Return to Transcripts main page

Lou Dobbs Tonight

Bush Meets with E.U., NATO; Arab-American Arrested for Plotting to Kill President

Aired February 22, 2005 - 18:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Tuesday, February 22. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, HOST: Good evening.

Tonight, President Bush has won a promise of support from European countries, even those opposed to the war in Iraq, to help train Iraqi security forces. President Bush hailed the move, saying the United Stats and Europe want to put the past behind them.

But despite the breakthrough on Iraq, there is building tension on another critical issue: Europe's plan to lift a longstanding arms embargo against China.

White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux reports from Brussels.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Day two of President Bush's European charm offensive proves his diplomacy is paying off. Emerging from back-to-back summits with NATO and the European Union, President Bush walked away about what he'd been working for: renewed friendly relations with his European counterparts....

JAAP DE HOOP SCHEFFER, NATO SECRETARY-GENERAL: There is a lot more we agree upon, and that is the bottom line.

MALVEAUX: ... and additional support to train Iraqi troops, a critical first step to the U.S. exit strategy.

All 26 NATO members pledged to contribute to the training mission in some way, from Poland's deployment of 40 troops to Iraq, to France's commitment of one officer who will help coordinate the mission out of Brussels.

Despite the modest contributions from some members, Mr. Bush rejected the notion that NATO's effort was merely symbolic.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Every contribution matters. And every country ought to be -- ought to be proud of the fact that they're contributing to the world's newest democracy.

MALVEAUX: Mr. Bush underscored his pro-democracy message by making appearances with several important allies: the new democratically elected Ukrainian leader, Viktor Yushchenko, and Mr. Bush's Iraq war proponents from Italy and Britain.

On this high profile day of diplomacy, at times the leaders' remarks seemed to border on hyperbole.

BUSH: After all, NATO is the most successful alliance in the history of the world.

SCHEFFER: It was an excellent summit. It was an excellent idea of the president to come here.

MALVEAUX: But towards the end of the day, the flowery language seemed to wear thin.

BUSH: Your question kind of made it sound like he finally showed up and met.

MALVEAUX: And it was clear that there were differences in how the U.S. and Europe perceive their approaches to potential threats.

BUSH: This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. Having said that, all options are on the table.

MALVEAUX: Significant policy disagreements between the U.S. and Europe still remain, one being the Bush administration's concern over the European Union's intention to lift the arms embargo on China.

BUSH: There is deep concern in our country that a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to China, which would change the balance of relations in -- between China and Taiwan.

MALVEAUX (on camera): President Bush leaves Brussels with largely symbolic gestures of support, but as one European Union official put it, sometimes symbolism is substance.

Suzanne Malveaux, CNN, Brussels.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: President Bush for a second day in a row raised concerns about the state of democracy in Russia. President Bush said he has a close, personal relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but Mr. Bush said Russia must be reminded that democracies are, in his words, based upon rule of law and a free press.

President Bush's comments come just two days before he's expected to meet with Putin in Slovakia. For his part, President Putin said today the fundamental principles of democracy must be adapted to Russian traditions and Russian history.

NATO's new promise to help Iraq train and build its military could play a critical role in reducing the number of American troops in Iraq.

Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre has the report -- Jamie. JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the United States has been pressing hard for its NATO allies to do more in helping to train Iraqi forces, and, of course, getting the Iraqi military to stand and fight with the insurgents is the key to withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. Currently about 155,000 troops there.

The commitment came from all 26 NATO members, although in many cases it was a rather modest commitment. Still when you add it up, it's about 160 instructors and over about $4.5 million to help that training effort.

Still, allies France and Germany, who were opposed to the war in Iraq, are making somewhat more modest contributions and offering to train Iraqi troops outside Iraq. France, in addition, is sending one coordinator to NATO headquarters.

Still the NATO secretary-general, Jaap De Hoop Scheffer, insisted this was more than a symbolic gesture.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHEFFER: NATO has more ambitions as far as setting up a training academy near Baghdad, and as you know, NATO is not only training. NATO is also equipping the Iraqi security forces, the Iraqi armed forces, so I think we're doing well.

The fact that the president came so short after his inauguration I think was a sign of his administration's commitment to NATO, which was something that was very positively received, of course.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCINTYRE: The Pentagon says currently they have 140,000 Iraqi troops trained and on duty in various capacities, but again there's a debate about the capability of those troops and their willingness to fight.

Right now the U.S. has 155,000 troops, and the Pentagon said they're going to begin the drawdown of those extra troops they had on hand for the elections. They hope to be down to 138,000 U.S. troops in the next month or so -- Lou.

DOBBS: Jamie, Senator John McCain, a highly respected member of the armed services committee today, while in Afghanistan, called for the creation, as you know, of permanent joint military bases in Afghanistan. What is the U.S. position and the Pentagon reaction?

MCINTYRE: Well, the official reaction was that it's premature to speculate about any future permanent military presence in Afghanistan, although clearly the United States would like and needs to have bases in the region. It does have some bases in some of the countries nearby, some of the other stands, if you were, but Afghanistan would be a logical place.

But until the country has been stabilized and until there's a government that can negotiate such an agreement with the United States, it's not something the Pentagon says it has any plans for at this time.

As a matter of fact, the same thing sort of applies to Iraq. The Pentagon hasn't said anything about wanting permanent bases in Iraq, but it's not something it would rule out in the distant future if the Iraqi government wanted it -- Lou.

DOBBS: Jamie, thank you. Jamie McIntyre from the Pentagon.

Australia said today it will raise the number of its forces in Iraq. Prime Minister John Howard said another 450 to 470 Australian troops will arrive in Iraq within the next 10 weeks. Those troops will replace departing Dutch troops, who have been protecting Japanese engineers who are working in southern Iraq.

Nine hundred fifty Australian troops are already in Iraq. That's fewer than half of the 2,000 Australian troops who took part in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Tonight, a Virginia man has been charged with supporting terrorists who were plotting to assassinate President Bush. Prosecutors say the man, who was captured in Saudi Arabia, had joined an al Qaeda terrorist cell there.

Justice correspondent Kelli Arena has the report from Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KELLI ARENA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The government says Ahmed Abu Ali conspired to assassinate President Bush, that he supported al Qaeda and that was willing to set up a terror cell right here in the United States. He remains in custody in northern Virginia.

Abu Ali's parents say the government is lying to save embarrassment.

OMAR ABU ALI, AHMED'S FATHER: I would like to say the government lied to us from the first day. They told the district court that is a Saudi case, and we have nothing to do with this case. Now they are cooking -- they cooked the new thing. They changed the story about Ahmed.

ARENA: Abu Ali was held in Saudi Arabia without being charged, for 20 months. He is a U.S. citizen born in Texas. His family says he was held at the request of the United States and sued the U.S. government on behalf of their son.

U.S. government officials have insisted the Saudis have their own interest in Abu Ali, having to do with the bombings in Riyadh in May of 2003.

Abu Ali claims he was tortured by the Saudis and that he has the scars on the back to prove it. He was told to present that evidence on Thursday at a detention hearing. The judge assured him he would not suffer any torture or humiliation while in U.S. custody. In the indictment against him, Abu Ali is charged with discussing two scenarios to assassinate President Bush: one in which he would get close enough to the president to shoot him on the street, and another in which Abu Ali would detonate a car bomb.

(on camera) All the evidence against him remains under seal. The indictment just the bare bones of what the government knows.

Kelli Arena, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: Up next here, which states are winning and losing the battle to keep driver's licenses out of the hands of illegal aliens.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Illegal aliens in states all across this country tonight are demanding the right to obtain U.S. driver's licenses. Thirty-nine states, however, currently require some proof of legal status before allowing a driver's license to be issued. But now one of those states says illegal aliens can drive.

Bill Tucker has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: If you are illegal and living in New York State, you cannot be denied a driver's license, at least for now. That's the temporary ruling by a state Supreme Court judge who says that the New York Department of Motor Vehicles has no right to enforce immigration law.

Two years ago, the state began requiring an original Social Security card for new licenses. Last year, the state announced that it would revoke licenses for drivers who gave a number that didn't match Social Security records.

New York is hardly alone in requiring applicants for driver's licenses to prove their legal status. Thirty-nine states have such laws. Eleven, however, do not. And that list includes Tennessee, which issues driving certificates to those who cannot prove their legal status.

