Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Congress Finds Compromise on Intelligence Reform; Eight Soldiers Sue Military Over Stop-Loss
Aired December 06, 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.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, the White House and congressional leadership have brokered a deal to overhaul our intelligence agencies.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's a piece of legislation that is important for the security of our country.
DOBBS: The intelligence deal, however, does nothing to secure our ports and borders, nor to stop illegal aliens from possessing driver's licenses. Congressman Tom Tancredo says that's outrageous. He's our guest tonight.
An extraordinary challenge tonight to the Pentagon's controversial stop-loss policy. Eight soldiers have filed a lawsuit to stop the military from extending their service. We'll have a report from the Pentagon.
Social Security reform, a top priority for the Bush agenda. The federal government may have to borrow more than $1 trillion to pay for it, however. Senator Lindsey Graham has introduced legislation to reform Social Security. He's our guest.
And this week's series of special reports, "American Culture in Decline," a newfound American fascination with the lowest common denominator. Tonight, we focus on education. Critics say our schools aren't educating our children, and some aren't even trying.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kids aren't prepared for tomorrow. In other countries, they're catching up with us.
DOBBS: And tonight, I'll talk with Pat Robertson, founder and chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network, about the importance of moral values in America today.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Monday, December 6th. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening.
Tonight, Congress and the White House have reached a deal to introduce the most sweeping intelligence reforms in half a century. The deal follows last-minute talks to ease concerns about the impact of those reforms on the military's chain of command.
But that agreement fails to address the critical issues of border security and how to prevent illegal aliens from obtaining driver's licenses. The September 11 hijackers all possessed U.S. driver's licenses.
Ed Henry reports from Capitol Hill. Dana Bash reports from the White House. We go first to Ed Henry -- Ed.
ED HENRY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, this legislation had been held up by a Republican family feud. Congressional negotiators forged the deal by dealing with one of those major Republicans, Duncan Hunter. But essentially rolling over James Sensenbrenner, the other, on those immigration measures that you mentioned.
It's been more than three years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This is the most radical restructuring of the intelligence community in over 40 years.
Key to it is creating a new director of national intelligence, a quarterback, if you will. The 9/11 Commission had recommended to Congress it need this quarterback in order to try to oversee the nation's 15 spy agencies and try to prevent another terror attack on American soil.
And the deal, this tentative deal, reached -- it got a major shot in the arm just more than an hour ago when the House armed services chairman, Duncan Hunter and the Senate armed services chairman, John Warner, came to the cameras, endorsed this deal, by saying that they believe the language that had been held up dealing with the chain of command for the military was finally to their liking.
Here's Duncan Hunter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DUNCAN HUNTER (R-CA), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: I want to make sure that you understand this bill is not a done deal. It's not finished. But our aspect to this bill, that is protecting the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States and protecting the chain of command, is an area where we have received what we feel is a satisfactory provision that protects them. And as a result of that, we are going to support this bill.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HENRY: So Duncan Hunter is now on board. But as I mentioned, left out in the cold is James Sensenbrenner. He wanted to add some tough immigration provisions. He has been holding out. He said he would not sign on without those provisions. His office says he's still holding out.
But essentially, Republicans leaders up here are privately saying they've been advising the White House that in order to get a deal, the path to a deal was to clarify this language for Hunter but essentially not deal with the immigration provisions this year, punt them until next year. That's something Sensenbrenner has resisted.
But the negotiators up here, as well as the White House, decided what was more important was to deal with the chain of command issue. So what you saw is that today President Bush came forward. He focused on that issue.
Also, Vice President Cheney was working the phones, calling the Hill, saying they had to deal with the chain of command language. And a lot of Republicans up here felt that the president had a lot of political capital on the line, and he had to finally seal a deal -- Lou.
DOBBS: Ed, it strikes me that there's more to this than meets the eye. Do we know what the language is that suddenly mollified Senator John Warner, on the Senate side of armed services, and Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee?
HENRY: Yes, we do, Lou. There were four words added. It all came down to four words. Those are "respect and not abrogate." What that means is not abrogate the power of various department heads here in Washington. Read that as Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld. Basically to not -- that this national director of intelligence would not override the Pentagon chief.
That is what essentially assuaged the concerns of both Duncan Hunter and John Warner. Four words in this bill added late last night at the suggestion of senators Susan Collins and Joe Lieberman. The White House signed on. Now Hunter and Warner have signed on, Lou.
DOBBS: Ed Henry reporting from Capitol Hill. Thank you, Ed.
Tonight's deal on intelligence reform follows a battle between the White House and powerful Republicans in Congress. Today, the president declared the intelligence reform bill is necessary for the security of this country.
White House correspondent Dana Bash with the report -- Dana.
DANA BASH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And Lou, that was part of a last- minute presidential appeal that even some fellow Republicans who have wanted this bill for some time felt was a long time coming from the president.
And Mr. Bush really tried to make his final push in private, began doing that on Friday with phone calls to leaders and again on the phone today. We're told his vice president, Cheney, and his chief of staff, Andy Card, were also working with top leaders to work out the deal that Ed Henry was just talking about.
All through the weekend, a deal on the so-called chain of command language. And the president also publicly tried to pressure Republicans over the weekend using his weekly radio address to do it and again today in the Oval Office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BUSH: It's a good piece of legislation. It is a necessary piece of legislation. It's a piece of legislation that is important for the security of our country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: now, one other thing that President Bush is expected to do to get this going is to send a letter that the White House started talking about last night, which is something that it, once again, promises Duncan Hunter and John Warner, the Republican chairmen of armed services committees, that the chain of command will stay in place, something with his signature on it.
And a senior official, Lou, says you see some members of Congress leaving the White House today. They were talking about Social Security reform. A senior official conceded that getting this done is not only important of this legislation, but also setting the stage, setting the relationship between this president and his Republicans in Congress who he will very much need, but who think that they have as much of a mandate as he does and will have problems in the future.
And of course, I should tell you, Lou, that Ed was talking about the fact that the White House ignored Sensenbrenner as one Republican congressional staffer, who's working with the White House said today, the bottom line is they could only roll one Republican chairman at a time, Lou.
DOBBS: They may have rolled only one Republican chairman, but about 100 Republicans were rolled in the process. So this is going to have some interesting impact in the days and months ahead, particularly with the convening of the new Congress.
Dana Bash reporting from the White House. Thank you, Dana.
Later here, Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa will talk to me about the intel reform deal and its failure to support our ports and borders and to stop illegal aliens from obtaining driver's licenses.
In Saudi Arabia today, radical Islamist terrorists launched a bold attack against the U.S. consulate in Jeddah, killing five local employees. No Americans were injured or killed. The assault was the first major attack by radical Islamist terrorists in Saudi Arabia in six months.
Five terrorists stormed the consulate. Saudi troops and police killed three of the gunmen, and they captured two others. American diplomatic staff took refuge in a safe area within the compound.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ADAM ERELI, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: There were a number of Marines assigned to the consulate who acted very quickly, per their procedure, and I think took -- took decisive action that prevented the loss of life and thwarted the -- thwarted the attackers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Tonight, a senior Saudi official blamed the al Qaeda terror network for the attack.
Eight American soldiers today launched an extraordinary legal challenge of the Army's controversial stop-loss policy. That policy forces troops to continue serving in the military even after their enlistments have ended.
Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Pentagon is fond of saying that it has an all-volunteer military, but these days, many members of the military don't feel like volunteers at all.
Today in federal court in Washington, seven -- rather eight U.S. soldiers filed suit against the Pentagon against the so-called stop- loss policy that prevents them from leaving when their enlistments are technically up.
The lead plaintiff was a soldier named Specialist David Qualls, who signed up in what's called the "Try One" program of the Army National Guard. Supposedly it allows a veteran to serve for only one year on a trial basis before committing to a full enlistment.
But when it was time for him to go, under the stop-loss rules, he had to stay. These rules were supposed to ensure unit cohesion and making sure that units that fought together stayed together while they were in a combat zone. But Qualls claims that he's been spending most of his time filling sandbags and doing odd guard duty.
He said he supports the war but he feels like he's done his duty. The Center for Constitutional Law, which is supporting the soldiers, calls this a fraud, perpetrated on men and women who've sacrificed their normal jobs to serve their country. It is asking for an injunction to prevent Specialist Qualls, have him go back to Iraq. Meanwhile, the Pentagon says while some people may claim it's not fair, it is legal. They should read their contracts. Lou?
DOBBS: Read their contracts, indeed, Jamie. This is what Senator John Kerry referred to during the presidential campaign as a back-door draft. 40 percent of the troops serving in Iraq are guardsmen and reservists. Senator John McCain has said, point blank, criticizing the Pentagon directly, and with considerable energy, that they simply need more troops. What is the reaction of the Pentagon to this, and how are they responding? Because this looks like it would affect directly morale?
