Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Possible Reduction Of Troop Levels In Iraq; Senate Considered Massive Supplemental Spending Bills For Wars In Iraq And Afghanistan; Tony Snow Appointed As Press Secretary; Middle Class Incomes Haven't Kept Up With Rising Gas Prices; Signs Of Opposition To President Bush's Nuclear Deal With India; Sen. Judd Gregg Leads Fight for Emergency Border Security Spending; Supreme Court Hears Mohawk Industries Case; Michael Mandelbaum Interview
Aired April 26, 2006 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, the Pentagon is planning to bring tens of thousands of our troops home from Iraq by the end of this year. Is this what the Bush administration calls a strategy for victory? Is this president beginning to listen to the people?
We'll have a special report from the Pentagon tonight.
And the Senate has voted to spend another $2 billion to secure our borders. Nearly 40 senators, however, tried to block that proposal, despite overwhelming evidence that our borders and ports are anything but secure. I'll be talking with the senator who proposed the extra spending and sponsored the legislation, Senator Judd Gregg.
Also tonight, the Supreme Court is deciding whether companies that hire illegal aliens to drive down wages are racketeers. Attorneys from both sides of this closely-watched argument and case will be our guests.
And President Bush has appointed a new White House press secretary, a television news anchor and host who once described President Bush as something of an embarrassment.
We'll be going live to the White House for an update.
And a number of people have suggested I come up with a few answers to a number of issues. Tonight, we're going to begin the process.
Stay with us for all of that and much more here tonight.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT, news, debate, and opinion for Wednesday, April 26th.
Live in New York, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening, everybody.
The Pentagon tonight is considering a plan to withdraw as many as 30,000 of our troops from Iraq this year. The number of troops could fall from 130,000 to 100,000. The Bush administration saying it believes the selection of a new Iraqi prime minister is a major turning point.
But American casualties in Iraq are rising. More of our troops have been killed in April than in any other month of this year -- 2,391 Americans have been killed since this war began.
Jamie McIntyre reports from the Pentagon.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Pentagon officials tell CNN the U.S. military is planning for a possible reduction of U.S. troop levels in Iraq by 30,000, or even more by the end of this year.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go ahead.
MCINTYRE: According to officials familiar with the plans drawn up by the top U.S. general in Iraq, George Casey, the current 15 brigades of roughly 130,000 troops could be cut to 10 brigades, or about 100,000 troops. The cuts would be accomplished by simply not replacing some U.S. troops who are scheduled to rotate home over the next eight months.
But General Casey is not ready to recommend that plan until Iraq's fledgling military improves and the new prime minister gets his government up and running.
GEN. GEORGE CASEY, COMMANDER, MULTINATIONAL FORCES, IRA: We are seeing the situation a little clearer, I'd say. And the clearer I see it, the better I can make my recommendations.
MCINTYRE: Sources say there's an even more optimistic option that would further reduce U.S. troops by another 25,000, leaving a force of 75,000 Americans in Iraq by the start of 2007. But that's based on a rosy and unlikely best-case scenario. The Pentagon insists any draw-down will be up to military commanders and not influenced by political factors such as the upcoming midterm elections in Congress.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: The question of our force levels here will depend on conditions on the ground and discussions with the Iraqi government, which will evolve over time.
MCINTYRE: Sources say eventually the U.S. plans to consolidate its troops in a small number of heavily-fortified super bases in places like Baghdad, Tallil and Balad, to lower their profile and get them out of the line of fire.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MCINTYRE: Now, no one at the Pentagon will discuss the troop reduction plan in public, and there's a reason for that. They know full well that if things don't improve in Iraq in the short term, they may have to put that plan on hold -- Lou.
DOBBS: Throughout, Jamie, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld has said that the troop levels will be determined by the commanders on the ground, yet we just heard in your report, General Casey not ready to approve this plan. Where did the proposal for the reduction of 30,000 troops originate?
MCINTYRE: Well, this is planning that General Casey and his staff have been working on for months, actually. It was keyed to kick in after the formation of a new government. That government's just being formed now. And what you heard Casey say there was, he can see a little more clearly how things are going, but not clear enough to give the go-ahead to cut troops levels significantly.
DOBBS: Jamie, thank you very much for the good news.
Jamie McIntyre, from the Pentagon.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice today warned Iran to stay out of Iraq's affairs. In a visit to Baghdad, Secretary Rice said Iran must be a good neighbor of Iraq.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CONDOLEEZZA RICE, SECRETARY OF STATE: I would just note that the prime minister gave a very interesting statement in which he said that he really thanks the neighbors for the role that they played during Saddam Hussein's regime in sheltering people, but that now it's time for Iraq to control its own affairs. And I fully expect that that's going to be the case.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Of course, Iran is also threatening to destroy Israel.
Secretary Rice is also demanding that Iran stop its nuclear weapons production immediately. The United States wants the United Nations to take tough action against Iran, but Iran today threatened to strike U.S. interests all over the world should the United States attack Iran.