The Utah Senate voted at the end of last week to follow Tennessee's lead and issue a separate class of licenses for those in the state illegally. The difference in disparity between regulations seems to beg the question of national standards.

MARTI DINERSTEIN, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: The 9/11 Commission recommended that there be national standards. It said that travel documents, which a driver's license is, are as valuable to terrorists as weapons. And it specifically expressed the need for the country to secure both our birth certificates and our driver's licenses. TUCKER: Attorneys arguing for illegals did lose a case in Iowa. The state Supreme Court there dismissed a class-action suit by illegal aliens demanding that the state issue them driver's licenses.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TUCKER: The court letting stand a lower-court ruling which found that illegal aliens, Lou, have no legal right to a driver's license.

DOBBS: At least in the state of Iowa.

TUCKER: In the state of Iowa.

DOBBS: I wonder if the Bush administration, active as it is on open borders and amnesty, would consider the New York judge an activist judge?

TUCKER: No comment, Lou.

DOBBS: You don't have to answer that.

(LAUGHTER)

DOBBS: We'll be joined here later by a Colorado state representative who is calling for a crackdown on benefits for illegal aliens in the state of Colorado. He's introduced legislation similar to Arizona's Proposition 200, which became law last year.

Now to the issue of your privacy. A leading congressman has proposed a new measure that would help protect your personal medical and financial information from being shipped to cheap overseas labor countries. The bill would make it illegal for companies to export your most personal information to those cheap foreign labor markets without your permission. Some powerful opponents already lining up, of course, against that measure.

Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: An estimated 200,000 American tax returns were prepared outside the United States last year. Ten percent of all doctors' scribbled notes in the United States are transcribed overseas, according to the American Association of Medical Transcription. And an increasing number of mortgage and home equity loans are processed, not at the local bank, but in Bangalore.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Increasingly those secret financial and medical records are send to other countries to be store-housed, but without the privacy protections which Americans would be entitled to here in our own country.

SYLVESTER: Representative Ed Markey is reintroducing a bill that requires companies to ask customers for permission before sending sensitive information overseas. His bill has put him at odds with health care executives, including fellow Massachusetts resident Jonathan S. Bush.

Bush runs Athena health care, a company that reportedly employs 200 low-wage data-entry workers in India. He is also the first cousin of President Bush.

Athena health care would not do an interview, but its public relations firm said, "The focus of the company is on doctor-patients relations. The story you're doing is tangential to our mission."

Privacy advocates say information sent overseas could potentially be accessed by identity thieves and government agencies.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In a foreign country, you know, they follow that country's laws. If there's a coup, nationalization, just simply the country doesn't have strong privacy laws, that the government can go in after that information and the company has to turn it over.

SYLVESTER: Markey's bill stalled in the last congressional session, but he says that's because of politics, not public opinion.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SYLVESTER: Representative Markey points out that information often is sent to multiple sources after it leaves the doctor's office, usually to an American company that occasionally sends the work to a contractor in India, who usually then sends it to a subcontractor. In fact, they travel so much, Markey says, the records should be getting frequent-flier miles -- Lou?

DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much. Lisa Sylvester from Washington.

This important issue is the subject of our poll tonight. The question: Should health care companies be required to tell you if they plan to send your personal information overseas? Yes or no?

Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'll have the results later here.

Coming up next, deadly storms in California reaching historic levels. How much more rain has fallen this year than in years past? That story is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: At least six people have been killed by the dangerous weather that continues to batter Southern California. Flash flood warnings and tornado watches are in effect tonight across the area. It's been the fourth wettest year on record in Los Angeles. Los Angeles usually has a total of about 15 inches of rain each year. Since July of last year, however, the start of the water year in the Los Angeles area, nearly 32 inches of rain has fallen.

Ted Rowlands joins us now live from Highland Park, California, just outside Los Angeles -- Ted? TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, it continues to rain here in Southern California. We are outside of one of the red-tagged homes in Highland Park. You can see firefighters keeping a watchful eye here. From this angle, it doesn't look too bad. But from the back, you can see that this home and four others are precariously perched on top of a hillside that gave way at about 1:00 a.m., came crashing down and with the hillside, mud, debris and backyards in four of these homes.

Home owners here say they heard the crash, came out in the middle of the night, assessed the damage, most of them gathered some things, family members and pets, and got out. They say they are cooperating with authorities until this situation can be assessed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know that you can explain it to anyone. It's like any personal experience you have. Everyone's going to be different. I was frightened. I mean, that was the first thing that came, was fear and panic, and then that goes away, and then you deal with it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROWLANDS: This wild weather has been relentless in many areas of Southern California. This afternoon in Santa Monica, or off the coast of Santa Monica, a waterspout formed over the Pacific Ocean. Basically it's a mini-tornado out in the ocean. Nobody was hurt. It stayed offshore the entire time. It was quite a spectacle. It was caught on camera. Many people seeing that.

Also today, this storm does not discriminate. The rich are feeling it, as well, Bel Air even hit. There's a swimming pool literally fell down a hillside in the community of Bel Air, areas there also red-tagged.

And, Lou, the rain continues here and is expected to continue through the night into tomorrow. A lot of this soil is saturated. Anyone on a hillside here, very nervous until the weather changes -- Lou?

DOBBS: Ted, thank you very much. Ted Rowlands.

The Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in a case that could well have implications for every property owner in this country. The city of New London, Connecticut, is trying to seize private property for the purpose of development under eminent domain.

The city intends to use that right known as eminent domain to turn the property over then to private developers, the city arguing that increased economic activity will better serve the larger public good.

A group of New London homeowners, however, feels quite differently. They are fighting the city, arguing eminent domain should not apply in this case because their neighborhood is in good standing.

The Supreme Court last ruled on the issue of eminent domain back in 1954, when it said private property in distressed neighborhoods could be seized under eminent domain. A decision by the high court is expected by June.

Next, we'll be talking with one state lawmaker who is taking action to put American citizens first, certainly ahead of illegal aliens, in this country.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: We're following these important stories tonight. More than 400 people are now dead in central Iran, that after a magnitude 6.4 earthquake struck. The death count is expected to rise. Tens of thousands were left homeless by this disaster. Several countries, including the United States, plan to send aid to the region.

In Texas, the bodies of a missing pregnant woman and her seven- year-old son found 30 miles northeast of Ft. Worth. The woman's ex- boyfriend has been arrested and charged with murder. A study out today in American Journal of Public Health says murder is now the leading cause of death for pregnant women in this country.

A new national study shows parents today are not all that concerned about the drug risk of their children. The study says the current generation of parents is the group most experienced with drugs on record, but they're significantly less likely to warn their children about the dangers of drug abuse compared to parents just a few years ago.

My guest tonight has a critically important bill before the Colorado legislature. That bill seeks to protect the rights of American citizens, in particular, of course, Colorado citizens, by not extending those rights to illegal aliens.

Joining me now is the author of the legislation, Colorado State Representative David Schultheis.

Good to have you with us.

DAVID SCHULTHEIS, COLORADO STATE REPRESENTATIVE: Thank you very much. Nice to be here.

DOBBS: Why did you decide to introduce this legislation now? Colorado is, by the most recent rankings, the tenth most-targeted state by illegal aliens.

SCHULTHEIS: Yes, well, you know, after the 9/11 incident, my whole awareness of this issue started to pick up substantially. I started looking into it. And as I began to do so, I began to be aware of how many illegals actually are in California and the fact that we are the tenth in the nation. And that started to really concern me because of the potential cost to the citizens of Colorado. And when you kept -- go ahead.

DOBBS: Will your legislation mirror that of Proposition 200 in Arizona?

SCHULTHEIS: It will be close. Basically it's going to allow state services to be provided only to the citizens of Colorado or U.S. citizens.

DOBBS: And what is your judgment about the prospect of the legislature because you're taking a different tact than Proposition 200, in that it was a public initiative? What is the prospect that the legislature will support you?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, it's going to be very difficult -- it's difficult to say right now. I'm not so sure that it will pass out of this legislature, but I'm trying to run it now to give us a chance to deal with this issue that most of the public really would like us to deal with. And if they don't, I'm afraid that what we'll see is an initiative process on the 2006 ballot.

DOBBS: Your governor, Governor Bill Owens, in a controversy over an online pamphlet on state benefits for illegal aliens, which he later disavowed. Where does he stand on the legislation that you're introducing?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, I believe so far he's been neutral on this legislation. I haven't heard anything positive from him, or negative. It's been pretty much silence at this point. I think he's just looking to see where we head on this.

