Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Former Pentagon Adviser Says U.S. on Wrong Course in Iraq; The True State of America's Intelligence Capabilities
Aired September 14, 2004 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Tuesday, September 14. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening.
Tonight, what is the U.S. strategy in Iraq? Sixty Iraqis killed in two deadly attacks today. Three more American soldiers have been killed in combat. Former Pentagon adviser Michael Rubin says the United States is on the wrong course. He's our guest.
Can our intelligence agencies tell whether a mushroom cloud over North Korea is a nuclear blast? What is the true state of America's intelligence capabilities? Senate Intelligence Committee member Senator Dick Durbin is our guest.
In Russia, it may not be communism, but it's certainly not democracy. Russian President Vladimir Putin is concentrating power in the Kremlin. He blames the war on terror. Tonight, two Russian experts join me to talk about what the future holds for Russia and its relationship with the United States.
Hurricane Ivan is charging towards the U.S. Gulf Coast. More than a million people in New Orleans are set to evacuate. We'll be going to the National Hurricane Center for the very latest on Hurricane Ivan.
And in Exporting America tonight, the documentary "American Jobs," the broken promises of NAFTA and the assault on working American families.
The violence in Iraq is continuing to escalate. There is carnage throughout the country. The deadliest insurgent attack in Baghdad in weeks, a lethal drive-by shooting in Baquba, and three more American soldiers killed in combat. The attacks in Baghdad and Baquba killed 60 Iraqis. A group linked to the al Qaeda terrorist network claimed responsibility.
Walt Rodgers reports from Baghdad.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WALTER RODGERS, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): Ambulance sirens screamed as if enraged at the sight of a Baghdad car bombing. Here, the death toll grew all day approaching 50. More than 100 were wounded. The apparent target, a police station. Young Iraqi men bringing their photos to apply for a job on the force.
These Baghdad bombs are indiscriminate. Witness the sandals of the dead. Many shop owners spent this day cleaning human flesh from their store fronts. The explosion shredded lives and bodies of a people already made miserable by war. The U.S. Apache helicopter was the only explanation many Iraqis needed.
"This is an American rocket," he says, "holding a piece of pipe."
"Just before the explosion," this man assured us, "I spotted the Apache helicopter. It was a missile, not a car bomb."
An Arab Islamist Web site claimed responsibility, but, even if there were concrete supporting evidence of that, the trend in Iraq is to transfer anger and responsibility.
"It was the Americans and the work of the Jews," he said.
In hospital, however, an injured man who survived the blast said he couldn't tell if it was a missile or a car bomb.
These young men had dreams of building a new Iraq as policemen. Few other jobs are available. Still, even the most charitable Iraqis still believe the Americans had an obligation to protect them and failed.
The American response?
MAJ. GEN. PETE CHIARELLI, U.S. ARMY: Well, we can't protect all of Baghdad. We're working very, very hard to do that.
RODGERS: So there is much breastfeeding in hospitals these days as areas beyond U.S. protection are increasingly targeted.
In Baquba, another 12 policemen were murdered in a drive-by shooting.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
RODGERS: And if there is now any doubt about the guerrillas having regained the initiative in Iraq, saboteurs today also blew up a major oil pipeline near Tikrit, temporarily at least disrupting electrical power to much of this country -- Lou.
DOBBS: Walt, do these latest attacks and the escalating violence over the past certainly two weeks mean that the U.S. strategy right now, taking the offensive against towns and cities controlled by insurgents -- does it suggest that that strategy is simply failing?
RODGERS: That's a judgment I'd prefer not to make. I think the American strategy now, such as it is, is to try to stabilize this country and maintain stability, but recall most U.S. forces are enclosed on bases on -- in essentially fortresses in this country.
They're not going out around the countryside unless there is a specific required need, as in Sadr City last week, that suburb of Baghdad, when Muqtada al Sadr's army was in a state of rebellion, armed rebellion. Then there was no compunction but to send the U.S. forces in. The same several weeks earlier in Najaf when the Shiite rebel militias were also engaged in an uprising there.
But, basically, I think stabilization is the American strategy here, and there's no real effort to conquer and particularly certain areas in the Sunni triangle where the policy basically seems containment -- surround the rebels, lock them down and not engage them in anything that would involve major casualties, major American casualties at least, if you don't have to -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, Walt, failing that judgment, let me ask you another question more directly, if I may. Is all of this escalating violence evidence of stability in Iraq?
RODGERS: Well, I think the facts speak for themselves. What you see is that the guerrillas have the -- the insurgents have the initiative to strike whenever they want. They can't drive the Americans out. They can't defeat the Americans in a pitched battle in the field. They've never defeated the Americans in anything larger than a platoon -- or smaller than a platoon engagement.
Having said that, there's great instability here, and those insurgents can strike wherever they want and strike the at very institutions the United States is trying to build. For example, they can assassinate politicians, and they do. They can assassinate police chiefs, and they do. And, of course, what we see here -- they're trying to kill off young police recruits.
So, again, the initiative is almost at will in the hands of the insurgents, and there doesn't seem to be a lot -- as that one general said in the package we just ran, there isn't a lot that the U.S. Army can do about totally controlling this country. There simply are not enough troops in here to do that. The Bush administration does not want to commit those troops and has not wanted to commit those troops for a year and a half.
DOBBS: Walt Rodgers -- thank you -- reporting live from Baghdad.
An astonishing statement today about the global war on terror by the man who's been nominated to be the next CIA director. The nominee, Congressman Porter Goss, told the Senate committee that it will take longer than originally thought to rebuild the CIA's clandestine service.
The previous CIA director, George Tenet, said the clandestine service will not be strong enough to fight the global war against radical Islamic terror for five years. I'll be joined later by a leading member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Dick Durbin, to discuss the capabilities of American intelligence.
The September 11 commission said much tougher border controls are necessary to help protect this country from radical Islamist terrorism, but critics today said the federal government is failing to introduce reform fast enough, and that delay is putting the lives of Americans at risk. Lisa Sylvester reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Terrorist suspect Zacarias Moussaoui and Richard Reid entered the United States without visas. They were from France and Britain, two countries where visitors do not need to be screened prior to their arrival. The loophole is leaving the country vulnerable to future attacks, according to a new report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
DAN STEIN, FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM: We have an opportunity now with the 9/11 commission to put in recommendations which right away would make Americans safer and secure and move a long way toward improving enforcement of visa laws and visa compliance.
SYLVESTER: The group, also known as FAIR, wants to ensure the 9/11 commission recommendations for beefing up border security do not go unheated. Among the proposals in Congress, a bill introduced by Senator John McCain last week that calls on the Department of Homeland Security to establish a uniform standard for driver's licenses; another bill that would repeal the current visa lottery program that provides green cards to 55,000 foreign nationals a year; and an amendment being considered this week that would ban the use of foreign matricula cards to set up a bank account.
Immigration reformists expected more action after the 9/11 attacks, but they say politics has been getting in the way of policy.
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R), CALIFORNIA: The left wing of the Democratic Party, which controls that party, sees illegal immigrants as political pawns, and people who have a great deal of influence on the Republican Party see them as economic pawns in order to keep down wages.
SYLVESTER: Immigration reform groups say the crackdown on those in the United States illegally has to extend not jut to the borders, but also to the interior of the country where enforcement has been lacking.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: The Department of Homeland Security declined an on- camera interview, but a spokesman acknowledged that the matricula cards are a potential terrorist loophole and defended their efforts at interior enforcement, saying they have been cracking down on employment of illegal aliens, targeting companies, including Wal-Mart -- Lou.
DOBBS: And those comments coming on the day and the week in which "TIME" magazine reports three million American illegal aliens will enter this country this year.
Lisa Sylvester -- thank you very much -- reporting from Washington. President Bush today campaigned on the issue of homeland security in a speech before National Guard members. President Bush told a guard conference in Las Vegas that he is proud to have served in the National Guard.
President Bush made no mention of the controversy surrounding whether he fulfilled his guard requirements during the Vietnam War nor the controversy surrounding the CBS report suggesting that he violated direct orders and failed to fully serve in his commitment to the guard.
President Bush thanked the guard members for their service, and he said they are helping to protect this country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need the service of guardsmen and women because of the times we live in. These are dangerous times.
My most solemn duty as the president is to protect the American people. If America shows uncertainty and weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This is not going to happen on my watch.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Outside the guard conference, while the president was speaking, more than 200 people protested the war in Iraq.
And, separately, relatives of some National Guard members held a news conference criticizing President Bush and the war.
Senator John Kerry today recruited another former Clinton adviser to his communications team, former White House press secretary Michael McCurry. McCurry will handle the traveling press corps during the final weeks of this campaign.
On the campaign trail today, Senator Kerry again hammered President Bush on domestic issues, this time specifically on health care.