The Senate today considered the president's massive supplemental spending bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Senators approved an amendment to provide $1.3 billion in new spending to secure our borders, but 39 senators tried to block the amendment, despite overwhelming evidence that our borders and our ports are anything but secure.
Dana Bash reports from Capitol Hill -- Dana.
DANA BASH, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Senate Republican leadership offered that amendment to add about $2 billion for border security as an effort to lure some Senate conservatives who say, before they even think about signing on to a guest worker program, there must be an effort to beef up border security. But in order to do that, Republicans who are under enormous pressure this election year from conservatives to keep spending down, had to find a way to cut it, and on this particular bill, emergency spending bill on Iraq, that meant cutting it when it comes to Iraq.
Now, Democrats went to the Senate floor and said that that was an outrage.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D), NEW YORK: And now we're standing up here and with a straight face saying that we're going to cut their body armor funds, we're going to cut the IED research program, we're going to cut the death gratuity so we can score political points and act like all of a sudden we've become fiscally responsible? I'm sorry, Mr. President, I find that a sad commentary about what should be expected from each and every one of us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: Now, the Senate author of that amendment, Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, said that that was exaggerating, and he said that he understood that the Pentagon and perhaps the budget director would -- probably would add that money back in later in the -- through the Pentagon's general budget. And he lashed out at Democrats like Hillary Clinton for playing politics.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JUDD GREGG (R), NEW HAMPSHIRE: So, to come down here on and allege that these funds are going to come out of the needs of the people who are on the front lines in Iraq or Afghanistan is pure poppycock. Pure. And to make that representation is hyperbole and waving a red flag which is totally inappropriate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: Now, Gregg and other Republicans also said that border security is a way to fight the war on terrorism, so is Iraq. So, they said that this is moving some money around under the same broad theme, if you will, but there's no question that this is exhibit A in the Republicans' effort and how difficult it is, the effort to keep spending down this year.
And it's also part of the bigger issue on the floor right now, which is the fact that there is an intra-Republican fight here, Republicans versus Republicans on that issue. The leadership, the president of the United States, says -- say that this bill is about $14 billion over what they consider emergency spending on Iraq and Katrina. And the president says, if he doesn't -- they don't get that spending down, he will veto this bill.
One example, what they're talking about on the Senate floor, is a Republican amendment from the senators from Mississippi, Thad Cochran and Trent Lott, who want to add about $700 million for a railroad. Some Republicans senators, even the president, say that might be something that's well and good, but not a necessary -- it's not an emergency, so there's a big fight over that and a few other spending projects that's going to continue throughout the rest of the week -- Lou.
DOBBS: As a matter of fact, Senator Tom Coburn says point blank he'll stop it, as do a number of other senators. BASH: They're certainly going to try.
DOBBS: And this is -- yes, they can. And certainly this would be, should the president decide to, we have to point out, it would be his first veto in two -- two terms as president.
BASH: Very first. Yes, it would.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Dana Bash.
BASH: Thank you.
DOBBS: Later here, I'll be talking with Senator Judd Gregg. He proposed the amendment to give the extra money to our Border Patrol and Coast Guard and to improve our border and port security.
That brings us to the subject of our poll tonight. Do you believe the world's only superpower should be able to simultaneously fund its border security and its military? Yes or no?
Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results here later in the broadcast.
President Bush today appointed a new press secretary to help the president battle those sinking poll numbers and sell his sinking agenda. The new press secretary is television news anchor and FOX host Tony Snow. Snow once described President Bush as "something of an embarrassment."
Suzanne Malveaux reports from the White House on this latest in the shuffling of the deck at the White House -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, I had a chance to talk to Tony Snow earlier today. He is wasting no time in really reaching out to us, trying to improve, if you will, somewhat the strained relations between the White House and the press corps.
As you said, of course, we all know he's a former FOX anchor, as well as a former speechwriter for President Bush's father. But he reached out and in kind of an informal way gave us some personal details.
It was just last Thursday that he met with the president at the residence about the job. But it really wasn't until yesterday, after he got the final results of a CAT scan that said he was clear of cancer, that he did accept this job.
He told us his extra curriculars. He plays the flute, guitar in a rock band.
And also, as you mentioned, of course, he has been critical of this president from time to time, even characterizing him as "guilty," "impotent" and "an embarrassment." But Tony Snow told us today that, look, he is not here to drink the Kool-Aid. He is here to give the best counsel to the president, and sometimes that means disagreeing. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: For those of you who have read his columns and listened to his radio show, he sometimes has disagreed with me. I asked him about those comments. And he said, "You should have heard what I said about the other guy."