MCINTYRE: Well, the back-door draft also refers to members of the individual ready reserve and members who are called back to active duty when they had no expectation they would be called back again, a fine-print issue. But the Pentagon continues to say that even if they had a much larger military, they would still institute stop loss in order to keep soldiers who fought together together while they're in a combat zone. So they say that has a completely different purpose. Nevertheless, the critics still argue that the military's too small. DOBBS: Thank you very much, Jamie McIntyre, senior Pentagon correspondent. That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. Do you believe American soldiers should be forced to serve in the military after their enlistment terms have ended? Yes or no? Please cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results for you later here in the broadcast.
Also ahead, Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa join me to talk about the intelligence bill and its failure to secure our borders and our ports.
Also, free trade in terrorism. Should the United States be carrying on policies to reward allies with free trade agreements? And who should we be focusing on including Muslim nations?
And reforming Social Security could cost, of course, more than $1 trillion. Senator Lindsey Graham will be my guest, the leading advocate of Social Security reform, has introduced legislation, in fact, to do so. He's our guest coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The Food & Drug Administration today announced new rules designed to further protect the nation's food supply. These new rules require food manufacturers, processors, packers and shippers alike to keep records of where they receive food from and where they ship it to. The rules come just days after departing Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said he can't believe terrorists haven't already attacked our national food supply. Secretary Thompson today tried to clarify those statements. He said the government has improved food protection measures, but, in his opinion, needs to do far more.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOMMY THOMPSON, DEPARTING HHS SECRETARY: Imports are increasing. The number of inspectors are staying constant, about 1500, for all inspectors in FDA. We're getting more technology. We're going to be requesting, in the budget, more technology. There's new technology out there that we need. We need to have all of these tools. We've come a long way, but I'm still not satisfied.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Secretary Thompson saying that while he's not satisfied these new rules, he believes, are important for food safety in the country.
Tonight, a growing debate over protecting this nation against terrorism and the role of free trade in that fight. Some in Washington are calling upon the white house to reward Muslim countries helping this country in the war on terror with free trade. Lisa Sylvester reports.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE) LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): President Bush hosted the King of Jordan at the White House today, praising the country's cozy economic ties. The United States and Jordan have had a free trade agreement since 2001. And the United States recently completed similar agreements with Morocco and Bahrain.
DAN GRISWOLD, CATO INSTITUTE: Morocco and Bahrain and Jordan are all moderate Muslim majority regimes in the greater Middle East and signing free trade agreements with the United States is way of rewarding their reforms and also creating jobs and opportunities for young people in those countries.
SYLVESTER: Senators John McCain and Max Baucus have introduced legislation known as the Silk Road Bill that would unilaterally remove tariffs on good from Muslim countries that help the United States in the war on terror. Countries like Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt, which do not have free trade agreements with the United States, have faced declining exports while Latin American and African countries with preferential treatment have expanded exports.
EDWARD GRESSER: While we've been trying to pick winners in Africa and Latin America, we've been inadvertently defining losers in the Muslim countries.
SYLVESTER: The free trade agreements carry a cost to U.S. manufacturers. The American textile and apparel industry has lost 864,000 jobs since 1994. And U.S. manufacturers are not convinced that boosting jobs overseas will even reduce the threat of terrorism.
JIM SCHOLLAERT, AMERICAN MANUFACTURING TRADE COALITION: The folks who crashed those airplanes into the World Trade Center were not impoverished Pakistanis or Yemenis. For the most part, they were wealthy Saudis. And you know, man does not live by bread alone.
SYLVESTER: And U.S. textile manufacturers point out, the growing trade deficit is weakening the U.S. economy, making the country more dependent on foreign money and supplies and less secure in the long run.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: The United States intends to negotiate free trade agreements with Oman and the United Arab Emirates, and the White House has proposed a Middle East free trade agreement to take effect by 2013. Lou?
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Lisa Sylvester.
In Paris tonight, French authorities are second-guessing one of their airport security training procedures after they misplaced, mishandled and lost a bag containing plastic explosives. That's right. Airport officials have now decided it was a bad idea to test out bomb-sniffing dogs by using real explosives in real luggage belonging to real passengers. Five pounds of plastic explosives were placed in an unsuspecting passenger's bag before it went missing. At the time, more than 90 flights were taking off from Paris, meaning that that bag and the explosives could be anywhere. Those explosives have still not been found.
Still ahead here tonight, fixing Social Security before it's too late. Senator Lindsey Graham will join me. We'll be talking about his proposal to save Social Security.
And then, patients bombarding doctors with lists of prescription drugs they want to take. How prescription drug advertisements are forever changing the doctor/patient relationship. That special report ahead here. And we'll be joined by two congressmen who say the intelligence reform legislation only creates the illusion of security. Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa are my guests here tonight. That and a great deal more still ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Drug companies are spending billions of dollars each year to market prescription drugs to consumers. And the investment apparently is paying off and paying off big. Now, instead of arriving at the doctor's office with a list of symptoms, many patients are armed with a list of medications they want to take. Christine Romans has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)
DR. JONATHAN MOHRER, PHYSICIAN: How you doing today?
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): When Dr. Jonathan Mohrer started his practice 21 years ago, the idea of a pharmaceutical company pushing pills on his patients was unheard of. Today, he says the drug companies are a third party in his examining room.
MOHRER: Before this became a common practice that the patient would really not know all that much about the medications that they were taking, that they would really rely on my judgment in choosing a prescription drug to give them what I thought was best. And now there's a third party in the room that is exerting influence.
ROMANS (on camera): Dr. Mohrer and many doctors like him say money changes everything. The average doctor visit lasts just about ten minutes. And the drug companies are spending billions to make sure that in that precious time, you're asking your doctor about their prescription drugs, and you're getting a free sample to get started right away.
(voice-over) Doctors wrote $154 billion in prescriptions last year. Drug companies spent more than $16 billion on free samples, and $3 billion on consumer advertising. Health care advocates say those numbers are conservative.
DAVID LANSKY, MARKLE FOUNDATION: The drug companies are marketing their products in the most aggressive way they can to increase their sales volume. That's their business. They make money by selling pills.
ROMANS: Dr. Isabel Blumberg says about a third of her patients come in asking about a drug asking for a free sample. But she would never prescribe a medication a patient didn't need.
DR. ISABEL BLUMBERG, OBGYN: I think most responsible doctors are making decisions based on symptoms and requirements and not on free samples.
ROMANS: It's a subject sweeping medical dinners and conferences these days, events often sponsored by the drug companies. Doctors arguing over whether drug companies have too much influence in the doctor's office and whether a real examination of ethics is due. Christine Romans, CNN, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Coming up next here, Congressman Tom Tancredo, congressman Darrell Issa join us to talk about why they believe the intelligence reform bill won't do enough to protect this country against radical Islamism terrorism.
And then, securing your future. Senator Lindsey Graham has taken the lead in Congress, introducing legislation to reform Social Security. He's our guest here next.
And American culture in decline. What role do our nation's schools play in this cultural decline? We'll have that special report and Pat Robertson is our guest.
All of that and a great deal more still ahead here tonight. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa will be here in just a moment. We'll be talking about why they say the intelligence reform legislation doesn't do enough to protect this country.
But first, a look at a number of the top stories tonight.
The controversy sounding the use of steroids in major league baseball, it's escalating as the players union started a meeting today, Senator John McCain is calling for tougher testing for players. Senator McCain said he is confident that a bill on the issue would have the support of Congress and President Bush.
The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention today said more flu vaccines are on the way. The government plans to purchase as many as 5 million doses from manufacturers in both Canada and Germany after losing nearly half of its supply to contamination in October. Outgoing Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson is expected to make that announcement this week.
Sources say a new national counterterrorism center is up and running just outside Washington, though the government declines to comment on it. The new agency was created by an executive order from President Bush. Sources said the agency will be granted additional clout if the intelligence reform bill in Congress is passed. I'm joined now by two congressmen who say the intelligence reform bill will fail to prevent terrorists from crossing our borders. Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado, Congressman Darrell Issa of California join us tonight from Capitol Hill. Gentlemen, good to have you here.
REP. DARRELL ISSA, (R) CALIFORNIA: Pleasure. Good to be here.
REP. TOM TANCREDO, (R) COLORADO: That introduction, I didn't know we were both -- I thought we were here to argue, but now I understand we're on the same side. That's great news.
DOBBS: Well, if you want to argue, we'll give you ample opportunity. Let's begin with you, Congressman Issa. The fact that the president said this is important legislation. Congressman Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee has said that he is comfortable with four words that have been added. Are we not, in your opinion, better off?
