly salmonella outbreak. They will now include products manufactured since January of 2007. This comes as the FDA and Georgia's Department of Agriculture admit that the facility that made the contaminated products has a history of inspection violations. The salmonella outbreak has sickened more than 500 people and has now been linked to eight deaths across the country. Special Investigations Unit correspondent Abbie Boudreau has our report.
ABBIE BOUDREAU, SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS UNIT CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): This Georgia peanut plant is the center of the nationwide salmonella outbreak. CNN obtained these inspection reports dating back to January 2006 of Peanut Corporation of America's Blakely, Georgia, facility. The report show the plant failed to take standard steps to prevent contamination. It was cited for having unsanitized food services, dirty utensils, unmarked chemical containers and places where rodents could get in. National Food Safety experts blame the FDA for not properly regulating plants like this one.
WILLIAM HUBBARD, FORMER FDA ASSOC. COMM.: I do not believe the public is protected. We have rising rates of food-borne illness and an FDA that's so under funded it cannot protect us.
BOUDREAU: Federal Food Safety officials have closed the plant while they investigate, but the shutdown came too late for some. Shirley Almer was 72 when she died. She was in a nursing home, recovering from cancer. Her son, Jeff, says she was there to get stronger and then she was supposed to come home.
JEFF ALMER, SON OF SHIRLEY ALMER: My sister called me that morning and said, you guys better come up here and see her because things have gotten bad. And I mean it was just stunned to hear that.
BOUDREAU: She died that same day. According to a lawsuit filed by the Almer family against Peanut Corporation of America and King Nut Companies, Shirley Almer ate contaminated peanut butter produced in that Georgia processing facility. The court filings state that lab tests from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture show that the salmonella and the peanut butter genetically matches cases in the nationwide salmonella outbreak. Health officials have confirmed those findings to CNN.
J. ALMER: This is a woman who planned on being around when her grandkids got married. So, you know, we really feel cheated, we really do, and there's nothing -- nothing to bring her back.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BOUDREAU: This week, the FDA said the peanut company's internal testing found salmonella on at least 12 occasions since 2007, 2008. But retests of those products were negative so they shipped the questionable products out anyway. And while the company could not talk about that with us, it did tell CNN it has cooperated fully with the FDA, sharing every record the FDA has requested.
The company also adds that it recalled any products suspected of containing the bacteria and deeply regrets what has happened. And Lou, you had mentioned this, but this was just announced. This is a big deal by the FDA. The company will now be recalling all products made at the plant since January 2007. And we asked the FDA if they're to blame for the outbreak. They told us it's the responsibility of the industry to protect and to produce safe products.
DOBBS: If I may say, that is the most absurd, one of the most absurd imaginable statements the FDA could have made in response. We should point out that over the past eight years the FDA's budget has been cut by its leadership. Its leadership has been criticized on a host of fronts. Abbie, what happens next in this? To what degree will there be a response on the part of the FDA and against the firm itself?
BOUDREAU: I mean, at this point, every day, we're getting more and more information that's coming up. So we just don't really know what's going to happen next. I mean we're going to continue to follow this. But I think the big story here is just, is this system completely broken? And that's actually something we're going to work on for your show coming up hopefully next week.
DOBBS: Absolutely. Abbie Boudreau, thank you as always. Appreciate it.
BOUDREAU: Thank you.
DOBBS: Up next, President Obama ramming that stimulus package through the House of Representatives. No need to read that if you're a congressman or woman. Will the Senate read it or will they think about perhaps some larger issues and their responsibilities?