DOBBS: We're increasingly, across the country, as you know, Representative Schultheis, seeing state legislators like yourself, public citizen groups taking on this issue. What do you think the popular support for your initiative is?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, I will say that I did a telephone survey of every single home in my House district, and there was an 86 percent -- 86 percent of those which responded, which is about 2,600 people, said that they wanted to see a bill like this passed.

And one other legislator has also done this in Colorado, and he's received virtually the same exact percentage, 86 percent.

DOBBS: A number of people are talking about Colorado as the next battleground as the issue of illegal immigration in this country. You obviously talk with your colleagues. You talk with your constituents.

But amongst your colleagues, are you getting pressure? Are you getting support? Are you getting a sense of what your colleagues are thinking on this issue and why they haven't dealt with it before, frankly?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, the issue I don't think was ever really raised to the level in the past to the point we were concerned with it.

I've been following Congressman Tancredo's initiatives for several years, and I've become aware of what he's trying to do they. It raised my awareness. When I first had this bill filed, right prior to the filing, I received 20 cosponsors within about 10 minutes, which showed at least on my side of the aisle how they're -- how they're feeling about this issue.

DOBBS: Is it a partisan issue in Colorado, Democrat and Republican?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, I'm hoping not. Because of the response I got from my constituents, it was -- it was across the board. And I've received many, many calls and e-mails from Hispanics and other nationalities that basically are cheering me on. I've received only one negative comment in all of the -- in the last two weeks since I've introduced this legislation. So I think this is a real popular issue.

DOBBS: Representative Schultheis, I expect that after joining us tonight to give us your sense of things that you will be hearing more than one negative remark as a result, but we thank you for being here to share your thoughts. We appreciate it.

SCHULTHEIS: Thank you very much.

DOBBS: David Schultheis, representative of the state legislature in Colorado.

Taking a look now at some of your thoughts.

Herman Griego of San Jose, California, writes to say, "Being a third -- third generation Mexican-American, you have no idea how hard it is to make a decision whether illegal immigrants should be allowed driver's licenses. But no matter how long I studied this, turned it up, down and sideways, there can be no justification for giving illegals anything. It is the immoral Mexican government that should be held responsible for everything, from the costs of incarcerating their citizens, to arresting them and sending them back. A very painful decision, but the only one that can be considered honest and responsible."

Doreen Suran of Bellevue, Washington: "Since all of our jobs are being outsourced to China and India, the Mexican government should write brochures about how to illegally enter those countries. Maybe we could help and save some of our jobs for Americans."

And Kevin Roth in Orlando, Florida, wrote about a group of civilian volunteers working to secure the Arizona border from illegal immigration, the Minutemen: "I find the Minutemen concept shockingly dangerous and will certainly lead to widespread murder and other violent crime across the -- along the Arizona-Mexico border. This viewer can only hope that those Minutemen who break the law (and there will be many) will be swiftly brought to justice."

Ross in Detroit, Michigan: "The 'Wall Street Journal' is reporting that Toyota is building two more assembly plants in America. This is the importation of jobs to America. But Lou won't report that." Oh, yes, Ross, actually we will. We would report on this further disintegration of the U.S. manufacturing base and the continued exportation of the nation's capital and failure of the trade policies that have led us to record trade deficits.

It is, of course, appropriate to compliment Toyota for building their plants here, but don't you think, Ross, it would be kind of nice to hear that some American companies were building plants here?

We love hearing from you. Send us your thoughts at LouDobbs@CNN.com.

A reminder now to vote in our poll tonight. The question, should health care companies be required to tell you if they plan to send your personal information overseas? Yes or no? Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results for you coming up in just a matter of moments.

Ahead, why you should be concerned about the threat of a global outbreak of bird flu. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is our guest next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has warned the deadly bird flu could become a global pandemic. The CDC head, Dr. Julie Gerberding, says the bird flu could be mutate into a strain that could be widely transmitted by humans.

The latest figures show so far 55 people, all in Asia, have been infected with the disease, and 42 of them have died.

Joining me is Dr. Anthony Fauci. He is the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health.

Dr. Fauci, good to have you with us.

DR. ANTHONY, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: Good to be here.

DOBBS: Dr. Gerberding has put this issue squarely before the American people, raised our consciousness on it. The idea that this flu could reach pandemic proportions is a chilling thought. How concerned are you? How -- how seriously should we take this warning?

FAUCI: Well, we should take it very seriously. The concern is there, because the potential is there. And that potential for an infection right now, that is not efficiently being spread from birds to humans in Asia, nor efficiently from human to human, by mutations or recombinations or reassortments of these viruses, can actually acquire, usually gradually, the ability to do that.

The fact that that potential exists should spur us, as it is, to be very, very serious about the surveillance and very, very serious about the preparation. And that's what Dr. Gerberding was really alluding to yesterday, the importance of this, the potential for it, which should make us go ahead with a great deal of vigor in trying to do something about it, which is what is being done in the broad departmental plan for a pandemic flu.

DOBBS: I have to tell you, Dr. Fauci, you and Dr. Gerberding are among two of my most favorite civil servants, because you're straight talking, you're smart as the dickens, and -- and you tell us like it is.

Put this in context for us. We're reading and we're watching the video of millions of birds dying in Asia at rapid rates. What is the typical -- the trend line in this, if there is one?

FAUCI: Well, you know, it's a very good question, Lou. And what it is is what I can refer to, I think people understand better, as accumulating probabilities. When you have a few birds that are infected in maybe one country, the chances of there being the event that we're worrying about are very, very small. When you have a lot of birds in a lot of countries -- like first it was H5N1, which is the virus in question, was first noticed in Hong Kong in 1997. They slaughtered a bunch of birds and they put an end to it.

This past year and a half, we have nine or 10 countries in Asia, particularly Thailand and Vietnam, in which there have been 55 cases that jumped from bird to human, 42 deaths, and the first time this year was a documentation of a spread from human to human.

Now, that spread is very inefficient, but a change in the virus by a mutation, by any of a number of other means, can make that gradually more efficient. If that happens, the accumulation of probabilities get greater and greater, and we're certainly not going in the right direction. There are more birds infected, more countries, more people getting infected from the birds, and now the first instance of a well-documented case of person-to-person. It's still inefficient, it's not something that we need to panic about, but it's given us a big wake-up call.

DOBBS: That wake-up call -- and Dr. Fauci, you have explained it to me, to the viewers of this broadcast over the years, flu tends to move from the southern hemisphere north. In this instance, give us a sense of how much warning there would be? Because of international transportation, this could be relatively quick in which our health officials would have very little warning and time to react. Is that correct?

FAUCI: Well, two things. The flu that goes from the southern hemisphere to the north generally is the cyclic flu, which we call interpandemic flu. When you get something like this, a bird flu, which jumps from a bird to a human, the human population has very little immunity to it, and it can happen at any time, it's not constrained to a particular season.

Certainly flu spreads much more vigorously in a winter season. It's unlikely that you're going to have -- if it occurs, that you're going to have an event that today there's nothing and tomorrow it's spread worldwide. What it usually does is it gradually adapts itself to spread from human to human.

And when that occurs, you have a very small window, measured in months, usually, to get that vaccine off the ground. And that's the reason why, even as we speak today, we're already making a vaccine against H5N1, and we've actually purchased two million doses already to put in a stockpile in case we need to really scale up with the vaccine. So we're assuming that something bad is going to happen, and that's why we're doing that.

DOBBS: And Dr. Fauci, everyone listening to you right now is saying, two million doses, and the last time we looked there were 300,000 million people in this country...

FAUCI: You bet.

DOBBS: ... how long would it take, because we've just gone through the experience of constrained supplies and shortages of flu vaccine for the broader flu. How long to get 300 million people protected?

FAUCI: Well, first of all, to make it -- the reason why we contracted to make two million doses, as opposed to thousands of doses for a clinical trial, is once you get it to the point of being commercially produced at a high level, the scale-up from two million to tens of millions is much easier than going from several thousand in a clinical trial up to tens of millions.

The answer to your question, Lou, briefly, is it is going to take several months to do. So we're hoping that if in fact we do see this gradual, greater efficiency, you press the button and you say it's going to happen, let's do it. Right now we're at that stage of preparing ourselves to make that leap.