ISSA: We are better off. There's no question that Congressman Hunter fought for and got a compromise that means that commanders on the ground are going to be less concerned about whether they're going to have the resources they need to make their troops safe. But here -- that's outside our borders. Inside our borders, we're not any safer. Inside our borders, we have not fixed, in this bill, the fundamental problems that allowed 19 hijackers to have 63 driver's licenses, most of them valid from different states. And it's that kind of push back that we're getting that is inconsistent with what the 9/11 commission asked for. They asked for us to have this kind of strengthening of I.D., particularly the I.D. that's going to be used to get on an airplane.
DOBBS: They also, Congressman Tancredo, also called for greater border security and port security. Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner of the House judiciary committee was absolutely rolled by the White House and the House leadership on this issue. He just issued in a statement just a few moments ago -- and let me just read part of that, if I may. "Terrorists have exploited vulnerabilities in our asylum system, all of this addressing border security and immigration control and the issuance of driver's licenses." This bill fails to include the strong provisions in the House bill because my Senate colleagues found them too controversial. That's unfortunate because the refusal to consider these security measures on their merits will keep Americans unnecessarily at risk. Congressman, why...
TANCREDO: I could not have put it better.
DOBBS: Why could not there be an agreement on this issue because it, like every other part of this legislation, was a recommendation from the 9/11 commission?
TANCREDO: Here's why. In a nutshell. The president is not philosophically opposed to the provisions they added to the defense side of the bill. He is philosophically opposed to the provisions we wanted in on the immigration side of the bill. He's philosophically opposed to securing the border. That's why. It's easy for him to make this compromise because he doesn't oppose it. He would not support -- in fact, he called Chairman Sensenbrenner and told him he did not want the driver's license part of the bill in there, securing driver's licenses. Now, so there's -- that's why we can't get it, Lou.
DOBBS: I understand, Congressman Issa, Congressman Tancredo, that in the conference that Republicans stood up more on the issue of the failure to provide in this agreement for border security and immigration control more than on the issue of a chain of command over the intelligence agencies and their relationship to the Pentagon. Is that true?
ISSA: It's true, Lou, but it's true for a good and valid reason. The question of area commanders having what they needed in the way of resources was quite technical, and there were only a few people who really understood it. Chairman Hunter being first among them. And ranking member Skelton. And so they fought that battle, and we stood behind them. When it comes to understanding that you've got to have a national database to make sure somebody doesn't have 12 different driver's licenses in 12 different states with different underlying I.D., that's important, and it's very doable, and we all understand it.
You know, this is exactly like the way we always talk about rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. No matter what we do on the 9/11 bill, if people can come to this country, perhaps legally, through a visa, and then once they're here, disappear into our society, get as many I.D.s as they want in as many states as they want and wait until the time is right to attack us, we will not be safer.
TANCREDO: And Lou, it's important to understand another aspect of that debate. The only reason we had a conference that evening is because I went ahead with, you know, not a very well known provision, a rule I wasn't aware of until shortly before I did it that if you can gather enough signatures, 50 signatures from members, they can demand a conference. I was in the process of doing that. And believe me, I didn't even bring up the issue of the Duncan Hunter problem. I just kept saying to everybody, the Senate has stripped out the immigration provisions of this bill. And everybody signed just like that. That's why we got a conference that night. And that's why the bill actually was pulled from the floor. It would have been on the floor and passed had we not done that.
DOBBS: Very quickly, gentlemen, and Congressman Issa, I'll give you the last word, if I may, what is the next step here?
ISSA: Well, the next step is, people of conscience will vote against this bill. Many of us having voted for the House bill the first time, that's going to be necessary. More importantly, we're going to have to move the debate from the word immigration to the internal security of America that these missing links create.
TANCREDO: More security, that's right.
ISSA: Border and inside security. We have no way to control who's getting on an airplane if we can't control the validity of their I.D.
DOBBS: Congressman Issa, thank you very much. Congressman Tancredo, thank you very much.
Still ahead here, securing your future. Senator Lindsey Graham will be joining me. We'll be talking about his proposal to save Social Security and our future.
American culture in decline. This week we begin a series of special reports on a cultural race in this country seemingly to the bottom. Tonight, why critics say our public schools are not educating our children. Why some of those schools aren't even trying.
And we'll be talking about moral values with none other than Pat Robertson, chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network.
And also tonight, the public's right to know. Under fire, journalists being threatened in court for exercising their responsibility to keep the public informed. Paul McMasters of the First Amendment Center is my guest. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: This week, we begin a series of special reports, American culture in decline. Tonight, there is new evidence that one of the most important elements of our culture is in decline and in serious trouble. Education. Bill Tucker has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The good news about education is scores are improving. Over the last decade student test scores showed improvement in reading, writing and mathematics.
JACK JENNINGS, CTR. ON EDUCATION POLICY: Schools are doing better. But in terms of preparing for tomorrow, kids aren't prepared for tomorrow. And other countries are catching up with us. We used to lead the world in terms of numbers of kids going to high school, numbers of people going on to college. Today we're no longer the leader.
TUCKER: And it's not because we don't spend money. Last year, according to the Center For Education Statistics, we spent in total, at the federal and state level, $324 billion to educate 47 million kids in public schools. But that doesn't tell the whole story. The most money is typically spent in the suburbs where parents put their tax dollars to work. Not so for inner city and rural farm schools.
KATHLEEN PORTER-MAGEE, THOMAS B. FORDHAM FOUNDATION: If we believe that education is going to be the way out for poor and minority students, then we have to make sure that we're adequately educating those students. We have to give them a fair shot which right now we're not currently doing in the public schools.
TUCKER: And we're not always giving what is taught a fair shot. History's a good example. It's frequently treated as a second-class subject in many schools because it's not a subject tested under No Child Left Behind. Education's always been important. And study after study shows that the more education a person has, the more money they'll make. But to focus solely on employment is to miss a bigger point.
MILT GOLDBERG, EDUCATION COMM. OF THE STATES: It's important for civility. It's important for the way in which we respect one another's rights, interact with one another. And I think it's clear that the more education one has, the more likely it is you are to adopt such a position.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: But of all the obstacles that education faces, none may be larger and more indicative, Lou, of a cultural decline than the issue of simply playing politics with our education.
DOBBS: And lacking both courage and the will to speak straightforwardly, the fact that our students are testing so poorly, in American history, don't even understand what is happening with the subject in our public schools, is a crime. And the fact that we're not teaching, because it's not being tested under No Child Left Behind, what possible sense does that make?
TUCKER: It would be laughable if it weren't a joke, but it's true. Less than half the students at high school level test proficient in U.S. history. U.S. history, Lou, believe it or not, is deemed controversial.
What do you teach?
What kind of history do you teach to these kids?
So schools are allowed to go there, they don't have to provide testing to get federal money. They don't do it.
DOBBS: Frightening. Absolutely frightening, and the fact that we're not dealing with it straight up, hopefully that will change soon.
Bill, thank you very much. Bill Tucker.
Well, Pat Robertson is the founder of the Christian Coalition, the Christian Broadcasting Network. He's also the author of "Courting Disaster," how the Supreme Court is usurping the power of Congress and the people. And among other things, one of the people most interested in religion and our society and moral values.
I talked with him earlier and asked him if all of the talk about improving public education in this country is for naught when one considers the vast number of students who are not meeting even the most basic minimums in education.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REV. PAT ROBERTSON: You know, when I was a kid growing up I learned how to read with the phonics method and that's the way most people talk, they say mama, dada and begin to say syllables. The educators have bought in what they call "whole sentence construction." They have look, say and whole a sentence and they try to get a kid to memorize words, they can't read that way. And the simple phonics -- we had a program if you give a kid a vocabulary of as many as 20,000 words after about 38 different lessons. It is so simple to do but the educators refuse to do it.
DOBBS: Now, many of the people listening to us right now are listening to Pat Robertson, they're saying, "My gosh, he is a Christian. He is going to be talking about merging religion and state, which is first of all unconstitutional." And they are rejecting, based on ideological and partisan grounds, everything you are saying right now.
Is there a role for education in reversing this decline in our educational system and reversing the decline in our culture?
ROBERTSON: Of course, I am head of a university that is giving graduate degrees to a number of about 3,400 students, so I like education. And our -- I like public education and support it, but I frankly am in favor of a voucher system. You know, competition is a wonderful thing in the free enterprise system. Whenever you've got a monopoly, you have sloppy standards and that's what we've got in the educational system. The bureaucracy eats up billions of dollars. We spend more per pupil but the money doesn't get through to the teachers and to the students where they're needed in the classroom.
DOBBS: I agree with you that we ought to be paying our students certainly as much as we're paying our professional basketball players in this country, because they are providing a far more important service to society, to the country, to our children. But at the same time I have to disagree with you, Pat, about the voucher system. Because it seems to me it's just abdication of our responsibility to take charge in our community level of our public education system and to ensure that we are providing our public education to young people, many of whom simply aspire to be in the middle class and without public education won't achieve it.
How do you respond to that?