Frank Buckley has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JOHN F. KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: This is the annual report.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Using a series of charts with information from annual Medicare trustee reports, Senator John Kerry showed how in each year of the Bush administration, according to its own figures, Medicare costs were eating into the Social Security benefits of the average senior.
KERRY: Now that's each year up until -- guess what -- this year, election year 2004. Here's the chart they gave us this year to show the costs of your out-of-pocket expenses. Oh, my gosh! It's empty. A great big question mark.
BUCKLEY: Kerry accused the Bush administration of withholding the figures in the 2004 annual report because they projected a huge hit against Social Security benefits over the next three years, information released by the administration only after a request from a Democratic congressman from California.
KERRY: Once again, this administration hides the truth from the American people, and the reason they're hiding the truth from the American people is because the out-of-pocket expenses of Medicare have now gone up to 37.2 percent by 2006.
BUCKLEY: Bush campaign officials say Kerry's own votes in Congress have contributed to higher Medicare costs, a charge Kerry staffers dispute.
It was the second straight day Kerry went after President Bush on a domestic issue. Kerry's criticisms of the president designed to draw distinctions and to shake up poll numbers that show Bush leading since the Republican Convention.
(on camera): Even here in Wisconsin where voters have gone Democrat in five of the last seven presidential elections, including in 2000, it's Bush that's ahead. A new CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll indicating that Bush leads Kerry here by 8 points among likely voters. Kerry staffers admit they're behind here, but they still believe Wisconsin is a toss-up, and Senator Kerry will return to this state on Wednesday.
Frank Buckley, CNN, Milwaukee.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: That brings us to our poll. The question tonight: Are you better off today than you were four years ago? Yes or no. Cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll have the results later here in the broadcast.
Coming up next, tough questions for America's intelligence agencies and the man slated to be the new director of the CIA, after a huge mushroom cloud appears over North Korea. Senate Intelligence Committee member Senator Dick Durbin is my guest.
Russian President Vladimir Putin concentrating power in the Kremlin. Critics say Putin is moving Russia back toward communism. Two leading experts on Russia join me.
And Hurricane Ivan barreling tonight toward the U.S. Gulf Coast. More than a million people ready it leave their homes. The director of the National Hurricane Center, Max Mayfield, will give us the very latest on Hurricane Ivan next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) DOBBS: President Bush's nominee to be director of the CIA, Congressman Porter Goss, today faced tough questioning on Capitol Hill during his Senate confirmation hearing. Among the key issues facing Congressman Goss: whether U.S. intelligence agencies have the resources to effectively fight the war on terror and whether those agencies have the capability to watch potential new enemies, whether North Korea, Iran, or any other country.
Joining me now is Senator Dick Durbin, a leading Democratic member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Senator Durbin, good to have you with us.
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Thanks, Lou. Good to be with you.
DOBBS: Let's go to the issue first of all of the new CIA director nominee, Congressman Goss. Is he, in your judgment, a man you can support.
DURBIN: He's a good man, and I still have a number of questions. I asked some of them today.
It's just not another nomination. We know that intelligence is our first line of defense against terrorism. We want the very best person in that job, and the two things we're looking for, the unanswered questions, is Porter Goss committed to reform, which we really need -- the 9/11 commission tells us that -- and, secondly, can he be nonpartisan in this job?
I think that was the basic thrust of most questions today in the hearing.
DOBBS: You asked in point of fact about comments that Congressman Goss has made about John Kerry and other Democrats. What were you getting at?
DURBIN: Well, I think Porter Goss acknowledged to me yesterday in my office, today at the hearing, he said some things that he now regrets. They were very partisan. They took after the Democratic Party and John Kerry in a way that even today he didn't want to defend. He wanted to step away from them.
We have to be convinced that as the head of the CIA he'll be totally nonpartisan. Whoever is appointed by whatever president will meet that standard.
DOBBS: Congressman Goss is a known quantity certainly on Capitol Hill, certainly in Washington, D.C., eight years in his role as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Was he effective, in your judgment? Was he reliable in his role overseeing the oversight, a role of Congress?
DURBIN: I'd give him a C plus to a B because I think, though he's handled it with competence and with the integrity, at a time when we needed to be more aggressive in oversight and more forceful in reforming the intelligence agencies, he did not lead, and I think we needed it, both under President Clinton as well as under President Bush.
DOBBS: Today, Senator, Congressman Goss said something that most of us listening found astonishing. That is, after George Tenet had told us all that it would take five years for this country's intelligence community to be effective in its covert operations against radical Islamist terrorism, he said it will take longer. Were you astonished by that?
DURBIN: No, and I'll tell you why I wasn't. I'm disappointed, but wasn't surprised.
First, we need organization in management. That's what the 9/11 commission report is all about. But, beyond that, we have to fill the spaces with faces. We need the talent pool to draw from so we have people with the skills to provide the intelligence we need to be safe.
And, secondly, Lou, you would be, I'm sure, shocked if you knew what was going on when it came to computers in the federal government. The computer systems that we rely on today to protect America are archaic. They don't speak to one another. So, even if the agencies are ready to communicate, the equipment is not.
DOBBS: Senator, you've called for a Manhattan project to reform those, to restructure those information systems. How likely is that to come to pass, and how soon?
DURBIN: I'm encouraged. Now, for the first time, there's bipartisan support. I tried to do this a couple of years ago when we created the Department of Homeland Security, and I didn't get very far.
But now, as people reflect on the sorry state of the computer architecture in each of these agencies and the -- literally the physical inability for these computers to communicate, they're starting to take it more seriously.
I think we need a breakthrough. We need to bring the best in the private sector, the best in the public sector and the best in the academic world to make sure we have the best computers in the world protecting America.
DOBBS: Senator, one last area of inquiry, if I may, and that is -- it goes to the issue of all of the failures of intelligence by this country's intelligence agencies and its successes, there has been a sense that our reconnaissance effort, our ability to deliver imaging, our national reconnaissance organization was all but foolproof.
Yet, with this mushroom cloud over North Korea last week, we still hear U.S. officials, whether it be the secretary of state, whether it be the national security adviser, saying they don't think it was a nuclear event. Does that disturb you, and are you surprised by the ambiguity in those statements?
DURBIN: In most instances, reliable intelligence on the ground, human intelligence is still the very best. Computers and -- the satellites rather that generate these photographs and computer images really inform us to some degree. Our best guess now is that that cloud in North Korea was not a nuclear cloud.
But, still, we don't have the people on the ground. It's a very closed country and a closed society. So really looking for human intelligence is still the bedrock of good information and intelligence.
DOBBS: And it has to be extraordinary for you, as it is for all of us, to think that it has been 50 years in which this country has been watching over North Korea since the end of the war.
Senator Dick Durbin, we thank you for being here.
DURBIN: Thanks. Thanks very much, Lou.
Still ahead tonight, Putin's power grab. Russia's president says he needs to consolidate power in order to fight radical Islamist terrorism. Critics say it's nothing more than a return to communism. I'll be back with two experts on Russia. Politics and international relations next.
And then, Hurricane Ivan has lashed the Caribbean. This deadly storm is now heading straight for the U.S. Gulf Coast. Local officials urging millions of people now to leave their homes. We'll have the very latest for you on where and when the storm is likely to hit. I'll be talking with Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues with more news, debate and opinion. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: The United States tonight is reacting skeptically to Russian President Vladimir Putin's plans to massively overhaul Russia's political system. Putin says the changes are needed to fight rising radical Islamist terrorism in Russia, most recently citing the murder of hundreds of schoolchildren in Beslan.
The overhaul would consolidate Putin's power over regional governments, concentrate political power within the Kremlin. Secretary of State Colin Powell today told Reuters News Agency that the plan pulls back on some of Russia's democratic reform.
Joining me now for more on the impact of Russia's moves, Graham Allison, professor of international security at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard university, joining us from Boston; from Washington, D.C., Anatol Levin, senior associate at Carnegie Endowment.
Thank you both for being here.
Let me begin, if I may, Anatol. The moves by Putin following the massacre in Beslan, the terrorists and separatist movements within Chechnya, is he justified to make these moves in your judgment?
ANATOL LEVIN, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT: No, on the whole not. There are justifications for them, but I think, in general, they're unwise and potentially very dangerous because by trying to impose much closer central rule on Russia's ethnic autonomous republics in particular, he risks spreading ethnic unrest to parts of the Russian federation which so far have actually lived pretty contentedly and very peacefully within Russia.
So I think that this is very dangerous, it's very counterproductive, and, above all, it doesn't really answer the threat of Chechen terrorism and Islamist terrorism and, above all, it doesn't answer catastrophic failings of the Russian security forces.
DOBBS: Graham Allison, do you agree?