DOBBS: And Dr. Fauci, the two million doses that are being -- that have been manufactured, and the basis to ramp up, is that in the United States, or are we again seeing a situation in which we're going to be using overseas manufacturers of vaccine?

FAUCI: Yeah. Two parts to that. First of all, the answer to your question is that the company, Sanofi Pasteur, that is going to be making the two million doses, has their plant in Edgewater, Pennsylvania. That's the good news.

The news that we need to address, which we haven't, we need to get more companies involved, incentivize them to get involved in making vaccine for flu, and to build their factories and production capabilities in the United States. There is no doubt about that. We have one facility in the United States to make chilled (ph) vaccine for influenza. We need to do something about that.

DOBBS: Dr. Anthony Fauci, we thank you for being here, from the Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. As always, we appreciate you educating us and sharing your thoughts. FAUCI: Thank you.

DOBBS: Dr. Fauci.

We continue our series of special reports tonight in what we're calling "Overmedicated Nation." We have reported extensively here on the staggering number of medical mistakes made in this country, blamed for as many as 98,000 deaths a year. Tonight, we take a look at some simple rules that would protect you from simple, but often deadly mistakes.

Christine Romans has the report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In an airplane cockpit, pilots and crew have precise standard checks to protect the lives onboard. Now, for the first time ever, doctors have their own pre-flight checklist in the operating room.

About 15 percent of medical mistakes are wrong site, wrong patient errors. A doctor takes out the wrong kidney, or operates on the wrong knee, or performs surgery on the wrong patient.

The group that accredits American hospitals has been recording more of these incidents, 70 in 2003 -- but because so much data is voluntary, they say the number could be 100 times that. Experts blame the distractions of new technologies and drugs, doctor fatigue, and some doctors' sense of infallibility.

DENNIS O'LEARY, PRESIDENT, JCAHO: When the plane goes down, the pilot dies. In the operating room, the consequences are not that severe, but we are talking about real patients, real human beings, and I think any good physician or nurse cares deeply about that.

ROMANS: Since last summer, new guidelines demand the OR team must verify they have the right patient. They must mark the site that is to be cut, and take a time-out before surgery to make sure they have got the right patient for the right procedure.

ARTHUR LEVIN, CENTER FOR MEDICAL CONSUMERS: I think wrong site, wrong side, wrong patient surgery is something which we should expect never will happen. It is a perfectly reasonable demand that those be reduced to zero.

ROMANS: It should never happen, but it does, nationwide.

DR. ROBERT WACHTER, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO: If you go to one of the most famous hospitals in the world, there are safety problems there. And it's true in the rural 50-bed hospital that doubles as the bingo parlor on Friday night. We all have problems with delivering the care as safely as it should be, and we're all working on it.

(END VIDEOTAPE) ROMANS: The six-month-old operating room safety checklist is a small start, but overall progress on medical mistakes has been slow. Dr. Wachter likened it to the difference between a jumbo jet falling out of the sky every day to just a greyhound bus full of people dying a day.

DOBBS: That to me is one of the most unfortunate metaphors, but highlighting obviously the critical nature of the issue. Christine, thank you. Christine Romans.

In Florida tonight, new developments in a story of a severely brain-damaged woman caught in the middle of her family's legal battle. A stay in the case expired today, which would have allowed the husband of Terri Schiavo to remove her feeding tube. But shortly after that occurred, a circuit court judge issued an emergency stay in her case, saying that Schiavo must continue to be fed.

The stay will expire tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. Schiavo became brain- damaged 15 years ago after suffering a heart attack.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments related to that case. The Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of Oregon's unprecedented law on assisted suicide. That law helps terminally ill patients end their lives. The justices will review the appeal by the Bush administration. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft filed the appeal last November, the same day his resignation was announced.

Next, the author of a new book, who says American universities are being corrupted by corporate America. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: My guest tonight says the integrity of our universities in this country is simply being compromised by corporate America. Jennifer Washburn is the author of the new book, "University, Inc: The Corporate Corruption of Higher Education." She says universities are becoming so dependent upon private funding that they're starting to behave like for-profit institutions. Jennifer Washburn joins us tonight. Good to have you with us, Jennifer.

JENNIFER WASHBURN, AUTHOR: Thanks, Lou.

DOBBS: And congratulations on your book. It's an important, critically important subject, given the power of corporate America in this country politically and in every other way. But what you highlight is interesting in the sense that you're really saying that this corporate influence is washing away the tradition of free and open research, and teaching in effect, as well, in our universities.

WASHBURN: That's right. I mean, historically, universities fought very hard to preserve their independence and autonomy. They've resisted any kind of outside influence, whether it was religious, political, commercial. Now what we've seen in the last 25 years is that universities are drawing more and more of their research support from private industry and increasingly that support comes with strings attached.

DOBBS: Strings attached, to what degree? To the extent that universities are actually, you suggest, they're for-profit institutions in their behavior as a result of some of these relationships? Give us a couple of examples.

WASHBURN: Sure. Let's just look at K-Mart, endowed a chair at West Virginia University that allows -- that essentially requires its holder to spend 30 days a year training store managers.

DOBBS: That's actually one of my favorites.

WASHBURN: There's another example. Stanford University launched a new center to study global climate change, and it allowed ExxonMobil and other corporate sponsors to have a say in determining which academic research projects are going to receive funding. So these kinds of breaches of academic freedom are really unprecedented, and they're very disconcerting.

DOBBS: And we should be clear, you're not talking about this as some sort of vast, sinister conspiracy between the universities and corporate America, but something on the order of just bad public policy gone awry?

WASHBURN: Absolutely. Obviously, universities have a very important role to play in transferring academic knowledge to industry so that it can be developed into commercial products, so that we can all benefit from these inventions. But what's happened is that in 1980 Congress passed legislation that essentially allowed universities to patent federally funded research and license it to industry, in exchange for royalty revenues. So it introduced a profit motive into the heart of the university.

DOBBS: To, in effect, shorten the cycle from innovation to product and to, arguably, make the United States more competitive?

WASHBURN: Yes. The intention...

DOBBS: By the way, we should point out that the result of that has been in our global competitiveness since 1980, we've had 28 consecutive years of trade deficit, so it hasn't really quite worked out.

WASHBURN: Yeah, well, this is the thing. The intention of the legislation was quite noble. It was to speed the transfer of these inventions to industry. But unfortunately what's happened is that it's created all kinds of rampant conflicts of interest in the academy. Professors now have equity interests in the companies that are funding their research. Universities hold the patents to the drugs that the professors are studying.

DOBBS: It is interesting, when one looks at the academic history of the country over the last 40 years, because the '60s, with all the tumult over civil rights, over Vietnam, all that was engaged in the university and there, the political issue was whether ROTC was on campus, whether the federal government was sponsoring research. And now without a peep from almost anyone -- other than Jennifer Washburn, we find out is a noble exception -- the idea that this is just fine and hunky-dory. How did we get to the point that this kind of acquiescence in the independence of the university could be permitted?

WASHBURN: It's really extraordinary to me. I should say that there are certainly very prominent people who are speaking out. The former president of Harvard University, Derek Bok, wrote a book on the commercialization of the academy. And so there are voices. There are Nobel laureates who are speaking out. A lot of people are concerned that essentially, this is stopping one of the only centers in our society that is committed to truly independent thinking. And...

DOBBS: Awash right now in a fight at Harvard over the political correctness surrounding what was a straightforward and intelligent statement by Harvard President Larry Summers, awash in orthodoxy within each discipline. It's a critical time for us to examine our universities and where we're headed. And we thank you for adding your voice to that examination and bringing this critically important issue to the public. Jennifer Washburn. The book is "University, Inc.," and let's hope it gets fixed soon.

WASHBURN: Thank you.

DOBBS: Thank you.

Still ahead here, the results of tonight's poll and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Now the overwhelming results of tonight's poll. Ninety- eight percent of you say health care companies should be required to tell you whether they plan to send your personal information overseas. Congressman Ed Markey sponsoring the legislation that we reported on tonight to require your permission should be delighted with the results of this poll.

Thanks for being with us here tonight. Please join us tomorrow. Your right to know is under assault. A bold proposal in Congress aims to protect the freedom of the press and your right to know. We'll have those developments tomorrow here. And why we're losing our edge in one of our most critical industries. And a dire prediction about the future of farming in this country. And resisting change. Why doctors are reluctant to abandon their prescription pads in favor of new technology.