Three top political analysts join us here to assess that and more. Also tonight in "Lou's Line-Item Veto", we'll be examining the so-called stimulus of spending $400 million on climate change research. And your Second Amendment rights are under siege. Your rights to own and buy a gun could be at risk. A leading defender of gun rights, Senator John Barrasso joins us to assess the prospects of Eric Holder, the likely new attorney general, and the Obama administration, on this critically important issue. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Gun sales have simply soared since the election of President Obama. Gun owners all across this country are concerned, and many others are concerned, that the Obama administration will curtail second amendment rights to bear arms. This concern is based on the president's past record on gun rights and that of his nominee to be attorney general, who will be running the Justice Department, Eric Holder. Bill Tucker with our report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Gun sales soared at the end of last year. The FBI reported a 42 percent spike in background checks in November of last year versus November of 2007. Background checks rose 24 percent in December versus December of '07. Some gun shops report back orders for guns that are as long as 11 months. For gun owners, President Obama and his choice for attorney general, Eric Holder, are a double threat to their Second Amendment rights. Last year, holder went on record, refusing to support what is essentially an individual's right to own a gun in Washington, DC.
LARRY PRATT, GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA: Eric Holder signed on to a brief before the Supreme Court, the so-called Heller decision overturning the DC gun ban. And he was in favor of keeping the gun ban. He wants people in the District of Columbia to go to jail if they have a handgun.
TUCKER: After the court ruled against the ban, President Obama says he will, quote, "uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owner, hunters and sportsmen." But, as witnessed in the surge of gun sales, gun owners don't think so. They are worried their Second Amendment rights are about to come under assault.
The president has tried to ease those concerns, saying he supports enacting, quote, "commonsense laws", like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals.
Groups advocating for gun rights say Mr. Obama's efforts would instead make gun ownership expensive and bureaucratic. As an example of their concerns, they note that in the Illinois Senate, Mr. Obama supported a 500 percent increase in the federal tax on firearms and ammunition.
LAWRENCE KEANE, NATIONAL SHOOTING SPORTS FOUNDATION: They are very concerned about efforts that might be undertaken by this administration or the new Congress that would ban certain firearms or put restrictions on the ability of law-abiding Americans to purchase firearms. TUCKER: They also point to President Obama's support of micro- stamping, that is, having a gun imprintable with an identifiable mark, a process that researchers, including the University of California- Davis, and the National Academies of Science, say is not currently viable. In other states there have been separate efforts to put serial numbers on bullets, which also draws skepticism as being unworkable and expensive.
LAMAR CHEATHAM, LICENSED GUN DEALER: It's prohibitively expensive. But that's -- that's the goal. The goal is to go ahead and make everybody hang their guns on the wall because they won't be able to afford to buy ammunition.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER (on camera): Now, the two groups strongly behind the push for micro-stamping are the Brady Campaign and the Coalition to End Gun Violence. The coalition also supports numbering each and every bullet made. And no one in the gun community understands the logic of that one, nor even how it can be done, in fact. Lou, it's worth noting here that 75 percent of the violent crime in this country does not involve the use of a gun.
DOBBS: And there are other considerations here. But normally -- you know, I've talked about being -- over the past weekend, picking up a shotgun at the Gator Guns in Southern Florida in West Palm Beach. And hearing about these stories of guns being back-ordered and ammunition not available. And we're finding out it's true across the entire country. And you'd like to say to folks, simmer down, what's your concern, you know, these are just crazy rumors. It turns out they're not just crazy rumors.
TUCKER: They're not crazy rumors. Exactly right, there's reason for concern.
DOBBS: This is amazing. And I appreciate it. Thank you very much. We're going to turn now to somebody trying to do their best to assure that the Second Amendment is honored and respected by government. Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, a fierce critic of attorney general-nominee Eric Holder's record on Second Amendment rights. Senator Barrasso says he won't vote to confirm Holder. That vote, by the way, is expected to go before the full Senate tomorrow. Senator Barrasso joins us tonight from Capitol Hill. Senator, good to have you with us.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO, (R) WY: Good to be with you again, Lou.
DOBBS: Senator, this is extraordinary, because as I was just saying to our Bill Tucker, I'd like to be able to say to people, there's no reason for concern here, but the -- but the evidence suggests otherwise, doesn't it?