GRAHAM ALLISON, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: I do. I think that this is an instance in which Putin is exploiting a tragedy to consolidate power in a manner that has nothing whatever to do with the failures of the approach to Chechnya that he's been taking and it will have no impact on that problem.
DOBBS: You're both dubious of the effectiveness of this move by Putin. So we're left with a number of unresolved issues, in your judgment, it seems, if I understand you correctly.
One, it doesn't really respond or resolve the Chechnyan issue for the Russians. Secondly, it's ineffective in the war against radical Islamist terrorism. And, thirdly, it certainly creates great ambiguity about Russia's commitment to democratic reform or a suggestion, if you will, that they're headed back toward communism.
Can it be said that strongly, Anatol?
LEVIN: They're certainly not headed back toward communism. After all, the world is full of semi-authoritarian states with free market systems, many of them, it must be said, allies of the United States.
Putin is in no sense a communist, but I think he has been very much influenced by two things. One is the really disastrous decline of Russia under Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s, which he associates -- and, to some extent, it must be said rightly -- with the collapse of central state power and an anarchy of competing jurisdictions in Russia.
DOBBS: Well, if I may say, Anatol, just to be -- if I may interject, historically here, the fact is the collapse occurred before the market reforms. It simply accelerated the decline, but the decline was well in place, the collapse.
LEVIN: Well, the collapse of the Soviet Union did, but Putin, for example, would also associate the Yeltsin period with, for example, the plundering of the Russian state by powerful polyarchical businessmen.
DOBBS: Sure.
LEVIN: But, secondly, you see, Putin -- and it must be said a lot of people around the world -- have been very heavily influenced by the tremendous success of the authoritarian Chinese state in developing China.
DOBBS: I thought that was -- I thought the Chinese were your reference at the outset.
LEVIN: Well, absolutely.
DOBBS: Let me ask Graham Allison very quickly, if I may, Anatol, I -- what are the implications here for the United States? The contact between our countries, Secretary of State Powell has been in Russia over the course of the past three and a half years, six times. Not a decidedly active relationship, if one judges it on that basis.
What is the implication here for the relationship 20 United States and Russia going forward?
ALLISON: Well, I think the bottom line here is that Putin has a failed strategy in dealing with Chechnya, and a failed strategy in dealing with terrorism. And this is exacerbating the problem, certainly not helping it. So, I think that the issue for the U.S. as we think about Russia and our stakes in Russia, is whether we can help Putin better understand that the hand that he's currently playing is simply not working. And stand back a little bit and try to figure out whether there is a better alternative, which I think there is.
DOBBS: Would you like to be the U.S. representative who approaches Vladimir Putin to say, "Mr. President, you don't quite have the firm grip that the United States does on international policy and we think we have the better answer for you."
Anatol, would you like to be that person.
LEVIN: Well, no, I am sure the regulation government would reply. The U.S. is not doing too well in Iraq. I prefer to be the U.S. representative in Russia than I would be the Russian president. You know, with all of the criticism one can justly make of Putin. You know, he is ruling an extremely difficult country. And many of the decisions he has to make are very difficult.
DOBBS: Gentlemen, we thank you both. Graham Allison and we thank you very much, Anatol Levin, for being with us.
Turning now to the latest on Hurricane Ivan. Tonight, it is charging toward the U.S. Gulf coast forcing evacuations in four states now. This is a dangerous category four hurricane. Winds up to 140 miles an hour, as I last looked. Forecasters saying that Hurricane Ivan will now make landfall somewhere between Central Louisiana and the Florida Panhandle tomorrow, or rather early Thursday. And the mayor of New Orleans is in fact urging a million people who live in the low-lying parts of the city to evacuate.
The governors of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama have all declared states of emergency. This storm's already killed 60 people across the Caribbean.
Joining me now for the very latest on this storm to tell us exactly where and when it might hit is Max Mayfield director of the National Hurricane Center.
Max, good to have you here tonight. Incredibly you have another killer storm on your hands in short order.
MAX MAYFIELD, DIR. NATL. HURRICANE CENTER: We sure do, Lou. And this is not only a very, very powerful hurricane, but it's another large hurricane as indeed going to impact a very large area again. We have a NOAA aircraft out there right now that is sending back some information on the surface winds. There's a new instrument on board and we're still getting surface winds of 140 miles an hour in this hurricane. So it's a solid category four hurricane. We have the hurricane warnings up now that start over in Grand Isle, Louisiana and go over to Apalachicola, Florida with tropical storm warnings on either side of that. This is going to impact a large area. Be concerned with storm surge and the winds and the rainfall as it moves inland.
DOBBS: A lot of people are talking about New Orleans because it is low-lying, much of the city in point of fact below sea level. What is your best judgment right now? I know that you have to with your models and your forecasts changes this and adjust this with the storm as it progress, what is your best judgment about the narrowest band of likely landfall?
MAYFIELD: Well, this is not the worst case scenario for new Orleans, but it's getting close here. If the track actually goes in here into Alabama, and it could easily be Mississippi or even southeast Louisiana, it will not be as bad as if it stays to the right of that. The 10 to 15 of storms surge that we're forecasting is going to be near and to the east of where the center crosses the coast.
However having said that, even if it stays in our forecast track, they're going to get some very significant storm surge in areas of the onshore flow there in southeastern Louisiana. So outside of the levy system, they're going to have a real problem there.
DOBBS: When you talk about storm surge, and of course everyone in southern Louisiana is concerned about it from Lake Ponchartrain throughout New Orleans, the city almost all but surrounded by water, what kind of surge are you expecting right now in the seas?
MAYFIELD: Well, we're really think we'll have 10 to 16 feet. But again that's near and to the east of where the center crosses the coast. There'll be lesser amounts, I would guess, four to possibly eight feet in portion of the southeast Louisiana, as long the track stays to the east of there. If the track shifts a little bit closer, then they could have a much bigger problem especially around Lake Pontchartian. If that wind comes northerly off of the lake, they could have a real problem in the south side. If the track hits much closer to the city of New Orleans itself.
DOBBS: Now, as I look at the graphic behind you there, Max, as we see that, that's a broad area that you have there for a danger zone.
Why is this so wide over this storm?
MAYFIELD: Well, really good explanation for that, Lou, in this the hurricane forced winds extend a little over 100 miles away from the center. And the tropical storm force winds extend outward about 260 miles away from the center. This is sort of like Hurricane Opal back in 1995. I really impacted a very, very large area on the coastline. This one will do the same.
DOBBS: Max Mayfield, we thank you very much from the National Hurricane Center. Thank you, sir.
MAYFIELD: Thank you, sir.
Still ahead, carnage in Iraq. Former coalition adviser in Iraq, Michael Rubin says U.S. policies are rewarding insurgents and punishing peaceful Iraqis.
Michael Rubin is our guest.
One critical American industry sees unemployment rates doubling, and in the exporting of America, largely to blame. Marcus Courtney, president of Washtech on the incredible pressure on the information technology labor force. He's our guest.
And a groundbreaking documentary on the exporting of American jobs, the cheap foreign labor markets. Tonight the broken promises of NAFTA.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Radical Islamist terrorist today claimed responsibility for two attacks in Iraq that killed 60 people, A car bombing in Baghdad, a drive-by shooting in Baquba.
My next guest says the situation in Iraq is not only deteriorated but will continue to worsen. Michael Rubin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, former adviser to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq joining us tonight from Washington.
Michael, this violence is escalating, our report from Walt Rodgers in Baghdad, pointing out that stability is the strategy for U.S. forces, coalition.
But stability is the farthest thing of the current reality. What's wrong?
MICHAEL RUBIN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Well, basically things recently -- the situation recently has been getting a little bit worse but it's still very much salvageable. The attacks aren't just targeting just Americans they're targeting Iraqis. And the majority of Iraqis want us to succeed. We just saw this in a poll from the Iraq Center for Research and Strategic studies. People are pessimistic in the short term and optimistic in the long term. Basically these attacks are not just targeting the Iraqi people, they're targeting the elections.
DOBBS: They're targeting elections, but people are dying in front of police stations, as recruits line up to join those police forces. People are dying drive-by shoots. Eighty attacks against U.S. forces a day over the past couple weeks. This escalating violence and polls or no poll, the reality is carnage, violence, and seemingly the initiative on the part of the insurgents fully.
RUBIN: You're absolutely right there. Situation is worsening in the short term. The issue is what we saw in Najaf with Muqtada al- Sadr, and what we've seen in Fallujah and Baquba is that the Iraqis don't like living under the insurgents. Many of these insurgents are choosing violence because they realize that they cannot win through the polls. The key to restoring stability is to persevere through elections. At the same time, though, we don't want to be in a situation where we are coddling our adversaries and bullying our friends. We don't want to be rewarding violence.