ROBERTSON: Well, you're right you know -- I did a teaching program in Chicago, met with Marva Collins (ph), she's one of the great educators. She was teaching kids in the eighth grade Chaucer and Boccaccio and some of these great classics and she was just a fabulous teacher. But the educational establishment in Chicago just came on her with both feet and tried to humiliate her. Later surveys have showed that 60 percent of all the teachers in the Chicago public school systems send their own children to private schools. Why, because they see the drugs, the crime, the lack of discipline, court mandated problems that are there...
DOBBS: But should we retreat from that situation or should we take it on head on?
Should we be dealing with those issues, Pat, and taking control of that public education, because that truly -- as a beneficiary of the public school system in this country I truly believe in it and I truly believe that it is the only way to ensure mobility and advancement to the middle class and beyond in this society.
ROBERTSON: Well, I'll tell you how you start it. You break the hold of the National Education Association, which refuses to have standards of performance for teachers. You've got to make them perform appropriately and if they don't perform they don't get promoted or they get fired. And the second thing is you have to mandate the teaching of phonics. They have to teach these children how to read and write. I think some of the stuff the president was putting in may be good, this national testing, but the problem with that is you focus all your education just on passing the test and that maybe that doesn't engender creative thinking.
But yes, the public schools can be reformed if the education bureaucracy will go along with it.
DOBBS: And if we pay for value received and there is no greater value, I'm sure you would agree, than that performed by teachers.
ROBERTSON: Oh yeah.
DOBBS: Pat Robertson, as always, good to have you here. Thank you.
ROBERTSON: Thanks Lou. It was a pleasure.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Well, turning now to another issue requiring reform, Social Security. The White House today said reforming Social Security could force the government to borrow more than $1 trillion. That money would help cover the shortfall in Social Security payments while the system is being transformed, at least in part, to private accounts.
My guest tonight has been one of the most vocal members of Congress calling for a reform of Social Security and has introduced legislation to do just that.
Senator Lindsey Graham joins us tonight from Greenville, South Carolina. Senator, good to have you with us.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Thank you. I'd like to get my Social Security, I'm one of the few members of the Senate under 65.
DOBBS: Well, I think perhaps congratulations are in order. And we'll all cross our fingers for you, senator.
Let's begin with an issue that has just broken, and that is the agreement on intelligence reform. The Senate has -- and the White House and a number of members of Congress have said, the White House simply rolled House Judiciary Committee chairman and Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner. What's your reaction? GRAHAM: I think the concerns raised about driver's licenses have their place in overall immigration reform. But this bill is to try to create one-stop shopping, to bring some organization that was lacking before 9/11, to get our ducks in a row organizationally. And is not a cure for all the problems facing the country as far as internal security, and it was never meant to be.
DOBBS: You say immigration reform, but in point of fact, it is about border security. It is about internal security.
GRAHAM: Yes, you're right, exactly.
DOBBS: And -- and the 9/11 Commission, senator, as you well know, recommended that we reform all of those issues as well as the other -- others that are contained within this reform legislation.
How do you respond to that?
GRAHAM: Well, no. 1, they're back in the bill. The people who are on the commission have urged us to pass the bill as drafted. They have concerns about internal security, about driver's licenses. They've been addressed in the bill. Not completely, but you've got to remember that the people who are on the commission support the legislation.
DOBBS: Let's turn to Social Security if we may, and that is the idea of privatizing Social Security. It has a lot of people concerned, a country that is running just about $8 trillion in national debt, looking at the prospect of more than $1 trillion over the course of just a little over a decade in order to do it.
How in the world can we afford this?
GRAHAM: Well, you can't afford not to do it. Social Security is going bankrupt, it's coming apart at the seams. When I was born in 1955, there were 16 workers for every retiree. In about 15 years, there will be two workers for every retiree. Between 2011 and 2030, there will be a 65 percent increase in retirees and 8 percent increase in the work force. We're short of money to pay the benefits. If we do nothing, the cost will be trillions, if we do something progressive, the cost can be managed. But to do nothing is a death blow to Social Security.
DOBBS: Let's be progressive. Let's talk about the idea of private accounts. What percentage...
GRAHAM: Right.
DOBBS: ... of those who will be receiving Social Security will be eligible to take advantage of private accounts, and how soon, and what will be the impact on those now nearing retirement age?
DOBBS: Good question. Under the bill I've drafted, you have to be under 55 to participate. It's voluntary. You're able to put $1,330 of your FICA taxes, that would be taken through payroll deductions into a personal investment account. When it gets to be $10,000 in accumulated funds, you can opt then to into a system like federal employee can, where you can go into government bonds, mutual funds. Very secure system. Very similar to what the federal government employees are able to opt into. The growth rates of these funds will outpace of current growth rates of social security by a factor of three or four. If you're born after 1980 -- and this is a lot of information, but it's important, you get a negative return rate if you're born after 1980 in the current system. If you have a personal investment account, you will be able to receive much more than that.
DOBBS: Senator, with -- as you say, a lot of information to absorb.
GRAHAM: Yes, it's a lot.
DOBBS: And it's going to be quite a struggle through Congress as the White House and you and others in the Republican leadership engage on this issue. I suspect we'll be talking from time to time on this important matter.
GRAHAM: I hope so.
DOBBS: Senator Lindsey Graham, thank you.
GRAHAM: Thank you.
DOBBS: Still ahead here, "Freedom Under Fire." Why a recent series of attacks on the press may prevent critical information from reaching you in the future. It's all about the news and the public right to know. Paul McMasters of the First Amendment Center is my guest next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Freedom of the press, your right to know is under attack. At least 10 journalists in this country now face jail time for refusing to reveal their confidential sources. My guest tonight says we're in the midst of the most intense and prolonged attack on the freedom of the press that this country has seen in some time.
Paul McMasters is ombudsman at the First Amendment Center and joins us tonight from Washington, D.C. Paul, good to have you here.
PAUL MCMASTERS, OMBUDSMAN, FIRST AMENDMENT CENTER: Thanks for having me, Lou.
DOBBS: What is behind this sudden -- to me it's sudden -- onslaught over the course of the past year or two against journalists trying to protect their sources?
MCMASTERS: Well, Lou, there's probably a lot of things that go into this. And chief among them is that for a prosecutor, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line to a reporter that they may be able to talk into being part of their investigative team. But I also think that there are some really tough cases out there where the federal prosecutors are trying to do their jobs, and the journalists are trying to do their jobs, and they're stepping on one another in the process.
But what worries me is that now we see a situation where the First Amendment, common law and common sense sort of kept these two parties apart. And if they did get entangled, the courts would step in and sort it all out. But now the courts seem inclined to be more deferential to the prosecution's side of this problem.
DOBBS: More deferential, and also great latitude being exercised, the case of Judith Miller, of "The New York Times" and Matt Cooper of "Time" magazine, where they are ancillary to the true issue, did not, in point of fact, publish, but are embroiled now, facing a year and a half in jail because of contempt of court and refusing to identify sources. What is the solution?
MCMASTERS: Well, I'm not sure that there is an easy solution, obviously, because these are very important points. I think one of the things that has to be accomplished is somehow persuade both members of the Department of Justice and the federal court that the First Amendment rights involved here don't just belong to the press. They're very essential rights of free speech and in a sense they belong to the public here. And when the courts and the prosecutors get between the journalists and their sources and the journalists and their audience, I think that the public is the one that really loses here, even though it's often the journalists that are threatened with fines or jail time.
DOBBS: We devoted considerable time on this broadcast last month to this very issue, and talked with a number of people and reported on a number of elements of this issue. We also did a poll on the broadcast and asked our audience whether or not they would support a federal shield law. Thirty-nine percent of our audience said they would not. Now, while it's impressive that 61 percent would, that 39 percent that would not struck me as a large number, because everyone's interest is involved in freedom of the press. What is your thought?
MCMASTERS: Oh, I think part of the reason for those numbers, Lou, is that a lot of people have not yet figured out just what's at stake for them. As you well know, Washington leaks like a sieve, because it has to. We are now in the midst of one of the most secretive periods in our history as far as the public and the press' access to information is concerned. Under those circumstances, it's absolutely vital for the press to be able to deal with confidential sources, and for the confidential sources to be able to trust the press to protect them from retaliation, if they share information, inside information, if you will, with the American public that gives the public the kind of information it needs to participate in an informed way in its own governance.
DOBBS: Critical to an informed public in this country, and we thank you very much, Paul McMasters. We'll be talking about this issue, unfortunately, for some time to come. We appreciate your being here.
MCMASTERS: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: Still ahead, the results of our poll tonight and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight. Overwhelming 5 percent of you say American soldiers should be forced to serve in the military after their enlistment terms have ended; 95 percent of you say they should not be.
Thanks for being with us here tonight. Please join us tomorrow. Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Duncan Hunter, will be our guest as we continue also our special report on "Culture in Decline."