I like his perspective. I like the perspective he brings to this job. And I think you're going to like it, too.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TONY SNOW, INCOMING WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: One of the reasons I took the job is not only because I believe in the president, because, believe it or not, I want to work with you. These are times that are going to be very challenging. We have got a lot of big issues ahead and we've got a lot of important things that all of us are going to be covering together, and I am very excited and I can't wait.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: And so, of course, as part of an image makeover of this White House, he is tasked with the job, of course, selling the Iraq war, pushing good economic numbers at a time when the carnage, as well as gas prices, are high. President Bush's numbers are low. But, of course, another thing that he is meant to do is reassure conservative Republicans that there will be a clear, steady message about the president's agenda coming from this White House, and the hope from this administration is that means that those conservative Republicans, a critical base for this president, will come out and vote for those midterm elections -- Lou.
DOBBS: That's putting a lot on a fellow who just took over as just press secretary. How is he regarded there in Washington?
MALVEAUX: Well, Tony Snow is regarded very highly among journalists. He's very well liked.
He has a good sense of humor. Of course, he's been very outspoken and vocal about his own opinions on his radio show. But this is someone who really within the White House, with the administration, and the press corps carries a great deal of credibility.
DOBBS: Suzanne Malveaux, from the White House.
Thank you.
In his new job, Tony Snow will defend a president and an administration whose policies he has criticized in the past. Just last month, Tony Snow said President Bush has "lost control of the federal budget and cannot resist the temptation to stop raiding the public fists." And Snow wrote in September, "No president has looked this impotent this long when it comes to defending presidential powers and prerogatives."
And he wrote back in 2003, "When it comes to federal spending, George W. Bush is the boy who can't say no. The president doesn't seem to give a rip about spending restraint."
It's unlikely we'll hear similar critiques of the president now that Tony Snow has become White House press secretary, but we'll see.
New developments tonight in the CIA White House leak case. Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove back before a grand jury, testifying today for a fifth time to that grand jury investigating the leak of a CIA officer's identity. There is no word, of course, on what Karl Rove said to the grand jury.
Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald met briefly with the grand jury today. Fitzgerald is reportedly considering still whether or not to bring charges against Rove.
The CIA-White House leak investigation has now gone on for 847 days, nearly three times as long as Watergate.
Stay tuned.
Still ahead here, gasoline prices are soaring. Middle class Americans are under siege like never before. We'll have a special report for you.
And the Supreme Court considering whether companies that hire illegal aliens are racketeers. We'll hear from the attorneys on both sides of this closely-watched case.
And, the United States is the most powerful nation on this planet. Tonight, I'll be talking with the author who says the United States is also the world's government, and there are very high costs.
Some of you have asked me to provide a few answers to some of the problems we report on in this broadcast. Tonight, we begin the process.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: House Democrats today blasted the Bush administration for its failure to act in the face of soaring gasoline prices. Democrats dismissed the president's investigation of price gouging. They say regulators don't have the power to conduct a real investigation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. BART STUPAK (D), MICHIGAN: When the president says we're going to look at price gouging, he knows as well as I do it will never happen, there will be no concrete findings, there will be a study again. And the American people are sick and tired of studies, and we want real action.
REP. JOHN LARSON (D), CONNECTICUT: There are no rules as they relate to supply and demand at the pump here. What's going on is speculation, fear and greed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: House Speaker Dennis Hastert says he's asking Republican House leaders for legislation to help lower prices in the months and years to come. Gasoline is now selling at $2.92 a gallon on average across the country, 70 cents higher than just a year ago. More than $3 a gallon in California and other parts of the country.
Our middle class workers and families are facing a brutal reality, however. Since 2004, the price of gasoline has nearly doubled. But middle class incomes certainly haven't kept up and, in fact, have fallen.
Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Ninety-three percent. No, not the octane reading. That's how much the price a gallon of gasoline has gone up since the first week in January of 2004, 93 percent.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That is getting ridiculous. It's getting very ridiculous.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And I thought it was outrageous when it was like $2.50.
TUCKER: The outrage now so loud even a congressman can hear it.
REP. CURT WELDON (R), PENNSYLVANIA: This is a critical pocketbook issue for the people back across America and in my district. They want action. They want results.
TUCKER: The prices forcing choices.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Riding my bicycle and also walking a lot because of the gas prices. They get up so high now, and we don't have the money to afford them right now.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Even for the children's basketball, soccer games, we try to carpool, you know, with other parents because it's just impossible.
TUCKER: Some, though, are just caught.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can't change anything because a lot of my work has to do with my driving. I'm a mortgage broker, but I travel to people's homes, so I have no choice.
TUCKER: The pain is even greater than many politicians understand, because while the price of gas has almost doubled, paychecks have not. They've gotten smaller. Incomes of the typical worker have been falling why gas prices rose.
JARED BERNSTEIN, AUTHOR, "ALL TOGETHER NOW": I don't think too many policymakers get this dimension of the problem, that typical workers' earnings have been falling behind prices for the last couple of years. At this point, they are earning a couple of percent less than they did a few years ago in real terms.