DOBBS: Michael, if I may say, you suggest that the violence is rising because the insurgents understand they can't win. The other reason for rising violence would be because they believe they can win. In either case, violence is rising. What in the world can be done to stabilize Iraq to protect the government that we have put in place?
RUBIN: Well, the key here is to convince the Iraqis that they have more to gain by siding with us than by siding with the insurgents. The insurgents don't have a great deal of popular support among those who know them.
The insurgents' popularity increases as a symbol. Those that live farthest away from the insurgents tend to support them the most. The key here, though, is we don't want to be in a situation where we are rewarding the violence. We don't -- we need more Churchill and less Chamberlain.
DOBBS: Michael Rubin, thanks for being with us, American Enterprise Institute.
Coming up next, an important new documentary on the exporting of American jobs and the pain its creating for work American families. Tonight, filmmaker Greg Spotts looks at the broken promises of the North American Free Trade Agreement, "American Jobs" next. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: A disturbing new study tonight finds the unemployment rate for high-technology workers in this country has doubled over the past three years, that is during an economic recovery. The study was conducted by the University of Illinois of Chicago for Washtech, a national union for high-technology workers.
The study looked at six key U.S. regions, together they've lost more than 60,000 high-paying tech jobs in just three years in those regions. One of the main reasons, export of work to cheap foreign labor markets. Marcus Courtney, president of Washtech joins us tonight from Seattle, Washington, good to have you here.
MARCUS COURTNEY, PRESIDENT, WASHTECH: Thank you, Lou, great to be here.
DOBBS: A doubling of the unemployment in IT. The trade association in point of fact saying that employment and hiring this year is going to be half what it was last. Is there any good news in this for technology workers?
COURTNEY: Well, unfortunately we're not seeing a lot of great news. What we found since an economic recovery was declared three years ago, that the country has lost more than 200,000 high-tech jobs. And every major high-tech city we studied, from San Francisco to Boston, has fewer high-tech jobs today than it did three years ago.
And we were, at one point in this industry, looking at full employment with unemployment levels around 1 to 2 percent. And today, they're well over 6 percent.
DOBBS: And with that kind of trend in place, do you see any kind of reversal in the offing? Because as I said, ITAA is suggesting that hiring is going to be half what it was a year ago.
COURTNEY: Well, I think there's a lot of reports about increasing demand. But as we can see, the hiring of high-tech workers in this country is really stagnant. And if we do not begin changing government policy in trade agreements to make sure that we are actually jump-starting the high-tech economy in this country, we're going to continue to see our leading employers to choose to employ and hiring workers overseas instead of in this country.
DOBBS: Marcus, these jobs that are going overseas now, you point out that a lot of the responsibility for this rests with companies exporting those IT jobs to cheap labor market overseas. But are those high-quality jobs? Are they lower-paying jobs? What's the reality?
COURTNEY: Well, the reality is is the jobs that are being exported overseas are from the low-level jobs, such as customer service, all the way to the top-end jobs of software architecture and research and development. We have actively reported on and exposed how Microsoft as far back as 2001 was beginning to export software architects' jobs which is the highest value-added jobs in the industry.
DOBBS: Marcus, we thank you very much. Marcus Courtney of Washtech.
Well, all of this week we're bringing you the first-ever documentary on the pain created by the exporting of American jobs to cheap foreign labor markets and its devastating impact on communities all across this country. The documentary is "American Jobs", tonight focusing on the North America Free Trade Agreement and its broken promises.
We'll continue in just a moment. And we'll bring you "American Jobs" next. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Now, "American Jobs" and the broken promises of NAFTA.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE FROM "AMERICAN JOBS")
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. I went to The Gap, and I looked at everything like, sweaters, dresses, skirts, flip-flops, tube tops, and everything was made from different places. It was from Thailand, Turkey India, Hong Kong, China, the Philippines, Vietnam.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I went to American Eagle Outfitters.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I went to Guess.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I went to the Old Navy store.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nordstrom.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Shirts and pants were made mostly in Bangladesh, Indonesia and Pakistan.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Peru, Vietnam, Macao, Taiwan and Hong Kong.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hong Kong, Kuwait and China.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nicaragua, Peru and South Africa.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And I couldn't find anything that was made in America.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK, well, I went to my closet and I looked at all of my Gap clothing, and I found that the majority of the shirts were made in like China, Singapore and Hong Kong, and that the pants were made in Mexico.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nick, did you want to say something?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was just saying that it's really funny how these, these corporations and stuff, they portray themselves as all- American brands and all-American clothing, but when you look at it, they really rarely have anything made in America.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wondered if our leaders knew they were sacrificing the American textile industry when they ratified NAFTA back in 1993.
President Clinton, a Democrat, inherited the treaty from his Republican predecessor, and made the treaty's ratification a major priority of his first year in office.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Every living president says "a future with NAFTA will be brighter." Presidents Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton agree on that point. NEWT GINGRICH, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: It's a moment when you define for the future of the nation and the future of the world who we are and what we believe in.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: NAFTA really is the ultimate win-win situation. Mexico will modernize its economy, buying machinery, products and equipment from the USA. Creating better jobs for its own workers. Its consumers will, then, spend their new-found wealth on everything from autos, refrigerators and diapers made in the USA, creating better-paying jobs for Americans.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Two weeks before the House voted, insiders believed that NAFTA would be defeated. A coalition led by Dick Gephardt and David Bonior argued that NAFTA would destroy many more jobs than it created, leaving thousands of Americans unemployed.
REP. DICK GEPHARDT (D), MISSOURI: We must not approve a treaty that only protects the rights of business, but does not protect the rights of workers.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If NAFTA tonight threatened the jobs of editorial writers and network news anchors and Wall Street bankers, this bill wouldn't have a prayer. But it doesn't. It threatens the jobs of non-college educated workers. So it's going to pass.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Those of us who take these concerns seriously have today on this floor been called fear mongers, afraid to take risks, with no vision of the future. That is an insult to the working families of this country.
DAVID BONIOR (D-MI), FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: They knew they were in trouble. I had a powerful member of Congress in the House tell me that he went down to the White House. This is a person who'd been around for many, many, many years.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeatedly in our history, we have been asked to enlarge America's markets. There have always been doubters, but they have always been proven wrong.
BONIOR: Dan Rostenkowski, who was the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, told me that he went to the White House and said basically to the president, he said, you are going to let Bonior and those folks beat you? And the president said to him, what should we do, and basically Dan said, you've got to -- you're making more deals.
If you need a bridge or a highway, you could go in and get that. If you needed a fund-raiser in your district to raise some money to get you reelected, you could do that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We just don't know the cost of all the promises that are being made in the back rooms at the White House and on Capitol Hill. The American people should be outraged at the way this treaty has been bought, vote by vote, with wheeling and dealing that would make a rug merchant blush.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On this vote, the yeas are 234, the nays are 200, and the bill is passed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: We continue with "American Jobs" tomorrow evening.
Taking a look now at some of your thoughts on the issue of exporting America. Many of you wrote in about that personal attack on me in an op-ed in "The Wall Street Journal" yesterday. Arthur Mones of Scottsdale, Arizona -- "Lou, you handled the attack on your girth with equanimity and mirth. If that's the worst your adversaries can come up with, you must be saying something right about outsourcing."
Lou Marino from Bethlehem, Pennsylvania: "Professor Bhagwati's comments were unprofessional and completely insensitive to the plight of us millions of middle class Americans. I salute you for keeping issues vital to us at the forefront of the national debate. I don't like Brie either."
And Roberta Eckland of Lincoln City, Oregon: "If Dr. Jagdish Bhagwati, an MIT Ph.D., can only defend his arguments through personal insult and attack, yet is a professor at Columbia University, what kind of education are those poor students at one of the most prestigious universities receiving?"
We love hearing from you. Send us your thoughts at loudobbs@cnn.com. Send us your name and address, because each of you whose e-mail is read on this broadcast receives a free copy of my new book, "Exporting America."
Tonight's thought is on the responsibilities of corporate America. "So the question is, do corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, have responsibilities in their business activities, other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible? And my answer to that is, no, they do not." Economist Milton Friedman.
Staggering news tonight on this country's ballooning federal budget deficit. The Treasury Department today reported the deficit's already 9 percent higher than a year ago, almost $437 billion, and there's still a month to go in this budget year. The Congressional Budget Office had projected a deficit of $422 billion.
Well, coming up next, the results of our poll, and we'll tell you what's ahead tomorrow. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight. Only 9 percent of you say you are better off today than four years ago; 91 percent say you are not.
That's it for tonight. Thanks for being with us. Please join us here tomorrow. Author Kitty Kelley joins us to talk about her explosive, controversial new unauthorized biography of the Bush family. It's quite a read, I assure you. And former presidential adviser David Gergen will be with me. Also tomorrow, our "Face-Off" on electronic voting. That debate about the threat to our democracy.