BARRASSO: Well, it does. I was in Casper, Wyoming, this past weekend, the gun show absolutely loaded with people. I just left three sheriffs from Wyoming who are here in the Nation's Capital for a big meeting, and the number of people applying for concealed weapons permits has skyrocketed.
But I think there is grounds for concern because of Eric Holder's record. When he was deeply attorney general, the things he has written, his stand that basically says the Second Amendment doesn't apply to individuals, Lou, but it only applies to a well-regulated militia. And on that I fundamentally disagree. The people of our nation need to know that the Second Amendment means the things that we know it to mean. It applies to individuals. And I'm going to vote against him.
DOBBS: You know, the Second Amendment, like the other nine in our Bill of Rights, are all individual rights. So the argument for militias, tortured in its reasoning at the very best. The Supreme Court upholding the individual right. But I'd like to read to you and to our audience something that Mr. Holder said during his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. He stated that gun control is not on the Obama administration's agenda.
He said, quote, "I have no intention -- this administration has no intention of doing anything that would affect a states' regulation of firearms, who can carry a firearm, under what circumstances. There is nothing that we have discussed, nothing that is in planning, nothing that I can imagine that we're going to be doing in that regard." What is your reaction?
BARRASSO: Agendas can change on an instant and so can intentions. And that's why I've come out against Mr. Holder. I think he's absolutely wrong. He has a long history from his days as deputy attorney general under Janet Reno and his writings, he's been against gun shows. He's wanted a limit of one gun per month. Just look at this administration. The application form. One of the questions to apply to work for the administration, do you own any guns, what are the registration numbers? Well, mine aren't registered. When was it last fired? Have there been any accidents with the guns? What have you shot it at?
This is clearly not the philosophy of people that believe in the Second Amendment rights and individual choice of decisions.
DOBBS: It is extraordinary and I have to say that Eric Holder sounded a bit -- there was a little lawyerese in his statement, it seemed to me, when he said, the administration has no intention of doing anything that could affect a states' regulation of firearms.
This is not a place to be -- you know have you heard from the Obama administration? Has there been any response on the part of this administration to your concerns and those of other senators and congressmen on this, clearly, important issue, important issue to millions and -- I think to the republic itself, but to millions of Americans?
BARRASSO: I've not heard anything from the administration but I hear a lot from the people of Wyoming. And in Wyoming, we're a group of people who say, let us a lone. Leave our land alone. Leave our water alone. And leave our guns alone. We know what our Second Amendment rights mean and I'm going to be back in Wyoming this weekend talking to more folks from Wyoming, talking about our rights, and our Second Amendment rights.
DOBBS: Senator Barrasso, thank you very much for being with us here.
BARRASSO: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: We appreciate it.
Up next, Congress rubber stamping the president's economic spending legislation, passing HR-1. But not a single Republican voted for it. We'll be talking with three of the best political analysts in the country here next.
And climate change research, it's probably worthwhile. But what has it got to do with creating jobs and economic stimulus? We'll be talking about that. And this economic mess and the madness in Washington next in "Lou's Line-Item Veto". We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Well, the House of Representatives tonight passed the economic stimulus and recovery legislation, but how many congressmen and women actually read it and understood what's actually in it and what will be achieved? Not many, I fear. There's been no extensive in-depth economic analysis of this plan by either party. Let me be very clear, by either party. Yet Congress had no trouble voting on it today.
We'll continue here to examine the details of the legislation. It's likely impact as it moves forward on Capitol Hill in what we call "Lou's Line-Item Veto". This is, after all, supposed to be an economic stimulus and recovery package, but some critics call it more spending and a lot more borrowing.