Be with us. For all of us here, good night from New York. A special edition of "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 February 22, 2005 - 18:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Tuesday, February 22. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, HOST: Good evening.

Tonight, President Bush has won a promise of support from European countries, even those opposed to the war in Iraq, to help train Iraqi security forces. President Bush hailed the move, saying the United Stats and Europe want to put the past behind them.

But despite the breakthrough on Iraq, there is building tension on another critical issue: Europe's plan to lift a longstanding arms embargo against China.

White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux reports from Brussels.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Day two of President Bush's European charm offensive proves his diplomacy is paying off. Emerging from back-to-back summits with NATO and the European Union, President Bush walked away about what he'd been working for: renewed friendly relations with his European counterparts....

JAAP DE HOOP SCHEFFER, NATO SECRETARY-GENERAL: There is a lot more we agree upon, and that is the bottom line.

MALVEAUX: ... and additional support to train Iraqi troops, a critical first step to the U.S. exit strategy.

All 26 NATO members pledged to contribute to the training mission in some way, from Poland's deployment of 40 troops to Iraq, to France's commitment of one officer who will help coordinate the mission out of Brussels.

Despite the modest contributions from some members, Mr. Bush rejected the notion that NATO's effort was merely symbolic.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Every contribution matters. And every country ought to be -- ought to be proud of the fact that they're contributing to the world's newest democracy.

MALVEAUX: Mr. Bush underscored his pro-democracy message by making appearances with several important allies: the new democratically elected Ukrainian leader, Viktor Yushchenko, and Mr. Bush's Iraq war proponents from Italy and Britain.

On this high profile day of diplomacy, at times the leaders' remarks seemed to border on hyperbole.

BUSH: After all, NATO is the most successful alliance in the history of the world.

SCHEFFER: It was an excellent summit. It was an excellent idea of the president to come here.

MALVEAUX: But towards the end of the day, the flowery language seemed to wear thin.

BUSH: Your question kind of made it sound like he finally showed up and met.

MALVEAUX: And it was clear that there were differences in how the U.S. and Europe perceive their approaches to potential threats.

BUSH: This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. Having said that, all options are on the table.

MALVEAUX: Significant policy disagreements between the U.S. and Europe still remain, one being the Bush administration's concern over the European Union's intention to lift the arms embargo on China.

BUSH: There is deep concern in our country that a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to China, which would change the balance of relations in -- between China and Taiwan.

MALVEAUX (on camera): President Bush leaves Brussels with largely symbolic gestures of support, but as one European Union official put it, sometimes symbolism is substance.

Suzanne Malveaux, CNN, Brussels.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: President Bush for a second day in a row raised concerns about the state of democracy in Russia. President Bush said he has a close, personal relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but Mr. Bush said Russia must be reminded that democracies are, in his words, based upon rule of law and a free press.

President Bush's comments come just two days before he's expected to meet with Putin in Slovakia. For his part, President Putin said today the fundamental principles of democracy must be adapted to Russian traditions and Russian history.

NATO's new promise to help Iraq train and build its military could play a critical role in reducing the number of American troops in Iraq.

Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre has the report -- Jamie. JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the United States has been pressing hard for its NATO allies to do more in helping to train Iraqi forces, and, of course, getting the Iraqi military to stand and fight with the insurgents is the key to withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. Currently about 155,000 troops there.

The commitment came from all 26 NATO members, although in many cases it was a rather modest commitment. Still when you add it up, it's about 160 instructors and over about $4.5 million to help that training effort.

Still, allies France and Germany, who were opposed to the war in Iraq, are making somewhat more modest contributions and offering to train Iraqi troops outside Iraq. France, in addition, is sending one coordinator to NATO headquarters.

Still the NATO secretary-general, Jaap De Hoop Scheffer, insisted this was more than a symbolic gesture.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHEFFER: NATO has more ambitions as far as setting up a training academy near Baghdad, and as you know, NATO is not only training. NATO is also equipping the Iraqi security forces, the Iraqi armed forces, so I think we're doing well.

The fact that the president came so short after his inauguration I think was a sign of his administration's commitment to NATO, which was something that was very positively received, of course.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCINTYRE: The Pentagon says currently they have 140,000 Iraqi troops trained and on duty in various capacities, but again there's a debate about the capability of those troops and their willingness to fight.

Right now the U.S. has 155,000 troops, and the Pentagon said they're going to begin the drawdown of those extra troops they had on hand for the elections. They hope to be down to 138,000 U.S. troops in the next month or so -- Lou.

DOBBS: Jamie, Senator John McCain, a highly respected member of the armed services committee today, while in Afghanistan, called for the creation, as you know, of permanent joint military bases in Afghanistan. What is the U.S. position and the Pentagon reaction?

MCINTYRE: Well, the official reaction was that it's premature to speculate about any future permanent military presence in Afghanistan, although clearly the United States would like and needs to have bases in the region. It does have some bases in some of the countries nearby, some of the other stands, if you were, but Afghanistan would be a logical place.

But until the country has been stabilized and until there's a government that can negotiate such an agreement with the United States, it's not something the Pentagon says it has any plans for at this time.

As a matter of fact, the same thing sort of applies to Iraq. The Pentagon hasn't said anything about wanting permanent bases in Iraq, but it's not something it would rule out in the distant future if the Iraqi government wanted it -- Lou.

DOBBS: Jamie, thank you. Jamie McIntyre from the Pentagon.

Australia said today it will raise the number of its forces in Iraq. Prime Minister John Howard said another 450 to 470 Australian troops will arrive in Iraq within the next 10 weeks. Those troops will replace departing Dutch troops, who have been protecting Japanese engineers who are working in southern Iraq.

Nine hundred fifty Australian troops are already in Iraq. That's fewer than half of the 2,000 Australian troops who took part in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Tonight, a Virginia man has been charged with supporting terrorists who were plotting to assassinate President Bush. Prosecutors say the man, who was captured in Saudi Arabia, had joined an al Qaeda terrorist cell there.

Justice correspondent Kelli Arena has the report from Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KELLI ARENA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The government says Ahmed Abu Ali conspired to assassinate President Bush, that he supported al Qaeda and that was willing to set up a terror cell right here in the United States. He remains in custody in northern Virginia.

Abu Ali's parents say the government is lying to save embarrassment.

OMAR ABU ALI, AHMED'S FATHER: I would like to say the government lied to us from the first day. They told the district court that is a Saudi case, and we have nothing to do with this case. Now they are cooking -- they cooked the new thing. They changed the story about Ahmed.

ARENA: Abu Ali was held in Saudi Arabia without being charged, for 20 months. He is a U.S. citizen born in Texas. His family says he was held at the request of the United States and sued the U.S. government on behalf of their son.

U.S. government officials have insisted the Saudis have their own interest in Abu Ali, having to do with the bombings in Riyadh in May of 2003.

Abu Ali claims he was tortured by the Saudis and that he has the scars on the back to prove it. He was told to present that evidence on Thursday at a detention hearing. The judge assured him he would not suffer any torture or humiliation while in U.S. custody. In the indictment against him, Abu Ali is charged with discussing two scenarios to assassinate President Bush: one in which he would get close enough to the president to shoot him on the street, and another in which Abu Ali would detonate a car bomb.

(on camera) All the evidence against him remains under seal. The indictment just the bare bones of what the government knows.

Kelli Arena, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DOBBS: Up next here, which states are winning and losing the battle to keep driver's licenses out of the hands of illegal aliens.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Illegal aliens in states all across this country tonight are demanding the right to obtain U.S. driver's licenses. Thirty-nine states, however, currently require some proof of legal status before allowing a driver's license to be issued. But now one of those states says illegal aliens can drive.

Bill Tucker has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: If you are illegal and living in New York State, you cannot be denied a driver's license, at least for now. That's the temporary ruling by a state Supreme Court judge who says that the New York Department of Motor Vehicles has no right to enforce immigration law.

Two years ago, the state began requiring an original Social Security card for new licenses. Last year, the state announced that it would revoke licenses for drivers who gave a number that didn't match Social Security records.

New York is hardly alone in requiring applicants for driver's licenses to prove their legal status. Thirty-nine states have such laws. Eleven, however, do not. And that list includes Tennessee, which issues driving certificates to those who cannot prove their legal status.

The Utah Senate voted at the end of last week to follow Tennessee's lead and issue a separate class of licenses for those in the state illegally. The difference in disparity between regulations seems to beg the question of national standards.