TUCKER: But while consumers fume, the Republicans in the House have beaten back an attempt to raise taxes on oil companies. When it comes to Congress, oil money apparently outweighs consumer pain.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: But there does seem to be at least one guy on the consumer side. Congressman Weldon is proposing that the federal excise tax be eliminated for one year. That would cut 18 cents a gallon off the price of gas immediately, and he's challenging the states to match that with the elimination of their state taxes.
So, Lou, consumers could end up realizing a savings of perhaps as much as 40 cents a gallon right away.
DOBBS: Well, that would be very helpful, indeed. And to Nancy Pelosi, calling for the rollback of royalties from the federal government, to big oil, as well as $10 billion in subsidies, Congressman Weldon for wanting to take action on the excise tax, and those are all very positive and concrete things that can have a short- term result.
Now we'll find out whether Congress really wants to do something.
Thanks very much, Bill Tucker.
Coming up next here, President Bush promised India our nuclear technology. India will ship us mangos, but will the deal sell on Capitol Hill? There are signs that some on Capitol Hill don't think nuclear technology for mangos is such a good idea.
We'll have that story.
And the Supreme Court will decide whether a company hiring illegal aliens is guilty of racketeering. I'll be talking with the attorneys on both sides of the case.
All of that and a great deal more coming right up.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: There are signs of rising and considerable opposition to President Bush's deal to share nuclear technology with India. Many lawmakers want to know why president Bush is so eager to give away so much to receive so little in return. Kitty Pilgrim has the story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Bush administration hailed the deal as a major foreign policy victory. But many in Congress see it as a complete giveaway to India. The U.S. has agreed to provide assistance for India's civilian nuclear program without holding it to the same standards as other countries.
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D-CA), FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: India could make about six bombs a year. But once this deal goes into effect and they're able to buy all kinds of components for their weapons in the open market, which they can't do now, they'll be up to 50 bombs a year.
PILGRIM: By law, Congress has the power to block the deal. But the Bush administration wants to change the rules.
GARY MILHOLLIN, THE WISCONSIN PROJECT: What the administration is trying to do is, in effect, get rid of congressional oversight. Under the present rules, Congress has to affirmatively vote yes before an agreement for cooperation with India can go into effect. But the administration is afraid that they can't get that vote. So what they want to do is have the agreement go into effect automatically after 90 days.
PILGRIM: The march signing was only a joint statement of understanding. The Bush administration is trying to force Congress to give up its oversight.
HENRY SOKOLSKI, NPEC: All of those questions seem to be pushed aside by a mad rush to try to get to "yes" and get this thing off -- off the plate. I would hope that people who are concerned about selling our security quickly would say, we really owe it to ourselves to demand that Congress get this right. Right now, most Americans don't know much about this.
PILGRIM: India is anxious to have the deal done. Its reactors are expected to run out of fuel next year.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Now, even those opposed to the deal say India is valuable as an ally in the region. They just don't want to see that region become any more volatile than it already is with this deal, which appears to give away the farm -- Lou.
DOBBS: Well, let's -- first, the deal on its face, nearly every foreign policy expert, nearly every nuclear proliferation expert with whom we've talked, say this is idiotic, so let's just get that on the table. The second part, is this administration trying to avoid congressional oversight because it can't win approval?
PILGRIM: Yes, there's a certain amount of monkeying with the rules. They should have a simple majority "yes" or "no" in Congress. They are trying to move that to a two-third vote.
DOBBS: Who is?
PILGRIM: The Bush administration is.
DOBBS: And we have just about had a belly full of that kind of thing in Washington, haven't we?
PILGRIM: Many people were quite upset with this posture today.
DOBBS: Yes. Well, it's about time for people to just say, it's time to look at your thoughts.
Thank you very much, Kitty Pilgrim.
Let's take a look at what some of you have been saying.
Ashwini from Massachusetts said, "My parents and I have invested almost 15 years waiting for immigration papers, visas and citizenship. We've worked hard to become American citizens, something we're very proud of. This is not a label we wish to share with people who merely climb walls and hijack our economy."
Bobby in California, "The difference between legal and illegal immigrants is that of night and day. Folks like me came through the legal process and feel mighty proud of our swearing in ceremony. Treat the illegal immigrants as they should be, someone who breaks the laws of the land."
Michelle in New Jersey, "Lou, please keep using the specific and correct terminology: illegal alien. All of us whose families have achieved citizenship 'the old fashioned way' no the difference and are poised to educate our leaders on the topic come November."
Send us your thoughts at LouDobbs.com. We'll have more of your thoughts here later.
Coming up next, the Senate takes emergency action on this nation's border security crisis. Senate Budget Committee chairman, Senator Judd Gregg, is our guest.
Are U.S. companies hiring illegal aliens also racketeers? The Supreme Court will soon decide. Attorneys on both sides of the case join us here.
And I'll be talking with the author of a new book that says a strong American military is not only in this nation's best interest, but the world's.