Please be with us. For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" coming up next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired September 14, 2004 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Tuesday, September 14. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening.
Tonight, what is the U.S. strategy in Iraq? Sixty Iraqis killed in two deadly attacks today. Three more American soldiers have been killed in combat. Former Pentagon adviser Michael Rubin says the United States is on the wrong course. He's our guest.
Can our intelligence agencies tell whether a mushroom cloud over North Korea is a nuclear blast? What is the true state of America's intelligence capabilities? Senate Intelligence Committee member Senator Dick Durbin is our guest.
In Russia, it may not be communism, but it's certainly not democracy. Russian President Vladimir Putin is concentrating power in the Kremlin. He blames the war on terror. Tonight, two Russian experts join me to talk about what the future holds for Russia and its relationship with the United States.
Hurricane Ivan is charging towards the U.S. Gulf Coast. More than a million people in New Orleans are set to evacuate. We'll be going to the National Hurricane Center for the very latest on Hurricane Ivan.
And in Exporting America tonight, the documentary "American Jobs," the broken promises of NAFTA and the assault on working American families.
The violence in Iraq is continuing to escalate. There is carnage throughout the country. The deadliest insurgent attack in Baghdad in weeks, a lethal drive-by shooting in Baquba, and three more American soldiers killed in combat. The attacks in Baghdad and Baquba killed 60 Iraqis. A group linked to the al Qaeda terrorist network claimed responsibility.
Walt Rodgers reports from Baghdad.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WALTER RODGERS, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): Ambulance sirens screamed as if enraged at the sight of a Baghdad car bombing. Here, the death toll grew all day approaching 50. More than 100 were wounded. The apparent target, a police station. Young Iraqi men bringing their photos to apply for a job on the force.
These Baghdad bombs are indiscriminate. Witness the sandals of the dead. Many shop owners spent this day cleaning human flesh from their store fronts. The explosion shredded lives and bodies of a people already made miserable by war. The U.S. Apache helicopter was the only explanation many Iraqis needed.
"This is an American rocket," he says, "holding a piece of pipe."
"Just before the explosion," this man assured us, "I spotted the Apache helicopter. It was a missile, not a car bomb."
An Arab Islamist Web site claimed responsibility, but, even if there were concrete supporting evidence of that, the trend in Iraq is to transfer anger and responsibility.
"It was the Americans and the work of the Jews," he said.
In hospital, however, an injured man who survived the blast said he couldn't tell if it was a missile or a car bomb.
These young men had dreams of building a new Iraq as policemen. Few other jobs are available. Still, even the most charitable Iraqis still believe the Americans had an obligation to protect them and failed.
The American response?
MAJ. GEN. PETE CHIARELLI, U.S. ARMY: Well, we can't protect all of Baghdad. We're working very, very hard to do that.
RODGERS: So there is much breastfeeding in hospitals these days as areas beyond U.S. protection are increasingly targeted.
In Baquba, another 12 policemen were murdered in a drive-by shooting.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
RODGERS: And if there is now any doubt about the guerrillas having regained the initiative in Iraq, saboteurs today also blew up a major oil pipeline near Tikrit, temporarily at least disrupting electrical power to much of this country -- Lou.
DOBBS: Walt, do these latest attacks and the escalating violence over the past certainly two weeks mean that the U.S. strategy right now, taking the offensive against towns and cities controlled by insurgents -- does it suggest that that strategy is simply failing?
RODGERS: That's a judgment I'd prefer not to make. I think the American strategy now, such as it is, is to try to stabilize this country and maintain stability, but recall most U.S. forces are enclosed on bases on -- in essentially fortresses in this country.
They're not going out around the countryside unless there is a specific required need, as in Sadr City last week, that suburb of Baghdad, when Muqtada al Sadr's army was in a state of rebellion, armed rebellion. Then there was no compunction but to send the U.S. forces in. The same several weeks earlier in Najaf when the Shiite rebel militias were also engaged in an uprising there.
But, basically, I think stabilization is the American strategy here, and there's no real effort to conquer and particularly certain areas in the Sunni triangle where the policy basically seems containment -- surround the rebels, lock them down and not engage them in anything that would involve major casualties, major American casualties at least, if you don't have to -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, Walt, failing that judgment, let me ask you another question more directly, if I may. Is all of this escalating violence evidence of stability in Iraq?
RODGERS: Well, I think the facts speak for themselves. What you see is that the guerrillas have the -- the insurgents have the initiative to strike whenever they want. They can't drive the Americans out. They can't defeat the Americans in a pitched battle in the field. They've never defeated the Americans in anything larger than a platoon -- or smaller than a platoon engagement.
Having said that, there's great instability here, and those insurgents can strike wherever they want and strike the at very institutions the United States is trying to build. For example, they can assassinate politicians, and they do. They can assassinate police chiefs, and they do. And, of course, what we see here -- they're trying to kill off young police recruits.
So, again, the initiative is almost at will in the hands of the insurgents, and there doesn't seem to be a lot -- as that one general said in the package we just ran, there isn't a lot that the U.S. Army can do about totally controlling this country. There simply are not enough troops in here to do that. The Bush administration does not want to commit those troops and has not wanted to commit those troops for a year and a half.
DOBBS: Walt Rodgers -- thank you -- reporting live from Baghdad.
An astonishing statement today about the global war on terror by the man who's been nominated to be the next CIA director. The nominee, Congressman Porter Goss, told the Senate committee that it will take longer than originally thought to rebuild the CIA's clandestine service.
The previous CIA director, George Tenet, said the clandestine service will not be strong enough to fight the global war against radical Islamic terror for five years. I'll be joined later by a leading member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Dick Durbin, to discuss the capabilities of American intelligence.
The September 11 commission said much tougher border controls are necessary to help protect this country from radical Islamist terrorism, but critics today said the federal government is failing to introduce reform fast enough, and that delay is putting the lives of Americans at risk. Lisa Sylvester reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Terrorist suspect Zacarias Moussaoui and Richard Reid entered the United States without visas. They were from France and Britain, two countries where visitors do not need to be screened prior to their arrival. The loophole is leaving the country vulnerable to future attacks, according to a new report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
DAN STEIN, FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM: We have an opportunity now with the 9/11 commission to put in recommendations which right away would make Americans safer and secure and move a long way toward improving enforcement of visa laws and visa compliance.
SYLVESTER: The group, also known as FAIR, wants to ensure the 9/11 commission recommendations for beefing up border security do not go unheated. Among the proposals in Congress, a bill introduced by Senator John McCain last week that calls on the Department of Homeland Security to establish a uniform standard for driver's licenses; another bill that would repeal the current visa lottery program that provides green cards to 55,000 foreign nationals a year; and an amendment being considered this week that would ban the use of foreign matricula cards to set up a bank account.
Immigration reformists expected more action after the 9/11 attacks, but they say politics has been getting in the way of policy.
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R), CALIFORNIA: The left wing of the Democratic Party, which controls that party, sees illegal immigrants as political pawns, and people who have a great deal of influence on the Republican Party see them as economic pawns in order to keep down wages.
SYLVESTER: Immigration reform groups say the crackdown on those in the United States illegally has to extend not jut to the borders, but also to the interior of the country where enforcement has been lacking.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: The Department of Homeland Security declined an on- camera interview, but a spokesman acknowledged that the matricula cards are a potential terrorist loophole and defended their efforts at interior enforcement, saying they have been cracking down on employment of illegal aliens, targeting companies, including Wal-Mart -- Lou.
DOBBS: And those comments coming on the day and the week in which "TIME" magazine reports three million American illegal aliens will enter this country this year.
Lisa Sylvester -- thank you very much -- reporting from Washington. President Bush today campaigned on the issue of homeland security in a speech before National Guard members. President Bush told a guard conference in Las Vegas that he is proud to have served in the National Guard.
President Bush made no mention of the controversy surrounding whether he fulfilled his guard requirements during the Vietnam War nor the controversy surrounding the CBS report suggesting that he violated direct orders and failed to fully serve in his commitment to the guard.
President Bush thanked the guard members for their service, and he said they are helping to protect this country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need the service of guardsmen and women because of the times we live in. These are dangerous times.
My most solemn duty as the president is to protect the American people. If America shows uncertainty and weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This is not going to happen on my watch.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Outside the guard conference, while the president was speaking, more than 200 people protested the war in Iraq.
And, separately, relatives of some National Guard members held a news conference criticizing President Bush and the war.
Senator John Kerry today recruited another former Clinton adviser to his communications team, former White House press secretary Michael McCurry. McCurry will handle the traveling press corps during the final weeks of this campaign.
On the campaign trail today, Senator Kerry again hammered President Bush on domestic issues, this time specifically on health care.