MARTI DINERSTEIN, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: The 9/11 Commission recommended that there be national standards. It said that travel documents, which a driver's license is, are as valuable to terrorists as weapons. And it specifically expressed the need for the country to secure both our birth certificates and our driver's licenses. TUCKER: Attorneys arguing for illegals did lose a case in Iowa. The state Supreme Court there dismissed a class-action suit by illegal aliens demanding that the state issue them driver's licenses.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TUCKER: The court letting stand a lower-court ruling which found that illegal aliens, Lou, have no legal right to a driver's license.

DOBBS: At least in the state of Iowa.

TUCKER: In the state of Iowa.

DOBBS: I wonder if the Bush administration, active as it is on open borders and amnesty, would consider the New York judge an activist judge?

TUCKER: No comment, Lou.

DOBBS: You don't have to answer that.

(LAUGHTER)

DOBBS: We'll be joined here later by a Colorado state representative who is calling for a crackdown on benefits for illegal aliens in the state of Colorado. He's introduced legislation similar to Arizona's Proposition 200, which became law last year.

Now to the issue of your privacy. A leading congressman has proposed a new measure that would help protect your personal medical and financial information from being shipped to cheap overseas labor countries. The bill would make it illegal for companies to export your most personal information to those cheap foreign labor markets without your permission. Some powerful opponents already lining up, of course, against that measure.

Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: An estimated 200,000 American tax returns were prepared outside the United States last year. Ten percent of all doctors' scribbled notes in the United States are transcribed overseas, according to the American Association of Medical Transcription. And an increasing number of mortgage and home equity loans are processed, not at the local bank, but in Bangalore.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Increasingly those secret financial and medical records are send to other countries to be store-housed, but without the privacy protections which Americans would be entitled to here in our own country.

SYLVESTER: Representative Ed Markey is reintroducing a bill that requires companies to ask customers for permission before sending sensitive information overseas. His bill has put him at odds with health care executives, including fellow Massachusetts resident Jonathan S. Bush.

Bush runs Athena health care, a company that reportedly employs 200 low-wage data-entry workers in India. He is also the first cousin of President Bush.

Athena health care would not do an interview, but its public relations firm said, "The focus of the company is on doctor-patients relations. The story you're doing is tangential to our mission."

Privacy advocates say information sent overseas could potentially be accessed by identity thieves and government agencies.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In a foreign country, you know, they follow that country's laws. If there's a coup, nationalization, just simply the country doesn't have strong privacy laws, that the government can go in after that information and the company has to turn it over.

SYLVESTER: Markey's bill stalled in the last congressional session, but he says that's because of politics, not public opinion.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SYLVESTER: Representative Markey points out that information often is sent to multiple sources after it leaves the doctor's office, usually to an American company that occasionally sends the work to a contractor in India, who usually then sends it to a subcontractor. In fact, they travel so much, Markey says, the records should be getting frequent-flier miles -- Lou?

DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much. Lisa Sylvester from Washington.

This important issue is the subject of our poll tonight. The question: Should health care companies be required to tell you if they plan to send your personal information overseas? Yes or no?

Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'll have the results later here.

Coming up next, deadly storms in California reaching historic levels. How much more rain has fallen this year than in years past? That story is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: At least six people have been killed by the dangerous weather that continues to batter Southern California. Flash flood warnings and tornado watches are in effect tonight across the area. It's been the fourth wettest year on record in Los Angeles. Los Angeles usually has a total of about 15 inches of rain each year. Since July of last year, however, the start of the water year in the Los Angeles area, nearly 32 inches of rain has fallen.

Ted Rowlands joins us now live from Highland Park, California, just outside Los Angeles -- Ted? TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, it continues to rain here in Southern California. We are outside of one of the red-tagged homes in Highland Park. You can see firefighters keeping a watchful eye here. From this angle, it doesn't look too bad. But from the back, you can see that this home and four others are precariously perched on top of a hillside that gave way at about 1:00 a.m., came crashing down and with the hillside, mud, debris and backyards in four of these homes.

Home owners here say they heard the crash, came out in the middle of the night, assessed the damage, most of them gathered some things, family members and pets, and got out. They say they are cooperating with authorities until this situation can be assessed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know that you can explain it to anyone. It's like any personal experience you have. Everyone's going to be different. I was frightened. I mean, that was the first thing that came, was fear and panic, and then that goes away, and then you deal with it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROWLANDS: This wild weather has been relentless in many areas of Southern California. This afternoon in Santa Monica, or off the coast of Santa Monica, a waterspout formed over the Pacific Ocean. Basically it's a mini-tornado out in the ocean. Nobody was hurt. It stayed offshore the entire time. It was quite a spectacle. It was caught on camera. Many people seeing that.

Also today, this storm does not discriminate. The rich are feeling it, as well, Bel Air even hit. There's a swimming pool literally fell down a hillside in the community of Bel Air, areas there also red-tagged.

And, Lou, the rain continues here and is expected to continue through the night into tomorrow. A lot of this soil is saturated. Anyone on a hillside here, very nervous until the weather changes -- Lou?

DOBBS: Ted, thank you very much. Ted Rowlands.

The Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in a case that could well have implications for every property owner in this country. The city of New London, Connecticut, is trying to seize private property for the purpose of development under eminent domain.

The city intends to use that right known as eminent domain to turn the property over then to private developers, the city arguing that increased economic activity will better serve the larger public good.

A group of New London homeowners, however, feels quite differently. They are fighting the city, arguing eminent domain should not apply in this case because their neighborhood is in good standing.

The Supreme Court last ruled on the issue of eminent domain back in 1954, when it said private property in distressed neighborhoods could be seized under eminent domain. A decision by the high court is expected by June.

Next, we'll be talking with one state lawmaker who is taking action to put American citizens first, certainly ahead of illegal aliens, in this country.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: We're following these important stories tonight. More than 400 people are now dead in central Iran, that after a magnitude 6.4 earthquake struck. The death count is expected to rise. Tens of thousands were left homeless by this disaster. Several countries, including the United States, plan to send aid to the region.

In Texas, the bodies of a missing pregnant woman and her seven- year-old son found 30 miles northeast of Ft. Worth. The woman's ex- boyfriend has been arrested and charged with murder. A study out today in American Journal of Public Health says murder is now the leading cause of death for pregnant women in this country.

A new national study shows parents today are not all that concerned about the drug risk of their children. The study says the current generation of parents is the group most experienced with drugs on record, but they're significantly less likely to warn their children about the dangers of drug abuse compared to parents just a few years ago.

My guest tonight has a critically important bill before the Colorado legislature. That bill seeks to protect the rights of American citizens, in particular, of course, Colorado citizens, by not extending those rights to illegal aliens.

Joining me now is the author of the legislation, Colorado State Representative David Schultheis.

Good to have you with us.

DAVID SCHULTHEIS, COLORADO STATE REPRESENTATIVE: Thank you very much. Nice to be here.

DOBBS: Why did you decide to introduce this legislation now? Colorado is, by the most recent rankings, the tenth most-targeted state by illegal aliens.

SCHULTHEIS: Yes, well, you know, after the 9/11 incident, my whole awareness of this issue started to pick up substantially. I started looking into it. And as I began to do so, I began to be aware of how many illegals actually are in California and the fact that we are the tenth in the nation. And that started to really concern me because of the potential cost to the citizens of Colorado. And when you kept -- go ahead.

DOBBS: Will your legislation mirror that of Proposition 200 in Arizona?

SCHULTHEIS: It will be close. Basically it's going to allow state services to be provided only to the citizens of Colorado or U.S. citizens.

DOBBS: And what is your judgment about the prospect of the legislature because you're taking a different tact than Proposition 200, in that it was a public initiative? What is the prospect that the legislature will support you?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, it's going to be very difficult -- it's difficult to say right now. I'm not so sure that it will pass out of this legislature, but I'm trying to run it now to give us a chance to deal with this issue that most of the public really would like us to deal with. And if they don't, I'm afraid that what we'll see is an initiative process on the 2006 ballot.

DOBBS: Your governor, Governor Bill Owens, in a controversy over an online pamphlet on state benefits for illegal aliens, which he later disavowed. Where does he stand on the legislation that you're introducing?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, I believe so far he's been neutral on this legislation. I haven't heard anything positive from him, or negative. It's been pretty much silence at this point. I think he's just looking to see where we head on this.