And a number of people have suggested I come up with a few answers on a number of issues we report on. Tonight, a beginning. We're going to begin the process.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) DOBBS: Our nation's border security crisis is intensifying. Violence on the U.S.-Mexican border is rising. It's escalating almost daily. The U.S. Senate is taking emergency action to rush funds immediately to our overwhelmed Border Patrol officials.
Casey Wian has the story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Border Patrol's Predator B unmanned aerial vehicle has been flying over the Arizona desert since October. Its remote-controlled cameras have helped apprehend 1,800 illegal aliens and more than 8,000 pounds of drugs.
But here it is in a heap, after crashing this week. The border patrol is still investigating why the Predator went down. Whatever the reason, there's now a new hole in U.S. border security, because this is the only UAV in the border patrol's arsenal.
SEN. JUDD GREGG (R-NH), BUDGET COMMITTEE: Fairly ironic it would crash this week, but it crashed this week. So we now have none. We need to replace that. We not only need to replace it, we need to add about three or four more. That costs money and this amendment would accomplish that.
WIAN: The Senate has approved Gregg's proposal of nearly $2 billion in emergency funding for border security capital improvements: new drones, new patrol aircraft, armed helicopters, patrol boats and vehicles.
The funding must still be approved by the House, and it would only provide necessary equipment for the border patrol's 1,500 new agents. Still, it's badly needed because of the escalating threat from south of the border.
RICK FLORES, SHERIFF, WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS: You're talking about paramilitary drug lords, you know, who know how to take care of business and have no mercy for life.
WIAN: This week in Mexicali, a top police official's convoy was ambushed by at least 10 gunman wearing bulletproof vests and throwing grenades. He survived, but in Nuevo Laredo, a police officer was shot and killed by several men with assault rifles -- the second murdered cop within a week.
The city just across the border from Laredo, Texas, is gripped by a drug war, 90 people have been murdered in Nuevo Laredo so far this year, more than double last year's rate.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WIAN: Meanwhile, the border patrol was already scheduled to receive a new Predator drone in August. Until then, the agency says it will make adjustments to cover the vast area it once patrolled, Lou.
DOBBS: The story of what is happening on our southern border is simply not adequately covered, not by us, not by anyone, is it?
WIAN: It's not and one of the reasons is fear. Journalists in Mexico have been targeted and killed by the drug gangs. Many newspapers in border communities in Mexico have stopped their reporters from covering this issue, because of the threats of violence.
We had an issue a couple of months ago were gunmen walked into the offices of a newspaper and shot a reporter dead. Also reporters on the U.S. side of the border have taken extra precautions and aren't going into Mexico as often as they often did, Lou.
DOBBS: Casey, thank you very much. While our president and our Congress wants to talk about illegal alien amnesty and immigration reform, without a discussion of what is actually happening down there. Thank you very much -- Casey Wian from Los Angeles.
Senate Budget Committee chairman Senator Judd Gregg is leading the fight in Congress tonight for emergency border security spending and he succeeded. He says the United States needs almost $2 billion immediately to strengthen our security of our borders and he joins us tonight from Washington D.C.
Senator Gregg, I have to say something at the outset I don't often say when speaking to one of our senators or Congressman. I get to say tonight, congratulations.
GREGG: Thanks, I appreciate that.
DOBBS: You've taken on an issue, you've actually assert, if I may say, Senator Gregg, some considerable intellectual integrity back into the Senate's deliberations and its votes.
GREGG: Well and there was a very strong vote for this, so obviously it's not just my position. There are a lot of senators that feel very strongly that we need to get the border under control and we can get it under and control and we will get it under control and this just is one element of that effort.
We intend to add a lot more border patrol agents, a lot more detention beds. But the capital needs were significant. The Predator is -- it's ironic that it crashed this week, as I mentioned and you in your lead-in, but it's just reflective of the problem. We should have four or five Predators in the air, and we're going to have them in the air. But the fact is they aren't there now and with this amendment, they will be.
DOBBS: The estimates, as you know, Senator Gregg, run anywhere from 11 million or 12 million illegal aliens in this country to 20 million. The estimates run anywhere from one million to three million, the number of illegal aliens that are crossing our borders every year.
Is it your sense that with the -- providing the money that you will to the border patrol, to customs, to the Coast Guard, that we will actually be able to see a significant increase in security at our borders?
GREGG: Absolutely, no question about it.
DOBBS: How soon?
GREGG: There's no reason we cannot put a fairly significant number of boots on the ground, so to say, with the backup facilities they need: the capital investment and the planes the cars, the patrol boats, the unmanned vehicles, and the detention beds.
So that we can control the border, at least the southern border. The northern border is a little more complicated, but the southern border for these waves of people that are coming in. There should be a comprehensive approach to this.
In other words, there's got to be something done in the interior relative to employment and there's got to be something done out in the area of how you get these folks who are hiding behind the bushes today out in the public eye so we know who they are. But at least to the element of border patrol, we can do it and we will do it.