Frank Buckley has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JOHN F. KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: This is the annual report.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Using a series of charts with information from annual Medicare trustee reports, Senator John Kerry showed how in each year of the Bush administration, according to its own figures, Medicare costs were eating into the Social Security benefits of the average senior.
KERRY: Now that's each year up until -- guess what -- this year, election year 2004. Here's the chart they gave us this year to show the costs of your out-of-pocket expenses. Oh, my gosh! It's empty. A great big question mark.
BUCKLEY: Kerry accused the Bush administration of withholding the figures in the 2004 annual report because they projected a huge hit against Social Security benefits over the next three years, information released by the administration only after a request from a Democratic congressman from California.
KERRY: Once again, this administration hides the truth from the American people, and the reason they're hiding the truth from the American people is because the out-of-pocket expenses of Medicare have now gone up to 37.2 percent by 2006.
BUCKLEY: Bush campaign officials say Kerry's own votes in Congress have contributed to higher Medicare costs, a charge Kerry staffers dispute.
It was the second straight day Kerry went after President Bush on a domestic issue. Kerry's criticisms of the president designed to draw distinctions and to shake up poll numbers that show Bush leading since the Republican Convention.
(on camera): Even here in Wisconsin where voters have gone Democrat in five of the last seven presidential elections, including in 2000, it's Bush that's ahead. A new CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup poll indicating that Bush leads Kerry here by 8 points among likely voters. Kerry staffers admit they're behind here, but they still believe Wisconsin is a toss-up, and Senator Kerry will return to this state on Wednesday.
Frank Buckley, CNN, Milwaukee.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: That brings us to our poll. The question tonight: Are you better off today than you were four years ago? Yes or no. Cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll have the results later here in the broadcast.
Coming up next, tough questions for America's intelligence agencies and the man slated to be the new director of the CIA, after a huge mushroom cloud appears over North Korea. Senate Intelligence Committee member Senator Dick Durbin is my guest.
Russian President Vladimir Putin concentrating power in the Kremlin. Critics say Putin is moving Russia back toward communism. Two leading experts on Russia join me.
And Hurricane Ivan barreling tonight toward the U.S. Gulf Coast. More than a million people ready it leave their homes. The director of the National Hurricane Center, Max Mayfield, will give us the very latest on Hurricane Ivan next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) DOBBS: President Bush's nominee to be director of the CIA, Congressman Porter Goss, today faced tough questioning on Capitol Hill during his Senate confirmation hearing. Among the key issues facing Congressman Goss: whether U.S. intelligence agencies have the resources to effectively fight the war on terror and whether those agencies have the capability to watch potential new enemies, whether North Korea, Iran, or any other country.
Joining me now is Senator Dick Durbin, a leading Democratic member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Senator Durbin, good to have you with us.
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Thanks, Lou. Good to be with you.
DOBBS: Let's go to the issue first of all of the new CIA director nominee, Congressman Goss. Is he, in your judgment, a man you can support.
DURBIN: He's a good man, and I still have a number of questions. I asked some of them today.
It's just not another nomination. We know that intelligence is our first line of defense against terrorism. We want the very best person in that job, and the two things we're looking for, the unanswered questions, is Porter Goss committed to reform, which we really need -- the 9/11 commission tells us that -- and, secondly, can he be nonpartisan in this job?
I think that was the basic thrust of most questions today in the hearing.
DOBBS: You asked in point of fact about comments that Congressman Goss has made about John Kerry and other Democrats. What were you getting at?
DURBIN: Well, I think Porter Goss acknowledged to me yesterday in my office, today at the hearing, he said some things that he now regrets. They were very partisan. They took after the Democratic Party and John Kerry in a way that even today he didn't want to defend. He wanted to step away from them.
We have to be convinced that as the head of the CIA he'll be totally nonpartisan. Whoever is appointed by whatever president will meet that standard.
DOBBS: Congressman Goss is a known quantity certainly on Capitol Hill, certainly in Washington, D.C., eight years in his role as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Was he effective, in your judgment? Was he reliable in his role overseeing the oversight, a role of Congress?
DURBIN: I'd give him a C plus to a B because I think, though he's handled it with competence and with the integrity, at a time when we needed to be more aggressive in oversight and more forceful in reforming the intelligence agencies, he did not lead, and I think we needed it, both under President Clinton as well as under President Bush.
DOBBS: Today, Senator, Congressman Goss said something that most of us listening found astonishing. That is, after George Tenet had told us all that it would take five years for this country's intelligence community to be effective in its covert operations against radical Islamist terrorism, he said it will take longer. Were you astonished by that?
DURBIN: No, and I'll tell you why I wasn't. I'm disappointed, but wasn't surprised.
First, we need organization in management. That's what the 9/11 commission report is all about. But, beyond that, we have to fill the spaces with faces. We need the talent pool to draw from so we have people with the skills to provide the intelligence we need to be safe.
And, secondly, Lou, you would be, I'm sure, shocked if you knew what was going on when it came to computers in the federal government. The computer systems that we rely on today to protect America are archaic. They don't speak to one another. So, even if the agencies are ready to communicate, the equipment is not.
DOBBS: Senator, you've called for a Manhattan project to reform those, to restructure those information systems. How likely is that to come to pass, and how soon?
DURBIN: I'm encouraged. Now, for the first time, there's bipartisan support. I tried to do this a couple of years ago when we created the Department of Homeland Security, and I didn't get very far.
But now, as people reflect on the sorry state of the computer architecture in each of these agencies and the -- literally the physical inability for these computers to communicate, they're starting to take it more seriously.
I think we need a breakthrough. We need to bring the best in the private sector, the best in the public sector and the best in the academic world to make sure we have the best computers in the world protecting America.
DOBBS: Senator, one last area of inquiry, if I may, and that is -- it goes to the issue of all of the failures of intelligence by this country's intelligence agencies and its successes, there has been a sense that our reconnaissance effort, our ability to deliver imaging, our national reconnaissance organization was all but foolproof.
Yet, with this mushroom cloud over North Korea last week, we still hear U.S. officials, whether it be the secretary of state, whether it be the national security adviser, saying they don't think it was a nuclear event. Does that disturb you, and are you surprised by the ambiguity in those statements?
DURBIN: In most instances, reliable intelligence on the ground, human intelligence is still the very best. Computers and -- the satellites rather that generate these photographs and computer images really inform us to some degree. Our best guess now is that that cloud in North Korea was not a nuclear cloud.
But, still, we don't have the people on the ground. It's a very closed country and a closed society. So really looking for human intelligence is still the bedrock of good information and intelligence.
DOBBS: And it has to be extraordinary for you, as it is for all of us, to think that it has been 50 years in which this country has been watching over North Korea since the end of the war.
Senator Dick Durbin, we thank you for being here.
DURBIN: Thanks. Thanks very much, Lou.
Still ahead tonight, Putin's power grab. Russia's president says he needs to consolidate power in order to fight radical Islamist terrorism. Critics say it's nothing more than a return to communism. I'll be back with two experts on Russia. Politics and international relations next.
And then, Hurricane Ivan has lashed the Caribbean. This deadly storm is now heading straight for the U.S. Gulf Coast. Local officials urging millions of people now to leave their homes. We'll have the very latest for you on where and when the storm is likely to hit. I'll be talking with Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues with more news, debate and opinion. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: The United States tonight is reacting skeptically to Russian President Vladimir Putin's plans to massively overhaul Russia's political system. Putin says the changes are needed to fight rising radical Islamist terrorism in Russia, most recently citing the murder of hundreds of schoolchildren in Beslan.
The overhaul would consolidate Putin's power over regional governments, concentrate political power within the Kremlin. Secretary of State Colin Powell today told Reuters News Agency that the plan pulls back on some of Russia's democratic reform.
Joining me now for more on the impact of Russia's moves, Graham Allison, professor of international security at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard university, joining us from Boston; from Washington, D.C., Anatol Levin, senior associate at Carnegie Endowment.
Thank you both for being here.
Let me begin, if I may, Anatol. The moves by Putin following the massacre in Beslan, the terrorists and separatist movements within Chechnya, is he justified to make these moves in your judgment?
ANATOL LEVIN, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT: No, on the whole not. There are justifications for them, but I think, in general, they're unwise and potentially very dangerous because by trying to impose much closer central rule on Russia's ethnic autonomous republics in particular, he risks spreading ethnic unrest to parts of the Russian federation which so far have actually lived pretty contentedly and very peacefully within Russia.
So I think that this is very dangerous, it's very counterproductive, and, above all, it doesn't really answer the threat of Chechen terrorism and Islamist terrorism and, above all, it doesn't answer catastrophic failings of the Russian security forces.
DOBBS: Graham Allison, do you agree?
GRAHAM ALLISON, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: I do. I think that this is an instance in which Putin is exploiting a tragedy to consolidate power in a manner that has nothing whatever to do with the failures of the approach to Chechnya that he's been taking and it will have no impact on that problem.