DOBBS: We're increasingly, across the country, as you know, Representative Schultheis, seeing state legislators like yourself, public citizen groups taking on this issue. What do you think the popular support for your initiative is?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, I will say that I did a telephone survey of every single home in my House district, and there was an 86 percent -- 86 percent of those which responded, which is about 2,600 people, said that they wanted to see a bill like this passed.

And one other legislator has also done this in Colorado, and he's received virtually the same exact percentage, 86 percent.

DOBBS: A number of people are talking about Colorado as the next battleground as the issue of illegal immigration in this country. You obviously talk with your colleagues. You talk with your constituents.

But amongst your colleagues, are you getting pressure? Are you getting support? Are you getting a sense of what your colleagues are thinking on this issue and why they haven't dealt with it before, frankly?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, the issue I don't think was ever really raised to the level in the past to the point we were concerned with it.

I've been following Congressman Tancredo's initiatives for several years, and I've become aware of what he's trying to do they. It raised my awareness. When I first had this bill filed, right prior to the filing, I received 20 cosponsors within about 10 minutes, which showed at least on my side of the aisle how they're -- how they're feeling about this issue.

DOBBS: Is it a partisan issue in Colorado, Democrat and Republican?

SCHULTHEIS: Well, I'm hoping not. Because of the response I got from my constituents, it was -- it was across the board. And I've received many, many calls and e-mails from Hispanics and other nationalities that basically are cheering me on. I've received only one negative comment in all of the -- in the last two weeks since I've introduced this legislation. So I think this is a real popular issue.

DOBBS: Representative Schultheis, I expect that after joining us tonight to give us your sense of things that you will be hearing more than one negative remark as a result, but we thank you for being here to share your thoughts. We appreciate it.

SCHULTHEIS: Thank you very much.

DOBBS: David Schultheis, representative of the state legislature in Colorado.

Taking a look now at some of your thoughts.

Herman Griego of San Jose, California, writes to say, "Being a third -- third generation Mexican-American, you have no idea how hard it is to make a decision whether illegal immigrants should be allowed driver's licenses. But no matter how long I studied this, turned it up, down and sideways, there can be no justification for giving illegals anything. It is the immoral Mexican government that should be held responsible for everything, from the costs of incarcerating their citizens, to arresting them and sending them back. A very painful decision, but the only one that can be considered honest and responsible."

Doreen Suran of Bellevue, Washington: "Since all of our jobs are being outsourced to China and India, the Mexican government should write brochures about how to illegally enter those countries. Maybe we could help and save some of our jobs for Americans."

And Kevin Roth in Orlando, Florida, wrote about a group of civilian volunteers working to secure the Arizona border from illegal immigration, the Minutemen: "I find the Minutemen concept shockingly dangerous and will certainly lead to widespread murder and other violent crime across the -- along the Arizona-Mexico border. This viewer can only hope that those Minutemen who break the law (and there will be many) will be swiftly brought to justice."

Ross in Detroit, Michigan: "The 'Wall Street Journal' is reporting that Toyota is building two more assembly plants in America. This is the importation of jobs to America. But Lou won't report that." Oh, yes, Ross, actually we will. We would report on this further disintegration of the U.S. manufacturing base and the continued exportation of the nation's capital and failure of the trade policies that have led us to record trade deficits.

It is, of course, appropriate to compliment Toyota for building their plants here, but don't you think, Ross, it would be kind of nice to hear that some American companies were building plants here?

We love hearing from you. Send us your thoughts at LouDobbs@CNN.com.

A reminder now to vote in our poll tonight. The question, should health care companies be required to tell you if they plan to send your personal information overseas? Yes or no? Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results for you coming up in just a matter of moments.

Ahead, why you should be concerned about the threat of a global outbreak of bird flu. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is our guest next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has warned the deadly bird flu could become a global pandemic. The CDC head, Dr. Julie Gerberding, says the bird flu could be mutate into a strain that could be widely transmitted by humans.

The latest figures show so far 55 people, all in Asia, have been infected with the disease, and 42 of them have died.

Joining me is Dr. Anthony Fauci. He is the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health.

Dr. Fauci, good to have you with us.

DR. ANTHONY, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: Good to be here.

DOBBS: Dr. Gerberding has put this issue squarely before the American people, raised our consciousness on it. The idea that this flu could reach pandemic proportions is a chilling thought. How concerned are you? How -- how seriously should we take this warning?

FAUCI: Well, we should take it very seriously. The concern is there, because the potential is there. And that potential for an infection right now, that is not efficiently being spread from birds to humans in Asia, nor efficiently from human to human, by mutations or recombinations or reassortments of these viruses, can actually acquire, usually gradually, the ability to do that.

The fact that that potential exists should spur us, as it is, to be very, very serious about the surveillance and very, very serious about the preparation. And that's what Dr. Gerberding was really alluding to yesterday, the importance of this, the potential for it, which should make us go ahead with a great deal of vigor in trying to do something about it, which is what is being done in the broad departmental plan for a pandemic flu.

DOBBS: I have to tell you, Dr. Fauci, you and Dr. Gerberding are among two of my most favorite civil servants, because you're straight talking, you're smart as the dickens, and -- and you tell us like it is.

Put this in context for us. We're reading and we're watching the video of millions of birds dying in Asia at rapid rates. What is the typical -- the trend line in this, if there is one?

FAUCI: Well, you know, it's a very good question, Lou. And what it is is what I can refer to, I think people understand better, as accumulating probabilities. When you have a few birds that are infected in maybe one country, the chances of there being the event that we're worrying about are very, very small. When you have a lot of birds in a lot of countries -- like first it was H5N1, which is the virus in question, was first noticed in Hong Kong in 1997. They slaughtered a bunch of birds and they put an end to it.

This past year and a half, we have nine or 10 countries in Asia, particularly Thailand and Vietnam, in which there have been 55 cases that jumped from bird to human, 42 deaths, and the first time this year was a documentation of a spread from human to human.

Now, that spread is very inefficient, but a change in the virus by a mutation, by any of a number of other means, can make that gradually more efficient. If that happens, the accumulation of probabilities get greater and greater, and we're certainly not going in the right direction. There are more birds infected, more countries, more people getting infected from the birds, and now the first instance of a well-documented case of person-to-person. It's still inefficient, it's not something that we need to panic about, but it's given us a big wake-up call.

DOBBS: That wake-up call -- and Dr. Fauci, you have explained it to me, to the viewers of this broadcast over the years, flu tends to move from the southern hemisphere north. In this instance, give us a sense of how much warning there would be? Because of international transportation, this could be relatively quick in which our health officials would have very little warning and time to react. Is that correct?

FAUCI: Well, two things. The flu that goes from the southern hemisphere to the north generally is the cyclic flu, which we call interpandemic flu. When you get something like this, a bird flu, which jumps from a bird to a human, the human population has very little immunity to it, and it can happen at any time, it's not constrained to a particular season.

Certainly flu spreads much more vigorously in a winter season. It's unlikely that you're going to have -- if it occurs, that you're going to have an event that today there's nothing and tomorrow it's spread worldwide. What it usually does is it gradually adapts itself to spread from human to human.

And when that occurs, you have a very small window, measured in months, usually, to get that vaccine off the ground. And that's the reason why, even as we speak today, we're already making a vaccine against H5N1, and we've actually purchased two million doses already to put in a stockpile in case we need to really scale up with the vaccine. So we're assuming that something bad is going to happen, and that's why we're doing that.

DOBBS: And Dr. Fauci, everyone listening to you right now is saying, two million doses, and the last time we looked there were 300,000 million people in this country...

FAUCI: You bet.

DOBBS: ... how long would it take, because we've just gone through the experience of constrained supplies and shortages of flu vaccine for the broader flu. How long to get 300 million people protected?

FAUCI: Well, first of all, to make it -- the reason why we contracted to make two million doses, as opposed to thousands of doses for a clinical trial, is once you get it to the point of being commercially produced at a high level, the scale-up from two million to tens of millions is much easier than going from several thousand in a clinical trial up to tens of millions.

The answer to your question, Lou, briefly, is it is going to take several months to do. So we're hoping that if in fact we do see this gradual, greater efficiency, you press the button and you say it's going to happen, let's do it. Right now we're at that stage of preparing ourselves to make that leap.

DOBBS: And Dr. Fauci, the two million doses that are being -- that have been manufactured, and the basis to ramp up, is that in the United States, or are we again seeing a situation in which we're going to be using overseas manufacturers of vaccine?