DOBBS: From the shadows, as it's described by advocates of amnesty, the guest-worker program and open borders on May 1st, we will see a lot of people in -- out from the shadows, demonstrating in support of guest -- the guest-worker program, amnesty for illegal aliens.
So we won't have that issue at least on Monday, will we?
GREGG: Well, my view is that we have to secure the border first. And that you really can't put in place an interior border policy. In other words, for people who are here illegally and for people who want to come here to get jobs, until you are absolutely sure that the vast majority of people coming across our border are coming across legally and we know who they are. And we can do that, and we're going to do it.
DOBBS: And good for you, and good for -- good for all of us, who the 280 million legal citizens of this country who require some representation. Senator Gregg, you're to be complimented again.
Is it your sense that the leadership of the Senate and the president will insist on a contemporaneous guest-worker program be passed by the Senate, so-called immigration reform?
GREGG: Well, the president and I think the leadership of the Senate and most people want a comprehensive approach. But as to this specific amendment, the $2 billion for capital improvement and the additional border patrol agents, which we intend to hire and the additional detention beds, which we intend to put in place, that does not require a comprehensive action. I mean, we're going to do that, whether there's a comprehensive bill or not.
DOBBS: Well, Senator Gregg, as I began our discussion, congratulations.
GREGG: Thank you.
DOBBS: Thank you. Senator Judd Gregg, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.
A reminder now to vote in our poll. Do you believe the world's only superpower should be able to spontaneously -- simultaneously fund border security and its military? Yes or no. There's been nothing spontaneous about that. I can't imagine why I lapsed to that word, forgive me. Cast your vote, please, at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results coming up here in just a few minutes.
Still ahead, firms in this country conspiring to hire illegal aliens could soon be prosecuted under federal racketeering laws. It will be all up to the U.S. Supreme Court. I'll talking to both sides in the important case now before the Supreme Court.
And I'll talk with Michael Mandelbaum, the author of the new book "The Case for Goliath," who says the United States has no choice but to be the word's policeman, even if we Americans must foot the world's security bill. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Federal racketeering laws intended to fight organized crime could soon be used to prosecute firms that hire illegal aliens. The Supreme Court today heard the case against Mohawk Industries, a carpet firm accused of conspiring with recruiters to hire illegal aliens to drive down wages for its middle-class workforce.
The Supreme Court will decide whether Mohawk can ultimately be prosecuted for carrying out a racketeering enterprise in this case. Two lower courts have already sided against Mohawk.
Joining me tonight from Washington is Howard Foster. He represents the workers fighting Mohawk. And I want to turn to you first, Howard, and ask you, knowingly hiring illegal aliens, knowingly driving down wages, do you have -- obviously, you've got great proof of this. How did the idea of racketeering occur?
HOWARD FOSTER, ATTORNEY FOR MOHAWK WORKERS: Congress actually put it in the law in 1996 that hiring illegal immigrants is a RICO violation, hiring 10 or more in a 12-month period.
DOBBS: And the number of firms, obviously, who do this across the country -- I mean, we've already heard from the meat packing industry and others that on Monday, May 1st, with demonstrations, they are going to give their people the day off because they can't operate without them, say they, giving corporate support of the illegal aliens they've hired. If the Supreme Court sides with you, they could be in considerable trouble, could they not?
FOSTER: Well, yes. Firms like Mohawk that hire thousands of illegal immigrants and basically get away with it may have to think twice about hiring all those people if they think private lawyers are going to go out there and sue them under RICO. DOBBS: Let me just turn to Juan Morillo, the lead attorney from whom we're going to hearing momentarily. He sent a letter to one of our producers, which includes this passage: "All of Mohawk's employee are hired in accordance with current legal requirements and must provide federally-mandated documentation. Mohawk will continue to comply with all federal and state laws and regulations governing employment." That seems on its face, reasonable. How do you respond?
FOSTER: Well, we brought this case because they don't. And let me give you some examples. A woman who lives in Dalton, Georgia, went into Mohawk to get a job, to work in their -- one of their carpet mills, and she was turned down because she can't speak fluent Spanish.
DOBBS: That's incredible. Let me read one other passage from Morillo's letter saying -- and I only want to go to this one line -- "The company believes that it is the job of the federal government to enforce immigration law. There's no current system that will allow employers to determine with a high degree of certainty that a potential employee is, in fact, authorized to work in the United States." Do you agree with him there?
FOSTER: No. There is a pretty good way for an employer -- any employer who wants to can go online free and check new hires against the government databases to see if their numbers are legit, a Social Security card, an alien registration card. Mohawk does not do that.
DOBBS: We thank you very much, Howard Foster. We appreciate it. And I'm going to turn now to the fellow that represents the interests of the client you're suing and that is, of course, Mohawk Industries.
Mohawk lead co-counsel, Juan Morillo, joins us. He says racketeering laws were meant to prosecute individuals, not corporations. Juan, thank you for being here.