For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired December 6, 2004 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, the White House and congressional leadership have brokered a deal to overhaul our intelligence agencies.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's a piece of legislation that is important for the security of our country.
DOBBS: The intelligence deal, however, does nothing to secure our ports and borders, nor to stop illegal aliens from possessing driver's licenses. Congressman Tom Tancredo says that's outrageous. He's our guest tonight.
An extraordinary challenge tonight to the Pentagon's controversial stop-loss policy. Eight soldiers have filed a lawsuit to stop the military from extending their service. We'll have a report from the Pentagon.
Social Security reform, a top priority for the Bush agenda. The federal government may have to borrow more than $1 trillion to pay for it, however. Senator Lindsey Graham has introduced legislation to reform Social Security. He's our guest.
And this week's series of special reports, "American Culture in Decline," a newfound American fascination with the lowest common denominator. Tonight, we focus on education. Critics say our schools aren't educating our children, and some aren't even trying.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kids aren't prepared for tomorrow. In other countries, they're catching up with us.
DOBBS: And tonight, I'll talk with Pat Robertson, founder and chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network, about the importance of moral values in America today.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Monday, December 6th. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening.
Tonight, Congress and the White House have reached a deal to introduce the most sweeping intelligence reforms in half a century. The deal follows last-minute talks to ease concerns about the impact of those reforms on the military's chain of command.
But that agreement fails to address the critical issues of border security and how to prevent illegal aliens from obtaining driver's licenses. The September 11 hijackers all possessed U.S. driver's licenses.
Ed Henry reports from Capitol Hill. Dana Bash reports from the White House. We go first to Ed Henry -- Ed.
ED HENRY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, this legislation had been held up by a Republican family feud. Congressional negotiators forged the deal by dealing with one of those major Republicans, Duncan Hunter. But essentially rolling over James Sensenbrenner, the other, on those immigration measures that you mentioned.
It's been more than three years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This is the most radical restructuring of the intelligence community in over 40 years.
Key to it is creating a new director of national intelligence, a quarterback, if you will. The 9/11 Commission had recommended to Congress it need this quarterback in order to try to oversee the nation's 15 spy agencies and try to prevent another terror attack on American soil.
And the deal, this tentative deal, reached -- it got a major shot in the arm just more than an hour ago when the House armed services chairman, Duncan Hunter and the Senate armed services chairman, John Warner, came to the cameras, endorsed this deal, by saying that they believe the language that had been held up dealing with the chain of command for the military was finally to their liking.
Here's Duncan Hunter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DUNCAN HUNTER (R-CA), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: I want to make sure that you understand this bill is not a done deal. It's not finished. But our aspect to this bill, that is protecting the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States and protecting the chain of command, is an area where we have received what we feel is a satisfactory provision that protects them. And as a result of that, we are going to support this bill.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HENRY: So Duncan Hunter is now on board. But as I mentioned, left out in the cold is James Sensenbrenner. He wanted to add some tough immigration provisions. He has been holding out. He said he would not sign on without those provisions. His office says he's still holding out.
But essentially, Republicans leaders up here are privately saying they've been advising the White House that in order to get a deal, the path to a deal was to clarify this language for Hunter but essentially not deal with the immigration provisions this year, punt them until next year. That's something Sensenbrenner has resisted.
But the negotiators up here, as well as the White House, decided what was more important was to deal with the chain of command issue. So what you saw is that today President Bush came forward. He focused on that issue.
Also, Vice President Cheney was working the phones, calling the Hill, saying they had to deal with the chain of command language. And a lot of Republicans up here felt that the president had a lot of political capital on the line, and he had to finally seal a deal -- Lou.
DOBBS: Ed, it strikes me that there's more to this than meets the eye. Do we know what the language is that suddenly mollified Senator John Warner, on the Senate side of armed services, and Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee?
HENRY: Yes, we do, Lou. There were four words added. It all came down to four words. Those are "respect and not abrogate." What that means is not abrogate the power of various department heads here in Washington. Read that as Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld. Basically to not -- that this national director of intelligence would not override the Pentagon chief.
That is what essentially assuaged the concerns of both Duncan Hunter and John Warner. Four words in this bill added late last night at the suggestion of senators Susan Collins and Joe Lieberman. The White House signed on. Now Hunter and Warner have signed on, Lou.
DOBBS: Ed Henry reporting from Capitol Hill. Thank you, Ed.
Tonight's deal on intelligence reform follows a battle between the White House and powerful Republicans in Congress. Today, the president declared the intelligence reform bill is necessary for the security of this country.
White House correspondent Dana Bash with the report -- Dana.
DANA BASH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And Lou, that was part of a last- minute presidential appeal that even some fellow Republicans who have wanted this bill for some time felt was a long time coming from the president.
And Mr. Bush really tried to make his final push in private, began doing that on Friday with phone calls to leaders and again on the phone today. We're told his vice president, Cheney, and his chief of staff, Andy Card, were also working with top leaders to work out the deal that Ed Henry was just talking about.
All through the weekend, a deal on the so-called chain of command language. And the president also publicly tried to pressure Republicans over the weekend using his weekly radio address to do it and again today in the Oval Office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BUSH: It's a good piece of legislation. It is a necessary piece of legislation. It's a piece of legislation that is important for the security of our country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: now, one other thing that President Bush is expected to do to get this going is to send a letter that the White House started talking about last night, which is something that it, once again, promises Duncan Hunter and John Warner, the Republican chairmen of armed services committees, that the chain of command will stay in place, something with his signature on it.
And a senior official, Lou, says you see some members of Congress leaving the White House today. They were talking about Social Security reform. A senior official conceded that getting this done is not only important of this legislation, but also setting the stage, setting the relationship between this president and his Republicans in Congress who he will very much need, but who think that they have as much of a mandate as he does and will have problems in the future.
And of course, I should tell you, Lou, that Ed was talking about the fact that the White House ignored Sensenbrenner as one Republican congressional staffer, who's working with the White House said today, the bottom line is they could only roll one Republican chairman at a time, Lou.
DOBBS: They may have rolled only one Republican chairman, but about 100 Republicans were rolled in the process. So this is going to have some interesting impact in the days and months ahead, particularly with the convening of the new Congress.
Dana Bash reporting from the White House. Thank you, Dana.
Later here, Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa will talk to me about the intel reform deal and its failure to support our ports and borders and to stop illegal aliens from obtaining driver's licenses.
In Saudi Arabia today, radical Islamist terrorists launched a bold attack against the U.S. consulate in Jeddah, killing five local employees. No Americans were injured or killed. The assault was the first major attack by radical Islamist terrorists in Saudi Arabia in six months.
Five terrorists stormed the consulate. Saudi troops and police killed three of the gunmen, and they captured two others. American diplomatic staff took refuge in a safe area within the compound.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ADAM ERELI, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: There were a number of Marines assigned to the consulate who acted very quickly, per their procedure, and I think took -- took decisive action that prevented the loss of life and thwarted the -- thwarted the attackers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Tonight, a senior Saudi official blamed the al Qaeda terror network for the attack.
Eight American soldiers today launched an extraordinary legal challenge of the Army's controversial stop-loss policy. That policy forces troops to continue serving in the military even after their enlistments have ended.
Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Pentagon is fond of saying that it has an all-volunteer military, but these days, many members of the military don't feel like volunteers at all.
Today in federal court in Washington, seven -- rather eight U.S. soldiers filed suit against the Pentagon against the so-called stop- loss policy that prevents them from leaving when their enlistments are technically up.
The lead plaintiff was a soldier named Specialist David Qualls, who signed up in what's called the "Try One" program of the Army National Guard. Supposedly it allows a veteran to serve for only one year on a trial basis before committing to a full enlistment.
But when it was time for him to go, under the stop-loss rules, he had to stay. These rules were supposed to ensure unit cohesion and making sure that units that fought together stayed together while they were in a combat zone. But Qualls claims that he's been spending most of his time filling sandbags and doing odd guard duty.
He said he supports the war but he feels like he's done his duty. The Center for Constitutional Law, which is supporting the soldiers, calls this a fraud, perpetrated on men and women who've sacrificed their normal jobs to serve their country. It is asking for an injunction to prevent Specialist Qualls, have him go back to Iraq. Meanwhile, the Pentagon says while some people may claim it's not fair, it is legal. They should read their contracts. Lou?
DOBBS: Read their contracts, indeed, Jamie. This is what Senator John Kerry referred to during the presidential campaign as a back-door draft. 40 percent of the troops serving in Iraq are guardsmen and reservists. Senator John McCain has said, point blank, criticizing the Pentagon directly, and with considerable energy, that they simply need more troops. What is the reaction of the Pentagon to this, and how are they responding? Because this looks like it would affect directly morale?