FAUCI: Yeah. Two parts to that. First of all, the answer to your question is that the company, Sanofi Pasteur, that is going to be making the two million doses, has their plant in Edgewater, Pennsylvania. That's the good news.

The news that we need to address, which we haven't, we need to get more companies involved, incentivize them to get involved in making vaccine for flu, and to build their factories and production capabilities in the United States. There is no doubt about that. We have one facility in the United States to make chilled (ph) vaccine for influenza. We need to do something about that.

DOBBS: Dr. Anthony Fauci, we thank you for being here, from the Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. As always, we appreciate you educating us and sharing your thoughts. FAUCI: Thank you.

DOBBS: Dr. Fauci.

We continue our series of special reports tonight in what we're calling "Overmedicated Nation." We have reported extensively here on the staggering number of medical mistakes made in this country, blamed for as many as 98,000 deaths a year. Tonight, we take a look at some simple rules that would protect you from simple, but often deadly mistakes.

Christine Romans has the report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In an airplane cockpit, pilots and crew have precise standard checks to protect the lives onboard. Now, for the first time ever, doctors have their own pre-flight checklist in the operating room.

About 15 percent of medical mistakes are wrong site, wrong patient errors. A doctor takes out the wrong kidney, or operates on the wrong knee, or performs surgery on the wrong patient.

The group that accredits American hospitals has been recording more of these incidents, 70 in 2003 -- but because so much data is voluntary, they say the number could be 100 times that. Experts blame the distractions of new technologies and drugs, doctor fatigue, and some doctors' sense of infallibility.

DENNIS O'LEARY, PRESIDENT, JCAHO: When the plane goes down, the pilot dies. In the operating room, the consequences are not that severe, but we are talking about real patients, real human beings, and I think any good physician or nurse cares deeply about that.

ROMANS: Since last summer, new guidelines demand the OR team must verify they have the right patient. They must mark the site that is to be cut, and take a time-out before surgery to make sure they have got the right patient for the right procedure.

ARTHUR LEVIN, CENTER FOR MEDICAL CONSUMERS: I think wrong site, wrong side, wrong patient surgery is something which we should expect never will happen. It is a perfectly reasonable demand that those be reduced to zero.

ROMANS: It should never happen, but it does, nationwide.

DR. ROBERT WACHTER, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO: If you go to one of the most famous hospitals in the world, there are safety problems there. And it's true in the rural 50-bed hospital that doubles as the bingo parlor on Friday night. We all have problems with delivering the care as safely as it should be, and we're all working on it.

(END VIDEOTAPE) ROMANS: The six-month-old operating room safety checklist is a small start, but overall progress on medical mistakes has been slow. Dr. Wachter likened it to the difference between a jumbo jet falling out of the sky every day to just a greyhound bus full of people dying a day.

DOBBS: That to me is one of the most unfortunate metaphors, but highlighting obviously the critical nature of the issue. Christine, thank you. Christine Romans.

In Florida tonight, new developments in a story of a severely brain-damaged woman caught in the middle of her family's legal battle. A stay in the case expired today, which would have allowed the husband of Terri Schiavo to remove her feeding tube. But shortly after that occurred, a circuit court judge issued an emergency stay in her case, saying that Schiavo must continue to be fed.

The stay will expire tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. Schiavo became brain- damaged 15 years ago after suffering a heart attack.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments related to that case. The Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of Oregon's unprecedented law on assisted suicide. That law helps terminally ill patients end their lives. The justices will review the appeal by the Bush administration. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft filed the appeal last November, the same day his resignation was announced.

Next, the author of a new book, who says American universities are being corrupted by corporate America. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: My guest tonight says the integrity of our universities in this country is simply being compromised by corporate America. Jennifer Washburn is the author of the new book, "University, Inc: The Corporate Corruption of Higher Education." She says universities are becoming so dependent upon private funding that they're starting to behave like for-profit institutions. Jennifer Washburn joins us tonight. Good to have you with us, Jennifer.

JENNIFER WASHBURN, AUTHOR: Thanks, Lou.

DOBBS: And congratulations on your book. It's an important, critically important subject, given the power of corporate America in this country politically and in every other way. But what you highlight is interesting in the sense that you're really saying that this corporate influence is washing away the tradition of free and open research, and teaching in effect, as well, in our universities.

WASHBURN: That's right. I mean, historically, universities fought very hard to preserve their independence and autonomy. They've resisted any kind of outside influence, whether it was religious, political, commercial. Now what we've seen in the last 25 years is that universities are drawing more and more of their research support from private industry and increasingly that support comes with strings attached.

DOBBS: Strings attached, to what degree? To the extent that universities are actually, you suggest, they're for-profit institutions in their behavior as a result of some of these relationships? Give us a couple of examples.

WASHBURN: Sure. Let's just look at K-Mart, endowed a chair at West Virginia University that allows -- that essentially requires its holder to spend 30 days a year training store managers.

DOBBS: That's actually one of my favorites.

WASHBURN: There's another example. Stanford University launched a new center to study global climate change, and it allowed ExxonMobil and other corporate sponsors to have a say in determining which academic research projects are going to receive funding. So these kinds of breaches of academic freedom are really unprecedented, and they're very disconcerting.

DOBBS: And we should be clear, you're not talking about this as some sort of vast, sinister conspiracy between the universities and corporate America, but something on the order of just bad public policy gone awry?

WASHBURN: Absolutely. Obviously, universities have a very important role to play in transferring academic knowledge to industry so that it can be developed into commercial products, so that we can all benefit from these inventions. But what's happened is that in 1980 Congress passed legislation that essentially allowed universities to patent federally funded research and license it to industry, in exchange for royalty revenues. So it introduced a profit motive into the heart of the university.

DOBBS: To, in effect, shorten the cycle from innovation to product and to, arguably, make the United States more competitive?

WASHBURN: Yes. The intention...

DOBBS: By the way, we should point out that the result of that has been in our global competitiveness since 1980, we've had 28 consecutive years of trade deficit, so it hasn't really quite worked out.

WASHBURN: Yeah, well, this is the thing. The intention of the legislation was quite noble. It was to speed the transfer of these inventions to industry. But unfortunately what's happened is that it's created all kinds of rampant conflicts of interest in the academy. Professors now have equity interests in the companies that are funding their research. Universities hold the patents to the drugs that the professors are studying.

DOBBS: It is interesting, when one looks at the academic history of the country over the last 40 years, because the '60s, with all the tumult over civil rights, over Vietnam, all that was engaged in the university and there, the political issue was whether ROTC was on campus, whether the federal government was sponsoring research. And now without a peep from almost anyone -- other than Jennifer Washburn, we find out is a noble exception -- the idea that this is just fine and hunky-dory. How did we get to the point that this kind of acquiescence in the independence of the university could be permitted?

WASHBURN: It's really extraordinary to me. I should say that there are certainly very prominent people who are speaking out. The former president of Harvard University, Derek Bok, wrote a book on the commercialization of the academy. And so there are voices. There are Nobel laureates who are speaking out. A lot of people are concerned that essentially, this is stopping one of the only centers in our society that is committed to truly independent thinking. And...

DOBBS: Awash right now in a fight at Harvard over the political correctness surrounding what was a straightforward and intelligent statement by Harvard President Larry Summers, awash in orthodoxy within each discipline. It's a critical time for us to examine our universities and where we're headed. And we thank you for adding your voice to that examination and bringing this critically important issue to the public. Jennifer Washburn. The book is "University, Inc.," and let's hope it gets fixed soon.

WASHBURN: Thank you.

DOBBS: Thank you.

Still ahead here, the results of tonight's poll and a preview of what's ahead tomorrow.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Now the overwhelming results of tonight's poll. Ninety- eight percent of you say health care companies should be required to tell you whether they plan to send your personal information overseas. Congressman Ed Markey sponsoring the legislation that we reported on tonight to require your permission should be delighted with the results of this poll.

Thanks for being with us here tonight. Please join us tomorrow. Your right to know is under assault. A bold proposal in Congress aims to protect the freedom of the press and your right to know. We'll have those developments tomorrow here. And why we're losing our edge in one of our most critical industries. And a dire prediction about the future of farming in this country. And resisting change. Why doctors are reluctant to abandon their prescription pads in favor of new technology.

Be with us. For all of us here, good night from New York. A special edition of "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