JUAN MORILLO, MOHAWK IND. LEAD COUNSEL: Sure, my pleasure.
DOBBS: You heard Howard say that you did, in point of fact, act in a way that was disregarding of any kind of responsibility toward checking out the documentation and so forth that Mohawk did. How do you respond?
MORILLO: Well, Lou, there's absolutely no evidence that that's indeed the case. And one important point is that this notion that we were paying no wages is absolutely ludicrous. The average wage that we pay our employees is in excess of $15 an hour.
We provide a comprehensive set of benefit package, which includes healthcare insurance, dental insurance, eye insurance, 401(k) plans, workers' compensation and other benefits. So the notion that we're paying low wages and that that's the reason we would be purportedly hiring illegal aliens is just ridiculous on its face.
And then moreover, to the point that we're hiring illegal aliens there's, like I said, absolutely no proof of that. And the company does what is required under federal law, and that is to visually inspect the documentation that's presented. DOBBS: But courts have sided in two instances, the lower courts, as it approaches the Supreme Court, against you.
MORILLO: Well, Lou, all the district court said is that at this stage in the proceedings, where there's been absolutely no factual development that the plaintiffs could proceed under RICO. But today we got a very sympathetic hearing from the U.S. Supreme Court saying that this would RICO-nize, as Justice Breyer, said ordinary business disputes.
And that's the implication of this case, that not only could plaintiffs use this to go after corporate employers for whatever crime they think they committed, but that they could turn garden-variety business disputes into RICO actions.
DOBBS: Do you consider -- and I'm not suggesting a finding of fact here, but do you consider the hiring of dozens or hundreds of illegal aliens, using third-party recruiters, transporting them, providing them places to live, and in some cases documentation, do you consider that to be the ordinary pursuit of commerce?
MORILLO: Absolutely not, Lou. But in this situation, that's just simply not what happened, and there's no proof of that. And we believe that it's the job of the federal government to enforce the immigration laws and if they're going to delegate that function to corporate employers -- and this is a brief but important point -- they should provide corporate employers with the requisite tools to enforce the laws.
And moreover, if the employers use those tools, the federal government shouldn't then turn around, as they do, and sue the corporate employers for discrimination if they are too vigorous in their enforcement.
DOBBS: Juan Morillo, we thank you very much. I would only add to that that some of this is always solved, of course, when corporations where they're acting as employers or otherwise act as good, good American citizens themselves.
Juan, thank you very much for being here. And we look forward to the disposition of the case, as I know you do.
MORILLO: My pleasure.
DOBBS: The American Chamber of Commerce in Mexico tonight has issued a strong warning against Monday's planned in Mexico "Nothing Gringo" boycott. Now, this groups says a "Nothing Gringo" boycott will backfire against illegal aliens in this country and their supporters in Mexico.
Mexicans are being urged not to buy any American products from U.S. firms on Monday, the same day as the May 1st boycott planned in this country, which will feature -- if it's a day without a gringo in Mexico, it's a day without an illegal alien in America. The economics and the politics are getting interesting.
Coming up, at the top of the hour, here on CNN, "THE SITUATION ROOM" and Wolf Blitzer. Wolf, tell us what you're working on.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks very -- thank you, Lou.
Happening now, Karl Rove stealing the White House thunder. He's called to testify in front of a grand jury for the fifth time. Is an indictment pending or will this help clear his name?
Plus, Snow on the job. A former Fox News anchor taking center stage for the president. That would be Tony Snow. It was supposed to be the headline. Can he help the White House get back on message?
And Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld make a surprise visit to Baghdad. This amid suggestions that the Pentagon wants to cut back its troop levels there. What, if anything, will Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld accomplish?
And fueling the fire over gas price outrage. Politicians call for investigations, but is there any real bite to their bark? We're checking up on your money.
Lou, all that coming up at the top of the hour.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Wolf. We appreciate it. We'll be watching.
Just ahead, I'll share my thoughts about the illegal alien crisis in this country and offer a few thoughts about the Senate's decision today to raise funding for border security.
And we'll talk about some answers in the energy crisis we face.
I'll be talking as well with Michael Mandelbaum, the author of "The Case for Goliath," who says the greatest threat to American in the 21st century comes from within. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: My next guest says we already have a world government. It's called the government of the United States. And in his book, "The Case For Goliath: How America Acts as the World's Government in the 21st Century," Michael Mandelbaum says the United States is providing the entire world with government services and guess who is footing the bill? American taxpayers.
Michael Mandelbaum joins us now. Good to have you with us. A terrific analysis and really laying forward unequivocally the cost and the role of the U.S. government. And you also point out there's a real question about whether it's sustainable.
MICHAEL MANDELBAUM, "THE CASE FOR GOLIATH": I think there is a real question. But the source of the challenge to America's role as the world government doesn't come from other countries.