Tonight Ines Ferre reports on the hundred of millions of dollars allocated for pet projects, ranging from climate change research to energy efficient federal cars.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
INES FERRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Just hours before the stimulus bill went to a vote on the House floor, Republicans were picking it apart, saying that throwing billions at government agencies won't stimulate the economy or create jobs. Like $600 million for energy efficient vehicles for federal agencies. Democrats hope this will help the U.S. automakers by replacing some 34,000 vehicles. The Congressional Budget Office says such programs are slow to bear fruit. One senior Republican says it sends the wrong message.
REP. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, (R) WI: I'm just wondering why the existing vehicles won't be able to work for a little while longer. You know, most Americans aren't buying cars because they don't have the money to buy cars. And they're having their old beaters around a little bit longer simply because that's the way the economics are working. FERRE: Nearly $400 million would go towards climate change research and data modeling for NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
REP. EARL BLUMENAUER, (D) OR: Investment for climb change and energy research creates jobs and business is crying out for it large and small.
FERRE: But critics say the language in projects like these are vague and question how climate change research will stimulate the economy as a whole.
PAT MICHAELS, CATO INSTITUTE: We already fund global change research to the tune of $5, $6 billion. What's going on here I am guessing is to fatten up some programs or some budgets from some agency or administrator that didn't get exactly what he or she wanted in the last budgetary cycle.
FERRE: Also in the bill, $335 million to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and tuberculosis. Democrats say STDs cost the health care system about $15 billion annually. Republicans argue programs like these just don't belong in the stimulus bill.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FERRE (on camera): And the bill is supposed to create or save 3 million to 4 million jobs. But when we spoke to some of the agencies that would receive the money, not even they would speculate how many jobs would be created by funding their projects. Lou?
DOBBS: Well, they don't have to speculate. Plenty of folks in the Republican and Democratic Parties are doing that for them. Ines, thank you very much. Each of those in its own right, a worthy issue for support. But what in the world is it doing in an economic stimulus package like this? Ines, thank you very much. Ines Ferre.
DOBBS: Last night, we reported on the provision to resod the National Mall. Tonight, we can report that is one of now two congressional measures that has been removed from the legislation that has been passed by the House today. The $200 million National Mall Revitalization Fund, as it was styled, was removed in the dark of night last night. The provision was taken out after a meeting between White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and 11 Republican congressmen, who along with many others, had criticized that plan as being part of the stimulus package.
The widely criticized $200 million contraceptive spending for low income families is also gone. A favorite of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi who said among other things that contraception was sound economic policy and would help states cut medical costs in an economic downturn.
And this economic stimulus package, it is indeed a spending and borrowing bill. Because so much has been moved in and out of it over the past just 24 hours, we only know for sure that it is more than $800 billion and somewhere near $900 billion. And we do also know that our government simply doesn't have a dime to put into it to fund it. The government will have to borrow every dime of that $900 billion or whatever the number is finally. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that more than $350 billion in interest will have to be paid because they are borrowing all of that money whenever it's finally passed. That would add another 40 percent to cost of the spending bill.
Economist Alan Sinai (ph) studied the plan, he says the deficits this year and next year, as a result, will be between 10 and 12 percent of our gross domestic product. That would be the largest share in American history. It's more than double the level that we had under President Reagan, for example. Sinai also expects gross federal debt to rise from 70 percent of GDP to 90 percent by the end of 2011. Consider if you will, what that means for future generations of Americans. I hope you'll consider calling your congressmen and your senators and give them your view on this approach to economic recovery.
Here are the phone numbers you might need. On behalf of a lovely woman in Washington, DC whose personal phone number is just one digit off what the Capitol telephone number is, we implore you to write down these numbers carefully. The main telephone number for the Capitol switchboard is 202-223-3121. 202-224-3121.
And the phone number at the White House, 202-456-1111. We have those numbers as well as links to reach your elected representatives directly on our Web site, loudobbs.com.