DOBBS: You're both dubious of the effectiveness of this move by Putin. So we're left with a number of unresolved issues, in your judgment, it seems, if I understand you correctly.
One, it doesn't really respond or resolve the Chechnyan issue for the Russians. Secondly, it's ineffective in the war against radical Islamist terrorism. And, thirdly, it certainly creates great ambiguity about Russia's commitment to democratic reform or a suggestion, if you will, that they're headed back toward communism.
Can it be said that strongly, Anatol?
LEVIN: They're certainly not headed back toward communism. After all, the world is full of semi-authoritarian states with free market systems, many of them, it must be said, allies of the United States.
Putin is in no sense a communist, but I think he has been very much influenced by two things. One is the really disastrous decline of Russia under Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s, which he associates -- and, to some extent, it must be said rightly -- with the collapse of central state power and an anarchy of competing jurisdictions in Russia.
DOBBS: Well, if I may say, Anatol, just to be -- if I may interject, historically here, the fact is the collapse occurred before the market reforms. It simply accelerated the decline, but the decline was well in place, the collapse.
LEVIN: Well, the collapse of the Soviet Union did, but Putin, for example, would also associate the Yeltsin period with, for example, the plundering of the Russian state by powerful polyarchical businessmen.
DOBBS: Sure.
LEVIN: But, secondly, you see, Putin -- and it must be said a lot of people around the world -- have been very heavily influenced by the tremendous success of the authoritarian Chinese state in developing China.
DOBBS: I thought that was -- I thought the Chinese were your reference at the outset.
LEVIN: Well, absolutely.
DOBBS: Let me ask Graham Allison very quickly, if I may, Anatol, I -- what are the implications here for the United States? The contact between our countries, Secretary of State Powell has been in Russia over the course of the past three and a half years, six times. Not a decidedly active relationship, if one judges it on that basis.
What is the implication here for the relationship 20 United States and Russia going forward?
ALLISON: Well, I think the bottom line here is that Putin has a failed strategy in dealing with Chechnya, and a failed strategy in dealing with terrorism. And this is exacerbating the problem, certainly not helping it. So, I think that the issue for the U.S. as we think about Russia and our stakes in Russia, is whether we can help Putin better understand that the hand that he's currently playing is simply not working. And stand back a little bit and try to figure out whether there is a better alternative, which I think there is.
DOBBS: Would you like to be the U.S. representative who approaches Vladimir Putin to say, "Mr. President, you don't quite have the firm grip that the United States does on international policy and we think we have the better answer for you."
Anatol, would you like to be that person.
LEVIN: Well, no, I am sure the regulation government would reply. The U.S. is not doing too well in Iraq. I prefer to be the U.S. representative in Russia than I would be the Russian president. You know, with all of the criticism one can justly make of Putin. You know, he is ruling an extremely difficult country. And many of the decisions he has to make are very difficult.
DOBBS: Gentlemen, we thank you both. Graham Allison and we thank you very much, Anatol Levin, for being with us.
Turning now to the latest on Hurricane Ivan. Tonight, it is charging toward the U.S. Gulf coast forcing evacuations in four states now. This is a dangerous category four hurricane. Winds up to 140 miles an hour, as I last looked. Forecasters saying that Hurricane Ivan will now make landfall somewhere between Central Louisiana and the Florida Panhandle tomorrow, or rather early Thursday. And the mayor of New Orleans is in fact urging a million people who live in the low-lying parts of the city to evacuate.
The governors of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama have all declared states of emergency. This storm's already killed 60 people across the Caribbean.
Joining me now for the very latest on this storm to tell us exactly where and when it might hit is Max Mayfield director of the National Hurricane Center.
Max, good to have you here tonight. Incredibly you have another killer storm on your hands in short order.
MAX MAYFIELD, DIR. NATL. HURRICANE CENTER: We sure do, Lou. And this is not only a very, very powerful hurricane, but it's another large hurricane as indeed going to impact a very large area again. We have a NOAA aircraft out there right now that is sending back some information on the surface winds. There's a new instrument on board and we're still getting surface winds of 140 miles an hour in this hurricane. So it's a solid category four hurricane. We have the hurricane warnings up now that start over in Grand Isle, Louisiana and go over to Apalachicola, Florida with tropical storm warnings on either side of that. This is going to impact a large area. Be concerned with storm surge and the winds and the rainfall as it moves inland.
DOBBS: A lot of people are talking about New Orleans because it is low-lying, much of the city in point of fact below sea level. What is your best judgment right now? I know that you have to with your models and your forecasts changes this and adjust this with the storm as it progress, what is your best judgment about the narrowest band of likely landfall?
MAYFIELD: Well, this is not the worst case scenario for new Orleans, but it's getting close here. If the track actually goes in here into Alabama, and it could easily be Mississippi or even southeast Louisiana, it will not be as bad as if it stays to the right of that. The 10 to 15 of storms surge that we're forecasting is going to be near and to the east of where the center crosses the coast.
However having said that, even if it stays in our forecast track, they're going to get some very significant storm surge in areas of the onshore flow there in southeastern Louisiana. So outside of the levy system, they're going to have a real problem there.
DOBBS: When you talk about storm surge, and of course everyone in southern Louisiana is concerned about it from Lake Ponchartrain throughout New Orleans, the city almost all but surrounded by water, what kind of surge are you expecting right now in the seas?
MAYFIELD: Well, we're really think we'll have 10 to 16 feet. But again that's near and to the east of where the center crosses the coast. There'll be lesser amounts, I would guess, four to possibly eight feet in portion of the southeast Louisiana, as long the track stays to the east of there. If the track shifts a little bit closer, then they could have a much bigger problem especially around Lake Pontchartian. If that wind comes northerly off of the lake, they could have a real problem in the south side. If the track hits much closer to the city of New Orleans itself.
DOBBS: Now, as I look at the graphic behind you there, Max, as we see that, that's a broad area that you have there for a danger zone.
Why is this so wide over this storm?
MAYFIELD: Well, really good explanation for that, Lou, in this the hurricane forced winds extend a little over 100 miles away from the center. And the tropical storm force winds extend outward about 260 miles away from the center. This is sort of like Hurricane Opal back in 1995. I really impacted a very, very large area on the coastline. This one will do the same.
DOBBS: Max Mayfield, we thank you very much from the National Hurricane Center. Thank you, sir.
MAYFIELD: Thank you, sir.
Still ahead, carnage in Iraq. Former coalition adviser in Iraq, Michael Rubin says U.S. policies are rewarding insurgents and punishing peaceful Iraqis.
Michael Rubin is our guest.
One critical American industry sees unemployment rates doubling, and in the exporting of America, largely to blame. Marcus Courtney, president of Washtech on the incredible pressure on the information technology labor force. He's our guest.
And a groundbreaking documentary on the exporting of American jobs, the cheap foreign labor markets. Tonight the broken promises of NAFTA.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Radical Islamist terrorist today claimed responsibility for two attacks in Iraq that killed 60 people, A car bombing in Baghdad, a drive-by shooting in Baquba.
My next guest says the situation in Iraq is not only deteriorated but will continue to worsen. Michael Rubin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, former adviser to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq joining us tonight from Washington.
Michael, this violence is escalating, our report from Walt Rodgers in Baghdad, pointing out that stability is the strategy for U.S. forces, coalition.
But stability is the farthest thing of the current reality. What's wrong?
MICHAEL RUBIN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Well, basically things recently -- the situation recently has been getting a little bit worse but it's still very much salvageable. The attacks aren't just targeting just Americans they're targeting Iraqis. And the majority of Iraqis want us to succeed. We just saw this in a poll from the Iraq Center for Research and Strategic studies. People are pessimistic in the short term and optimistic in the long term. Basically these attacks are not just targeting the Iraqi people, they're targeting the elections.
DOBBS: They're targeting elections, but people are dying in front of police stations, as recruits line up to join those police forces. People are dying drive-by shoots. Eighty attacks against U.S. forces a day over the past couple weeks. This escalating violence and polls or no poll, the reality is carnage, violence, and seemingly the initiative on the part of the insurgents fully.
RUBIN: You're absolutely right there. Situation is worsening in the short term. The issue is what we saw in Najaf with Muqtada al- Sadr, and what we've seen in Fallujah and Baquba is that the Iraqis don't like living under the insurgents. Many of these insurgents are choosing violence because they realize that they cannot win through the polls. The key to restoring stability is to persevere through elections. At the same time, though, we don't want to be in a situation where we are coddling our adversaries and bullying our friends. We don't want to be rewarding violence.
DOBBS: Michael, if I may say, you suggest that the violence is rising because the insurgents understand they can't win. The other reason for rising violence would be because they believe they can win. In either case, violence is rising. What in the world can be done to stabilize Iraq to protect the government that we have put in place?