In the past when a country became as powerful as the United States, other countries would band together to clip its wings. But that isn't happening now and I don't think it's not going to happen, because other countries are not threatened by us, and they secretly appreciate the services that we provide, even if they don't usually say so.
DOBBS: I think most of us would agree when it comes to Europe, or old Europe as Donald Rumsfeld refers to it, but we're watching now a new axis being created. China and Russia coming up with a regional security pact, inviting in Iran and certainly others are likely to be invited as well. This looks like a contest for hegemony certainly in Asia and perhaps beyond. How do you react?
MANDELBAUM: I think the problem we have in Asia is not that the Chinese are going to challenge us frontally for hegemony in that region, and, in fact, the Chinese will say privately they'd like to us stay, because as long as we are in Asia, they don't have to worry about the Japanese. But they are not going to help us, and they're certainly not going to help us with North Korea or Iran.
DOBBS: You say that the greatest challenge, the greatest threat, comes from within, within this 21st century Goliath, and the de facto empire. What do you mean?
MANDELBAUM: What I mean is that the American public may start to feel stretched as the bill for the entitlement programs to which we are committed begins to rise and skyrocket with the retirement of the baby-boom generation, that is those Americans born between 1946 and 1964. And as the bill soars, Americans may decide that we really can't afford to pay for foreign and domestic policies.
DOBBS: The idea that this government can continue to spend $400 billion in Iraq, enormous cost, that we can continue to run a trade deficit, this year it will approach, if not exceed, a trillion dollars. Federal budget deficits which happen to also symmetrically amount to $400 billion, $9 trillion in national debt, there is a point at which we are going to have to make very, very difficult public policy decisions about whether or not we wish to remain the world's policeman, whether we want to balance our trade, and how we want to pursue the rest of this 21st century.
MANDELBAUM: Lou, you've just expressed one of the central themes of "The Case for Goliath." A crunch is coming, and foreign policy and the American role in the world and, therefore, the world's stability will be on the line.
DOBBS: Michael Mandelbaum, you are the author of, as you well know "The Case for Goliath." I want everyone to take a look at that cover, because it's a very important analysis, and a good read. We thank you for being here. All the best.
MANDELBAUM: My pleasure. Thank you.
DOBBS: Do you like seeing it up there, big on that screen like that?
MANDELBAUM: It looks good to me.
DOBBS: I thought it might. Good to have you here. Still ahead, the Senate votes to spend $2 billion to secure our border. My thoughts about the amendment and skepticism about a few other issues. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Now are the results of tonight's poll, 96 percent of you say that you believe the world's only superpower should be able to simultaneously fund our border security and our military. Let's take a look now at some of your other thoughts.
Nick in Pennsylvania wrote in to say, "I'm tired of the amnesty crowd saying that illegal immigrants need a path to citizenship. They make it sound as if there is no path available. The path is called legal immigration."
David in Texas. "I encourage all Americans to shift any purchases that they can to May 1st. If illegal immigrants want to see economic power, what message will they get if sales go up on the day of their boycott."
Joseph in Arizona, "Congress wants to pretend that illegal immigration is a complex problem. It isn't."
Finally Joyce in California. "Lou the personnel change at the White House's press secretary position will have little effect. We were always getting a snow job from the administration."
You're going to hear a lot more of those kinds of lines in the days and perhaps even weeks ahead, but we thought we would be early and then refrain from here on. Send us your thoughts at LouDobbs.com. Each of you whose e-mail is read here, receives a new copy of my book now in paper book. The national bestseller, "Exporting America."
Because we focus intensely on the issues that matter most to working middle-class men and women, we are often critical of both political parties and both houses of Congress and this administration. Tonight has not been an exception, but I also want to give some credit and I want to offer a solution that is actually bipartisan in the energy crisis.
The Democratic leader of the House, Nancy Pelosi, recommended rolling back $7 billion in royalties to oil companies approved by Congress and this president, $10 billion in subsidies in their energy legislation, and Congressman Curt Weldon suggested rolling back for at least a year the excise tax, the federal excise tax.
The savings would be enormous, amounting to about 40 cents a gallon, so I want to give both a Democrat and a Republican credit, that's part of the answer in the energy crisis.
Also I want to give credit certainly to Senator Judd Gregg and those senators today that saw fit to vote and pass his amendment to apply another $1.9 billion to securing our borders. It is literally the first positive to come out of the Senate's deliberations and negotiations at what is being too loosely called, "immigration reform." In Washington, any positive these days is to be hailed. Congratulations are in order for Senator Gregg and the rest.
But no one on this broadcast is anything other than skeptical about the Senate's intentions. If members of both parties and the president believe that passing a border security funding amendment clears their way to pass an irresponsible guest worker amnesty program, I think the upcoming illegal alien amnesty demonstrations next Monday will be viewed as a lounge act to the main event.
American citizens deserve far better from their elected representatives, and secure borders and ports.
That's our broadcast for tonight. We thank you for joining us. Please be with us tomorrow. Good night from New York.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