MCINTYRE: Well, the back-door draft also refers to members of the individual ready reserve and members who are called back to active duty when they had no expectation they would be called back again, a fine-print issue. But the Pentagon continues to say that even if they had a much larger military, they would still institute stop loss in order to keep soldiers who fought together together while they're in a combat zone. So they say that has a completely different purpose. Nevertheless, the critics still argue that the military's too small. DOBBS: Thank you very much, Jamie McIntyre, senior Pentagon correspondent. That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. Do you believe American soldiers should be forced to serve in the military after their enlistment terms have ended? Yes or no? Please cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results for you later here in the broadcast.
Also ahead, Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa join me to talk about the intelligence bill and its failure to secure our borders and our ports.
Also, free trade in terrorism. Should the United States be carrying on policies to reward allies with free trade agreements? And who should we be focusing on including Muslim nations?
And reforming Social Security could cost, of course, more than $1 trillion. Senator Lindsey Graham will be my guest, the leading advocate of Social Security reform, has introduced legislation, in fact, to do so. He's our guest coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The Food & Drug Administration today announced new rules designed to further protect the nation's food supply. These new rules require food manufacturers, processors, packers and shippers alike to keep records of where they receive food from and where they ship it to. The rules come just days after departing Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said he can't believe terrorists haven't already attacked our national food supply. Secretary Thompson today tried to clarify those statements. He said the government has improved food protection measures, but, in his opinion, needs to do far more.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOMMY THOMPSON, DEPARTING HHS SECRETARY: Imports are increasing. The number of inspectors are staying constant, about 1500, for all inspectors in FDA. We're getting more technology. We're going to be requesting, in the budget, more technology. There's new technology out there that we need. We need to have all of these tools. We've come a long way, but I'm still not satisfied.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Secretary Thompson saying that while he's not satisfied these new rules, he believes, are important for food safety in the country.
Tonight, a growing debate over protecting this nation against terrorism and the role of free trade in that fight. Some in Washington are calling upon the white house to reward Muslim countries helping this country in the war on terror with free trade. Lisa Sylvester reports.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE) LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): President Bush hosted the King of Jordan at the White House today, praising the country's cozy economic ties. The United States and Jordan have had a free trade agreement since 2001. And the United States recently completed similar agreements with Morocco and Bahrain.
DAN GRISWOLD, CATO INSTITUTE: Morocco and Bahrain and Jordan are all moderate Muslim majority regimes in the greater Middle East and signing free trade agreements with the United States is way of rewarding their reforms and also creating jobs and opportunities for young people in those countries.
SYLVESTER: Senators John McCain and Max Baucus have introduced legislation known as the Silk Road Bill that would unilaterally remove tariffs on good from Muslim countries that help the United States in the war on terror. Countries like Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt, which do not have free trade agreements with the United States, have faced declining exports while Latin American and African countries with preferential treatment have expanded exports.
EDWARD GRESSER: While we've been trying to pick winners in Africa and Latin America, we've been inadvertently defining losers in the Muslim countries.
SYLVESTER: The free trade agreements carry a cost to U.S. manufacturers. The American textile and apparel industry has lost 864,000 jobs since 1994. And U.S. manufacturers are not convinced that boosting jobs overseas will even reduce the threat of terrorism.
JIM SCHOLLAERT, AMERICAN MANUFACTURING TRADE COALITION: The folks who crashed those airplanes into the World Trade Center were not impoverished Pakistanis or Yemenis. For the most part, they were wealthy Saudis. And you know, man does not live by bread alone.
SYLVESTER: And U.S. textile manufacturers point out, the growing trade deficit is weakening the U.S. economy, making the country more dependent on foreign money and supplies and less secure in the long run.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: The United States intends to negotiate free trade agreements with Oman and the United Arab Emirates, and the White House has proposed a Middle East free trade agreement to take effect by 2013. Lou?
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Lisa Sylvester.
In Paris tonight, French authorities are second-guessing one of their airport security training procedures after they misplaced, mishandled and lost a bag containing plastic explosives. That's right. Airport officials have now decided it was a bad idea to test out bomb-sniffing dogs by using real explosives in real luggage belonging to real passengers. Five pounds of plastic explosives were placed in an unsuspecting passenger's bag before it went missing. At the time, more than 90 flights were taking off from Paris, meaning that that bag and the explosives could be anywhere. Those explosives have still not been found.
Still ahead here tonight, fixing Social Security before it's too late. Senator Lindsey Graham will join me. We'll be talking about his proposal to save Social Security.
And then, patients bombarding doctors with lists of prescription drugs they want to take. How prescription drug advertisements are forever changing the doctor/patient relationship. That special report ahead here. And we'll be joined by two congressmen who say the intelligence reform legislation only creates the illusion of security. Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa are my guests here tonight. That and a great deal more still ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Drug companies are spending billions of dollars each year to market prescription drugs to consumers. And the investment apparently is paying off and paying off big. Now, instead of arriving at the doctor's office with a list of symptoms, many patients are armed with a list of medications they want to take. Christine Romans has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)
DR. JONATHAN MOHRER, PHYSICIAN: How you doing today?
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): When Dr. Jonathan Mohrer started his practice 21 years ago, the idea of a pharmaceutical company pushing pills on his patients was unheard of. Today, he says the drug companies are a third party in his examining room.
MOHRER: Before this became a common practice that the patient would really not know all that much about the medications that they were taking, that they would really rely on my judgment in choosing a prescription drug to give them what I thought was best. And now there's a third party in the room that is exerting influence.
ROMANS (on camera): Dr. Mohrer and many doctors like him say money changes everything. The average doctor visit lasts just about ten minutes. And the drug companies are spending billions to make sure that in that precious time, you're asking your doctor about their prescription drugs, and you're getting a free sample to get started right away.
(voice-over) Doctors wrote $154 billion in prescriptions last year. Drug companies spent more than $16 billion on free samples, and $3 billion on consumer advertising. Health care advocates say those numbers are conservative.
DAVID LANSKY, MARKLE FOUNDATION: The drug companies are marketing their products in the most aggressive way they can to increase their sales volume. That's their business. They make money by selling pills.
ROMANS: Dr. Isabel Blumberg says about a third of her patients come in asking about a drug asking for a free sample. But she would never prescribe a medication a patient didn't need.
DR. ISABEL BLUMBERG, OBGYN: I think most responsible doctors are making decisions based on symptoms and requirements and not on free samples.
ROMANS: It's a subject sweeping medical dinners and conferences these days, events often sponsored by the drug companies. Doctors arguing over whether drug companies have too much influence in the doctor's office and whether a real examination of ethics is due. Christine Romans, CNN, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Coming up next here, Congressman Tom Tancredo, congressman Darrell Issa join us to talk about why they believe the intelligence reform bill won't do enough to protect this country against radical Islamism terrorism.
And then, securing your future. Senator Lindsey Graham has taken the lead in Congress, introducing legislation to reform Social Security. He's our guest here next.
And American culture in decline. What role do our nation's schools play in this cultural decline? We'll have that special report and Pat Robertson is our guest.
All of that and a great deal more still ahead here tonight. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Congressman Tom Tancredo and Congressman Darrell Issa will be here in just a moment. We'll be talking about why they say the intelligence reform legislation doesn't do enough to protect this country.
But first, a look at a number of the top stories tonight.
The controversy sounding the use of steroids in major league baseball, it's escalating as the players union started a meeting today, Senator John McCain is calling for tougher testing for players. Senator McCain said he is confident that a bill on the issue would have the support of Congress and President Bush.
The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention today said more flu vaccines are on the way. The government plans to purchase as many as 5 million doses from manufacturers in both Canada and Germany after losing nearly half of its supply to contamination in October. Outgoing Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson is expected to make that announcement this week.
Sources say a new national counterterrorism center is up and running just outside Washington, though the government declines to comment on it. The new agency was created by an executive order from President Bush. Sources said the agency will be granted additional clout if the intelligence reform bill in Congress is passed. I'm joined now by two congressmen who say the intelligence reform bill will fail to prevent terrorists from crossing our borders. Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado, Congressman Darrell Issa of California join us tonight from Capitol Hill. Gentlemen, good to have you here.
REP. DARRELL ISSA, (R) CALIFORNIA: Pleasure. Good to be here.
REP. TOM TANCREDO, (R) COLORADO: That introduction, I didn't know we were both -- I thought we were here to argue, but now I understand we're on the same side. That's great news.
DOBBS: Well, if you want to argue, we'll give you ample opportunity. Let's begin with you, Congressman Issa. The fact that the president said this is important legislation. Congressman Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee has said that he is comfortable with four words that have been added. Are we not, in your opinion, better off?