RUBIN: Well, the key here is to convince the Iraqis that they have more to gain by siding with us than by siding with the insurgents. The insurgents don't have a great deal of popular support among those who know them.
The insurgents' popularity increases as a symbol. Those that live farthest away from the insurgents tend to support them the most. The key here, though, is we don't want to be in a situation where we are rewarding the violence. We don't -- we need more Churchill and less Chamberlain.
DOBBS: Michael Rubin, thanks for being with us, American Enterprise Institute.
Coming up next, an important new documentary on the exporting of American jobs and the pain its creating for work American families. Tonight, filmmaker Greg Spotts looks at the broken promises of the North American Free Trade Agreement, "American Jobs" next. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: A disturbing new study tonight finds the unemployment rate for high-technology workers in this country has doubled over the past three years, that is during an economic recovery. The study was conducted by the University of Illinois of Chicago for Washtech, a national union for high-technology workers.
The study looked at six key U.S. regions, together they've lost more than 60,000 high-paying tech jobs in just three years in those regions. One of the main reasons, export of work to cheap foreign labor markets. Marcus Courtney, president of Washtech joins us tonight from Seattle, Washington, good to have you here.
MARCUS COURTNEY, PRESIDENT, WASHTECH: Thank you, Lou, great to be here.
DOBBS: A doubling of the unemployment in IT. The trade association in point of fact saying that employment and hiring this year is going to be half what it was last. Is there any good news in this for technology workers?
COURTNEY: Well, unfortunately we're not seeing a lot of great news. What we found since an economic recovery was declared three years ago, that the country has lost more than 200,000 high-tech jobs. And every major high-tech city we studied, from San Francisco to Boston, has fewer high-tech jobs today than it did three years ago.
And we were, at one point in this industry, looking at full employment with unemployment levels around 1 to 2 percent. And today, they're well over 6 percent.
DOBBS: And with that kind of trend in place, do you see any kind of reversal in the offing? Because as I said, ITAA is suggesting that hiring is going to be half what it was a year ago.
COURTNEY: Well, I think there's a lot of reports about increasing demand. But as we can see, the hiring of high-tech workers in this country is really stagnant. And if we do not begin changing government policy in trade agreements to make sure that we are actually jump-starting the high-tech economy in this country, we're going to continue to see our leading employers to choose to employ and hiring workers overseas instead of in this country.
DOBBS: Marcus, these jobs that are going overseas now, you point out that a lot of the responsibility for this rests with companies exporting those IT jobs to cheap labor market overseas. But are those high-quality jobs? Are they lower-paying jobs? What's the reality?
COURTNEY: Well, the reality is is the jobs that are being exported overseas are from the low-level jobs, such as customer service, all the way to the top-end jobs of software architecture and research and development. We have actively reported on and exposed how Microsoft as far back as 2001 was beginning to export software architects' jobs which is the highest value-added jobs in the industry.
DOBBS: Marcus, we thank you very much. Marcus Courtney of Washtech.
Well, all of this week we're bringing you the first-ever documentary on the pain created by the exporting of American jobs to cheap foreign labor markets and its devastating impact on communities all across this country. The documentary is "American Jobs", tonight focusing on the North America Free Trade Agreement and its broken promises.
We'll continue in just a moment. And we'll bring you "American Jobs" next. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Now, "American Jobs" and the broken promises of NAFTA.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE FROM "AMERICAN JOBS")
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. I went to The Gap, and I looked at everything like, sweaters, dresses, skirts, flip-flops, tube tops, and everything was made from different places. It was from Thailand, Turkey India, Hong Kong, China, the Philippines, Vietnam.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I went to American Eagle Outfitters.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I went to Guess.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I went to the Old Navy store.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nordstrom.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Shirts and pants were made mostly in Bangladesh, Indonesia and Pakistan.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Peru, Vietnam, Macao, Taiwan and Hong Kong.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hong Kong, Kuwait and China.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nicaragua, Peru and South Africa.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And I couldn't find anything that was made in America.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK, well, I went to my closet and I looked at all of my Gap clothing, and I found that the majority of the shirts were made in like China, Singapore and Hong Kong, and that the pants were made in Mexico.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nick, did you want to say something?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was just saying that it's really funny how these, these corporations and stuff, they portray themselves as all- American brands and all-American clothing, but when you look at it, they really rarely have anything made in America.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wondered if our leaders knew they were sacrificing the American textile industry when they ratified NAFTA back in 1993.
President Clinton, a Democrat, inherited the treaty from his Republican predecessor, and made the treaty's ratification a major priority of his first year in office.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Every living president says "a future with NAFTA will be brighter." Presidents Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton agree on that point. NEWT GINGRICH, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: It's a moment when you define for the future of the nation and the future of the world who we are and what we believe in.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: NAFTA really is the ultimate win-win situation. Mexico will modernize its economy, buying machinery, products and equipment from the USA. Creating better jobs for its own workers. Its consumers will, then, spend their new-found wealth on everything from autos, refrigerators and diapers made in the USA, creating better-paying jobs for Americans.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Two weeks before the House voted, insiders believed that NAFTA would be defeated. A coalition led by Dick Gephardt and David Bonior argued that NAFTA would destroy many more jobs than it created, leaving thousands of Americans unemployed.
REP. DICK GEPHARDT (D), MISSOURI: We must not approve a treaty that only protects the rights of business, but does not protect the rights of workers.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If NAFTA tonight threatened the jobs of editorial writers and network news anchors and Wall Street bankers, this bill wouldn't have a prayer. But it doesn't. It threatens the jobs of non-college educated workers. So it's going to pass.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Those of us who take these concerns seriously have today on this floor been called fear mongers, afraid to take risks, with no vision of the future. That is an insult to the working families of this country.
DAVID BONIOR (D-MI), FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: They knew they were in trouble. I had a powerful member of Congress in the House tell me that he went down to the White House. This is a person who'd been around for many, many, many years.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeatedly in our history, we have been asked to enlarge America's markets. There have always been doubters, but they have always been proven wrong.
BONIOR: Dan Rostenkowski, who was the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, told me that he went to the White House and said basically to the president, he said, you are going to let Bonior and those folks beat you? And the president said to him, what should we do, and basically Dan said, you've got to -- you're making more deals.
If you need a bridge or a highway, you could go in and get that. If you needed a fund-raiser in your district to raise some money to get you reelected, you could do that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We just don't know the cost of all the promises that are being made in the back rooms at the White House and on Capitol Hill. The American people should be outraged at the way this treaty has been bought, vote by vote, with wheeling and dealing that would make a rug merchant blush.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On this vote, the yeas are 234, the nays are 200, and the bill is passed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: We continue with "American Jobs" tomorrow evening.
Taking a look now at some of your thoughts on the issue of exporting America. Many of you wrote in about that personal attack on me in an op-ed in "The Wall Street Journal" yesterday. Arthur Mones of Scottsdale, Arizona -- "Lou, you handled the attack on your girth with equanimity and mirth. If that's the worst your adversaries can come up with, you must be saying something right about outsourcing."
Lou Marino from Bethlehem, Pennsylvania: "Professor Bhagwati's comments were unprofessional and completely insensitive to the plight of us millions of middle class Americans. I salute you for keeping issues vital to us at the forefront of the national debate. I don't like Brie either."
And Roberta Eckland of Lincoln City, Oregon: "If Dr. Jagdish Bhagwati, an MIT Ph.D., can only defend his arguments through personal insult and attack, yet is a professor at Columbia University, what kind of education are those poor students at one of the most prestigious universities receiving?"
We love hearing from you. Send us your thoughts at loudobbs@cnn.com. Send us your name and address, because each of you whose e-mail is read on this broadcast receives a free copy of my new book, "Exporting America."
Tonight's thought is on the responsibilities of corporate America. "So the question is, do corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, have responsibilities in their business activities, other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible? And my answer to that is, no, they do not." Economist Milton Friedman.
Staggering news tonight on this country's ballooning federal budget deficit. The Treasury Department today reported the deficit's already 9 percent higher than a year ago, almost $437 billion, and there's still a month to go in this budget year. The Congressional Budget Office had projected a deficit of $422 billion.
Well, coming up next, the results of our poll, and we'll tell you what's ahead tomorrow. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight. Only 9 percent of you say you are better off today than four years ago; 91 percent say you are not.
That's it for tonight. Thanks for being with us. Please join us here tomorrow. Author Kitty Kelley joins us to talk about her explosive, controversial new unauthorized biography of the Bush family. It's quite a read, I assure you. And former presidential adviser David Gergen will be with me. Also tomorrow, our "Face-Off" on electronic voting. That debate about the threat to our democracy.
Please be with us. For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" coming up next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