And a reminder to join us tomorrow. In "Lou's Line-Item Veto" we examine the $150 billion allocated in this legislation for infrastructure and construction spending. It might sound like a pretty good idea. Is it too much money? Will it actually get to where it's supposed to go? Is it enough? How many jobs will actually be created in an industry that's already laid off hundreds of workers? And how fast could those jobs be created? That's tomorrow in "Lou's Line-Item Veto". We hope you will be with us.
Up next here, the Obama administration is cracking down on lobbying, it says with just a few exceptions that include the people they are hiring. Including the treasury secretary's new chief of staff. I'll be joined by three of the country's best political analysts next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Joining me now three of the best political analysts, James Taranto of opinionjournal.com, Keith Richburg, New York bureau chief, "Washington Post," Robert Zimmerman, Democratic strategist, Democratic national committeeman. Great to have you all here. Let's quickly turn to, well, President Obama has his first legislative victory in the House. Will it be too expensive by at least half?
ROBERT ZIMMERMAN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: It's just the first step in what is going to be a very torturous process. And I think everyone is underestimating how tough the Senate is going to be. Both the rules of the Senate are going to give the Republicans more influence and you have got a number of Democrats from conservative states.
DOBBS: Is there a political price here, Keith, for the expediency that Barack Obama is asking for as president versus, you know, the rhetoric of hope that he brought as candidate Obama?
KEITH RICHBURG, "WASHINGTON POST": They wanted to rush something out very fast to show that we need something. And just take the job numbers coming out today.
DOBBS: But it sounded just like George Bush five months ago. Exactly the same.
RICHBURG: Absolutely. I think the problem is they wanted this out there very fast to show they are doing something. To call it a job creation bill is kind of wrong. It does different things. Tax cuts. Some job creation through the infrastructure side. Supporting the social safety net through health care and unemployment benefits for people. There's all kinds of things in this thing. It's a laundry list. It's a laundry list.
DOBBS: It ends up with a big price (ph) on it. I don't know what you think. Spending and borrowing and lots of it.
JAMES TARANTO, OPINIONJOURNAL.COM: Which shouldn't surprise us. We've just elected a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress.
DOBBS: We had the same thing from that Republican Congress preceding it.
TARANTO: Absolutely. And if the Republicans had voted the way they voted today when they were in the majority, maybe they would still be in the majority.
DOBBS: You suppose the Republicans learned a lesson because a lot of people felt if the Republicans had resisted the TARP vote when President Bush was calling for it and saying the sky is falling, they might have stood a far better chance or certainly more respect on the part of the electorate. The Republicans, it appears, decided not going to play the game again.
ZIMMERMAN: This is not about the Republicans learning a lesson. This is about the Republicans playing politics. I think it's worth nothing that the Democratic Congress had many more hearings, many more committee meetings and accepted more Republican amendments in this bill.
DOBBS: Keith?
RICHBURG: TARP has not worked. Has not unfrozen the credit markets and they are going to have to come back and put more money into that TARP program. And if McCain had come out against the TARP, I wonder where he would be.
DOBBS: I think it's an interesting question. And where would this economy be if George Bush had not going around screaming like Chicken Little the sky is falling, with Hank Paulson, the treasury secretary, acting with confusion, indecision and it appears no, utter misdirection?
TARANTO: That's a good question. I don't know the answer. But I will say it is a lot easy to be against big spending when you are in the minority because of the incentives in Congress. It is an institutional problem. Congress tends to spend money. Their job is spending other people's money.
ZIMMERMAN: Don't let the Democratic Congress off the hook from last year, however.
DOBBS: Don't you worry. We're not letting anybody - We're going to insist on this broadcast that congressmen and senators actually read legislation. They may not pay attention but we're going to point out when they don't. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Robert, thank you, Keith, thank you James. Appreciate it.
Tonight's poll results, 87 percent of you do not believe this is change.
Thanks for being with us tonight. CAMPBELL BROWN: NO BIAS, NO BULL starts right now. Campbell?