ISSA: We are better off. There's no question that Congressman Hunter fought for and got a compromise that means that commanders on the ground are going to be less concerned about whether they're going to have the resources they need to make their troops safe. But here -- that's outside our borders. Inside our borders, we're not any safer. Inside our borders, we have not fixed, in this bill, the fundamental problems that allowed 19 hijackers to have 63 driver's licenses, most of them valid from different states. And it's that kind of push back that we're getting that is inconsistent with what the 9/11 commission asked for. They asked for us to have this kind of strengthening of I.D., particularly the I.D. that's going to be used to get on an airplane.
DOBBS: They also, Congressman Tancredo, also called for greater border security and port security. Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner of the House judiciary committee was absolutely rolled by the White House and the House leadership on this issue. He just issued in a statement just a few moments ago -- and let me just read part of that, if I may. "Terrorists have exploited vulnerabilities in our asylum system, all of this addressing border security and immigration control and the issuance of driver's licenses." This bill fails to include the strong provisions in the House bill because my Senate colleagues found them too controversial. That's unfortunate because the refusal to consider these security measures on their merits will keep Americans unnecessarily at risk. Congressman, why...
TANCREDO: I could not have put it better.
DOBBS: Why could not there be an agreement on this issue because it, like every other part of this legislation, was a recommendation from the 9/11 commission?
TANCREDO: Here's why. In a nutshell. The president is not philosophically opposed to the provisions they added to the defense side of the bill. He is philosophically opposed to the provisions we wanted in on the immigration side of the bill. He's philosophically opposed to securing the border. That's why. It's easy for him to make this compromise because he doesn't oppose it. He would not support -- in fact, he called Chairman Sensenbrenner and told him he did not want the driver's license part of the bill in there, securing driver's licenses. Now, so there's -- that's why we can't get it, Lou.
DOBBS: I understand, Congressman Issa, Congressman Tancredo, that in the conference that Republicans stood up more on the issue of the failure to provide in this agreement for border security and immigration control more than on the issue of a chain of command over the intelligence agencies and their relationship to the Pentagon. Is that true?
ISSA: It's true, Lou, but it's true for a good and valid reason. The question of area commanders having what they needed in the way of resources was quite technical, and there were only a few people who really understood it. Chairman Hunter being first among them. And ranking member Skelton. And so they fought that battle, and we stood behind them. When it comes to understanding that you've got to have a national database to make sure somebody doesn't have 12 different driver's licenses in 12 different states with different underlying I.D., that's important, and it's very doable, and we all understand it.
You know, this is exactly like the way we always talk about rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. No matter what we do on the 9/11 bill, if people can come to this country, perhaps legally, through a visa, and then once they're here, disappear into our society, get as many I.D.s as they want in as many states as they want and wait until the time is right to attack us, we will not be safer.
TANCREDO: And Lou, it's important to understand another aspect of that debate. The only reason we had a conference that evening is because I went ahead with, you know, not a very well known provision, a rule I wasn't aware of until shortly before I did it that if you can gather enough signatures, 50 signatures from members, they can demand a conference. I was in the process of doing that. And believe me, I didn't even bring up the issue of the Duncan Hunter problem. I just kept saying to everybody, the Senate has stripped out the immigration provisions of this bill. And everybody signed just like that. That's why we got a conference that night. And that's why the bill actually was pulled from the floor. It would have been on the floor and passed had we not done that.
DOBBS: Very quickly, gentlemen, and Congressman Issa, I'll give you the last word, if I may, what is the next step here?
ISSA: Well, the next step is, people of conscience will vote against this bill. Many of us having voted for the House bill the first time, that's going to be necessary. More importantly, we're going to have to move the debate from the word immigration to the internal security of America that these missing links create.
TANCREDO: More security, that's right.
ISSA: Border and inside security. We have no way to control who's getting on an airplane if we can't control the validity of their I.D.
DOBBS: Congressman Issa, thank you very much. Congressman Tancredo, thank you very much.
Still ahead here, securing your future. Senator Lindsey Graham will be joining me. We'll be talking about his proposal to save Social Security and our future.
American culture in decline. This week we begin a series of special reports on a cultural race in this country seemingly to the bottom. Tonight, why critics say our public schools are not educating our children. Why some of those schools aren't even trying.
And we'll be talking about moral values with none other than Pat Robertson, chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network.
And also tonight, the public's right to know. Under fire, journalists being threatened in court for exercising their responsibility to keep the public informed. Paul McMasters of the First Amendment Center is my guest. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: This week, we begin a series of special reports, American culture in decline. Tonight, there is new evidence that one of the most important elements of our culture is in decline and in serious trouble. Education. Bill Tucker has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The good news about education is scores are improving. Over the last decade student test scores showed improvement in reading, writing and mathematics.
JACK JENNINGS, CTR. ON EDUCATION POLICY: Schools are doing better. But in terms of preparing for tomorrow, kids aren't prepared for tomorrow. And other countries are catching up with us. We used to lead the world in terms of numbers of kids going to high school, numbers of people going on to college. Today we're no longer the leader.
TUCKER: And it's not because we don't spend money. Last year, according to the Center For Education Statistics, we spent in total, at the federal and state level, $324 billion to educate 47 million kids in public schools. But that doesn't tell the whole story. The most money is typically spent in the suburbs where parents put their tax dollars to work. Not so for inner city and rural farm schools.
KATHLEEN PORTER-MAGEE, THOMAS B. FORDHAM FOUNDATION: If we believe that education is going to be the way out for poor and minority students, then we have to make sure that we're adequately educating those students. We have to give them a fair shot which right now we're not currently doing in the public schools.
TUCKER: And we're not always giving what is taught a fair shot. History's a good example. It's frequently treated as a second-class subject in many schools because it's not a subject tested under No Child Left Behind. Education's always been important. And study after study shows that the more education a person has, the more money they'll make. But to focus solely on employment is to miss a bigger point.
MILT GOLDBERG, EDUCATION COMM. OF THE STATES: It's important for civility. It's important for the way in which we respect one another's rights, interact with one another. And I think it's clear that the more education one has, the more likely it is you are to adopt such a position.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: But of all the obstacles that education faces, none may be larger and more indicative, Lou, of a cultural decline than the issue of simply playing politics with our education.
DOBBS: And lacking both courage and the will to speak straightforwardly, the fact that our students are testing so poorly, in American history, don't even understand what is happening with the subject in our public schools, is a crime. And the fact that we're not teaching, because it's not being tested under No Child Left Behind, what possible sense does that make?
TUCKER: It would be laughable if it weren't a joke, but it's true. Less than half the students at high school level test proficient in U.S. history. U.S. history, Lou, believe it or not, is deemed controversial.
What do you teach?
What kind of history do you teach to these kids?
So schools are allowed to go there, they don't have to provide testing to get federal money. They don't do it.
DOBBS: Frightening. Absolutely frightening, and the fact that we're not dealing with it straight up, hopefully that will change soon.
Bill, thank you very much. Bill Tucker.
Well, Pat Robertson is the founder of the Christian Coalition, the Christian Broadcasting Network. He's also the author of "Courting Disaster," how the Supreme Court is usurping the power of Congress and the people. And among other things, one of the people most interested in religion and our society and moral values.
I talked with him earlier and asked him if all of the talk about improving public education in this country is for naught when one considers the vast number of students who are not meeting even the most basic minimums in education.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REV. PAT ROBERTSON: You know, when I was a kid growing up I learned how to read with the phonics method and that's the way most people talk, they say mama, dada and begin to say syllables. The educators have bought in what they call "whole sentence construction." They have look, say and whole a sentence and they try to get a kid to memorize words, they can't read that way. And the simple phonics -- we had a program if you give a kid a vocabulary of as many as 20,000 words after about 38 different lessons. It is so simple to do but the educators refuse to do it.
DOBBS: Now, many of the people listening to us right now are listening to Pat Robertson, they're saying, "My gosh, he is a Christian. He is going to be talking about merging religion and state, which is first of all unconstitutional." And they are rejecting, based on ideological and partisan grounds, everything you are saying right now.
Is there a role for education in reversing this decline in our educational system and reversing the decline in our culture?
ROBERTSON: Of course, I am head of a university that is giving graduate degrees to a number of about 3,400 students, so I like education. And our -- I like public education and support it, but I frankly am in favor of a voucher system. You know, competition is a wonderful thing in the free enterprise system. Whenever you've got a monopoly, you have sloppy standards and that's what we've got in the educational system. The bureaucracy eats up billions of dollars. We spend more per pupil but the money doesn't get through to the teachers and to the students where they're needed in the classroom.
DOBBS: I agree with you that we ought to be paying our students certainly as much as we're paying our professional basketball players in this country, because they are providing a far more important service to society, to the country, to our children. But at the same time I have to disagree with you, Pat, about the voucher system. Because it seems to me it's just abdication of our responsibility to take charge in our community level of our public education system and to ensure that we are providing our public education to young people, many of whom simply aspire to be in the middle class and without public education won't achieve it.
How do you respond to that?
ROBERTSON: Well, you're right you know -- I did a teaching program in Chicago, met with Marva Collins (ph), she's one of the great educators. She was teaching kids in the eighth grade Chaucer and Boccaccio and some of these great classics and she was just a fabulous teacher. But the educational establishment in Chicago just came on her with both feet and tried to humiliate her. Later surveys have showed that 60 percent of all the teachers in the Chicago public school systems send their own children to private schools. Why, because they see the drugs, the crime, the lack of discipline, court mandated problems that are there...
DOBBS: But should we retreat from that situation or should we take it on head on?
Should we be dealing with those issues, Pat, and taking control of that public education, because that truly -- as a beneficiary of the public school system in this country I truly believe in it and I truly believe that it is the only way to ensure mobility and advancement to the middle class and beyond in this society.
ROBERTSON: Well, I'll tell you how you start it. You break the hold of the National Education Association, which refuses to have standards of performance for teachers. You've got to make them perform appropriately and if they don't perform they don't get promoted or they get fired. And the second thing is you have to mandate the teaching of phonics. They have to teach these children how to read and write. I think some of the stuff the president was putting in may be good, this national testing, but the problem with that is you focus all your education just on passing the test and that maybe that doesn't engender creative thinking.
But yes, the public schools can be reformed if the education bureaucracy will go along with it.
DOBBS: And if we pay for value received and there is no greater value, I'm sure you would agree, than that performed by teachers.
ROBERTSON: Oh yeah.
DOBBS: Pat Robertson, as always, good to have you here. Thank you.
ROBERTSON: Thanks Lou. It was a pleasure.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Well, turning now to another issue requiring reform, Social Security. The White House today said reforming Social Security could force the government to borrow more than $1 trillion. That money would help cover the shortfall in Social Security payments while the system is being transformed, at least in part, to private accounts.
My guest tonight has been one of the most vocal members of Congress calling for a reform of Social Security and has introduced legislation to do just that.
Senator Lindsey Graham joins us tonight from Greenville, South Carolina. Senator, good to have you with us.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Thank you. I'd like to get my Social Security, I'm one of the few members of the Senate under 65.
DOBBS: Well, I think perhaps congratulations are in order. And we'll all cross our fingers for you, senator.
Let's begin with an issue that has just broken, and that is the agreement on intelligence reform. The Senate has -- and the White House and a number of members of Congress have said, the White House simply rolled House Judiciary Committee chairman and Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner. What's your reaction? GRAHAM: I think the concerns raised about driver's licenses have their place in overall immigration reform. But this bill is to try to create one-stop shopping, to bring some organization that was lacking before 9/11, to get our ducks in a row organizationally. And is not a cure for all the problems facing the country as far as internal security, and it was never meant to be.
DOBBS: You say immigration reform, but in point of fact, it is about border security. It is about internal security.
GRAHAM: Yes, you're right, exactly.
DOBBS: And -- and the 9/11 Commission, senator, as you well know, recommended that we reform all of those issues as well as the other -- others that are contained within this reform legislation.
How do you respond to that?
GRAHAM: Well, no. 1, they're back in the bill. The people who are on the commission have urged us to pass the bill as drafted. They have concerns about internal security, about driver's licenses. They've been addressed in the bill. Not completely, but you've got to remember that the people who are on the commission support the legislation.
DOBBS: Let's turn to Social Security if we may, and that is the idea of privatizing Social Security. It has a lot of people concerned, a country that is running just about $8 trillion in national debt, looking at the prospect of more than $1 trillion over the course of just a little over a decade in order to do it.
How in the world can we afford this?
GRAHAM: Well, you can't afford not to do it. Social Security is going bankrupt, it's coming apart at the seams. When I was born in 1955, there were 16 workers for every retiree. In about 15 years, there will be two workers for every retiree. Between 2011 and 2030, there will be a 65 percent increase in retirees and 8 percent increase in the work force. We're short of money to pay the benefits. If we do nothing, the cost will be trillions, if we do something progressive, the cost can be managed. But to do nothing is a death blow to Social Security.
DOBBS: Let's be progressive. Let's talk about the idea of private accounts. What percentage...
GRAHAM: Right.
DOBBS: ... of those who will be receiving Social Security will be eligible to take advantage of private accounts, and how soon, and what will be the impact on those now nearing retirement age?
DOBBS: Good question. Under the bill I've drafted, you have to be under 55 to participate. It's voluntary. You're able to put $1,330 of your FICA taxes, that would be taken through payroll deductions into a personal investment account. When it gets to be $10,000 in accumulated funds, you can opt then to into a system like federal employee can, where you can go into government bonds, mutual funds. Very secure system. Very similar to what the federal government employees are able to opt into. The growth rates of these funds will outpace of current growth rates of social security by a factor of three or four. If you're born after 1980 -- and this is a lot of information, but it's important, you get a negative return rate if you're born after 1980 in the current system. If you have a personal investment account, you will be able to receive much more than that.
DOBBS: Senator, with -- as you say, a lot of information to absorb.
GRAHAM: Yes, it's a lot.
DOBBS: And it's going to be quite a struggle through Congress as the White House and you and others in the Republican leadership engage on this issue. I suspect we'll be talking from time to time on this important matter.
GRAHAM: I hope so.
DOBBS: Senator Lindsey Graham, thank you.
GRAHAM: Thank you.
DOBBS: Still ahead here, "Freedom Under Fire." Why a recent series of attacks on the press may prevent critical information from reaching you in the future. It's all about the news and the public right to know. Paul McMasters of the First Amendment Center is my guest next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Freedom of the press, your right to know is under attack. At least 10 journalists in this country now face jail time for refusing to reveal their confidential sources. My guest tonight says we're in the midst of the most intense and prolonged attack on the freedom of the press that this country has seen in some time.
Paul McMasters is ombudsman at the First Amendment Center and joins us tonight from Washington, D.C. Paul, good to have you here.
PAUL MCMASTERS, OMBUDSMAN, FIRST AMENDMENT CENTER: Thanks for having me, Lou.
DOBBS: What is behind this sudden -- to me it's sudden -- onslaught over the course of the past year or two against journalists trying to protect their sources?
MCMASTERS: Well, Lou, there's probably a lot of things that go into this. And chief among them is that for a prosecutor, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line to a reporter that they may be able to talk into being part of their investigative team. But I also think that there are some really tough cases out there where the federal prosecutors are trying to do their jobs, and the journalists are trying to do their jobs, and they're stepping on one another in the process.
But what worries me is that now we see a situation where the First Amendment, common law and common sense sort of kept these two parties apart. And if they did get entangled, the courts would step in and sort it all out. But now the courts seem inclined to be more deferential to the prosecution's side of this problem.
DOBBS: More deferential, and also great latitude being exercised, the case of Judith Miller, of "The New York Times" and Matt Cooper of "Time" magazine, where they are ancillary to the true issue, did not, in point of fact, publish, but are embroiled now, facing a year and a half in jail because of contempt of court and refusing to identify sources. What is the solution?
MCMASTERS: Well, I'm not sure that there is an easy solution, obviously, because these are very important points. I think one of the things that has to be accomplished is somehow persuade both members of the Department of Justice and the federal court that the First Amendment rights involved here don't just belong to the press. They're very essential rights of free speech and in a sense they belong to the public here. And when the courts and the prosecutors get between the journalists and their sources and the journalists and their audience, I think that the public is the one that really loses here, even though it's often the journalists that are threatened with fines or jail time.
DOBBS: We devoted considerable time on this broadcast last month to this very issue, and talked with a number of people and reported on a number of elements of this issue. We also did a poll on the broadcast and asked our audience whether or not they would support a federal shield law. Thirty-nine percent of our audience said they would not. Now, while it's impressive that 61 percent would, that 39 percent that would not struck me as a large number, because everyone's interest is involved in freedom of the press. What is your thought?
MCMASTERS: Oh, I think part of the reason for those numbers, Lou, is that a lot of people have not yet figured out just what's at stake for them. As you well know, Washington leaks like a sieve, because it has to. We are now in the midst of one of the most secretive periods in our history as far as the public and the press' access to information is concerned. Under those circumstances, it's absolutely vital for the press to be able to deal with confidential sources, and for the confidential sources to be able to trust the press to protect them from retaliation, if they share information, inside information, if you will, with the American public that gives the public the kind of information it needs to participate in an informed way in its own governance.
DOBBS: Critical to an informed public in this country, and we thank you very much, Paul McMasters. We'll be talking about this issue, unfortunately, for some time to come. We appreciate your being here.
MCMASTERS: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: Still ahead, the results of our poll tonight and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight. Overwhelming 5 percent of you say American soldiers should be forced to serve in the military after their enlistment terms have ended; 95 percent of you say they should not be.
Thanks for being with us here tonight. Please join us tomorrow. Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Duncan Hunter, will be our guest as we continue also our special report on "Culture in Decline."
For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
