Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports
Star Spangled Budget; Lay's End Run On Congress; Gay Couples Adopting Children; Patriots Take the Prize
Aired February 04, 2002 - 17:00 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.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Now on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS, a star- spangled budget. The president asks Congress for a big boost to fight terrorism.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need to be able to send our troops on the battlefields in places that many of us thought there'd never be a battlefield.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: After the company's own investigation finds that executives got rich amid accounting violations, Enron's chairman pulls an end run around Congress.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D), NORTH DAKOTA: There are a lot of tough questions to be asked and to be answered.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Will Kenneth Lay be ordered to appear? Is Congress out to get him?
Should gay couples adopt children? A group of children's doctors think so. We'll have a debate.
Against all odds, the Patriots win the Super Bowl.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM BRADY, PATRIOTS QUARTERBACK: When people say, "Well, you can't do this. You can't do this," that makes for a pretty dangerous team.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Not everyone said they couldn't do it.
Hello. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington where President Bush today divided up our money. Billions more for defense, both for military might as well as for protecting the homeland.
Also ahead, an FBI memo that gives us a new signal as to who might be responsible for the anthrax attacks.
First, this news alert.
President Bush calls on Congress to approve billions of additional dollars for fighting the war on terror and for homeland security. Speaking at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, the president unveiled his $2.13-trillion budget today. The budget also calls for steep cuts for a number of government programs. We'll have much more on this in just a moment.
Angry senators say they'll subpoena the former Enron chief Kenneth Lay to testify before congressional committees. This after Lay abruptly decided not to testify on Capitol Hill earlier today about the collapse of the energy company. Lay says he thinks lawmakers have already decided on his guilt.
Pakistani and U.S. officials say they're still acting on the assumption that kidnapped journalist Daniel Pearl is still alive. Officials say they're checking out several leads. "The Wall Street Journal" reporter disappeared in Karachi, Pakistan, on January 23rd.
The flights of Afghan war detainees to the U.S. naval base in Cuba are expected to resume in the next few days. Sources say the decision was made in part because more cells have been built and the security force at Guantanamo Bay has been beefed up.
And now back to our top story, President Bush's $2.1-trillion budget. A big chunk of that goes for the military for its war against terrorism and for protecting the homeland.
On domestic matters, some parents will get education breaks. Older people are to get help paying for those high prices for drugs. But other areas will get squeezed.
The president defends it all, reminding Congress that the September attack, like Pearl Harbor, is a call for action.
Our Senior White House Correspondent John King now with the nuts and bolts.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN KING, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The president opened the budget battle focusing on what he calls priority one: paying for and winning the war on terrorism.
GEORGE W. BUSH: It's proved that in this first phase that expensive precision weapons not only defeat the enemy but spare innocent lives, and the budget I submit makes it clear we need more of them.
KING: The new Bush budget proposes spending $2.1 trillion in the fiscal year that begins in October. The Pentagon would get the largest one-year increase in two decades, $48 billion to $379 billion in all. And spending on homeland security would nearly double to $38 billion with an emphasis on airport and border security and fighting bioterrorism.
Other key Bush priorities include $591 billion in new tax cuts and credits. One with a price tag of $32 billion would allow taxpayers who do not itemize deductions to get credit for charitable contributions. Another costing $4.2 billion would help parents pay for private education if their children leave failing public schools.
But some domestic spending would be cut and, overall, funding for programs other than the military and homeland defense would grow at just 2 percent on average. The White House says the squeeze is necessary, that supporting the troops and winning the war requires tough decisions elsewhere in the budget.
But Democrats say key domestic priorities, like health care and job training, suffer under the president's plan. Democrats also say Mr. Bush is dipping into Social Security money, that he wouldn't have to were it not for last year's big tax cut.
SEN. KENT CONRAD (D), BUDGET CHAIRMAN: The hard reality is his long-term fiscal plan did not add up before September 11th. It's been made worse by the events of September 11th.
KING: Democrats also note the bottom line: After four years of budget surpluses, the Bush budget projects a deficit of $106 billion this year and $80 billion in red ink next year.
The White House notes past wartime presidents also have been forced into deficit spending.
(voice-over): Presidential travel is one element of the early Bush strategy, as the president tries to rally the American people to see things his way in a wartime budget battle all the more complicated by this fall's congressional elections.
John King, CNN, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: And joining us now with more on the president's budget and his big-stick approach to defense spending, our Military Affairs Correspondent Jamie McIntyre. He's live at the Pentagon.
Jamie, give us the details over there.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Well, Wolf, this is the biggest increase -- or proposed increase in defense spending in nearly two decades, since the early years of the Reagan administration, and as you heard John King say, the Bush administration is defending this big increase as justified by the war on terrorism.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) MCINTYRE (voice-over): The Pentagon says its record-high spending plan is needed to make up for years of neglect and to transform the U.S. military into a high-tech force capable of defeating terrorists wherever they hide.
The Bush administration is asking Congress to approve $379 billion for defense, an increase of $48 billion. The Pentagon argues it needs every penny.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: If one thinks about the economic loss that took place on September 11th in this country and elsewhere in the world, in billions and billions of dollars, it is very clear that the defense budget is cheap when one compares it to putting our security at risk, our lives at risk, our country at risk, our freedoms at risk.
MCINTYRE: While the budget is being sold as funding for the war on terrorism, the bulk of the money goes for traditional weapons and forces. But some programs are being touted as transformational, such as $1.1 billion for more unmanned spy planes, $1.3 billion more for more precision-guided bombs, and another billion to arm four older ballistic missile submarines with cruise missiles.
Controversial programs, like the Air Force's F-22 Stealth Fighter, the Marine Corps' V-22 Tilt-Rotor Aircraft, and the Army's Crusader Howitzer all survived. But the Navy's next-generation Destroyer was scrapped as was one of its ship-launched missile-defense programs.
Some Democrats in Congress say Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is avoiding the tough decisions he promised to make when he came to the Pentagon last year.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MCINTYRE: Some of those Democrats I've talked to say that they're concerned the Pentagon is simply adding new spending to many of the old programs without making some of the hard decisions that they expected Secretary Rumsfeld to make. That will be a subject, obviously, of some debate when the secretary goes up to Capitol Hill to defend his budget.
Meanwhile, Rumsfeld himself declared war on the Pentagon bureaucracy the day before the September 11th attacks, and he says that it's not the case that the Pentagon is inflexible and incapable of change, and he cites the way the U.S. military quickly adapted new tactics and techniques to fight the war on terrorism in Afghanistan.
Wolf.
BLITZER: Jamie, on a different subject, what's the latest on that internal investigation the military is now undergoing as far as that Afghan strike that may have hit the wrong target?
MCINTYRE: Well, it's increasingly beginning to look, Wolf, although this investigation is not over, that the U.S. may have killed some forces there that were friendly to the United States. But the U.S. is insisting that, at this point, it believes that the shoot-out started because people from inside this compound fired first at U.S. forces.
But Defense Secretary Rumsfeld today, in acknowledging that some innocents may have been killed, said it's possible that everybody's telling the truth here, that the U.S. troops were fired on first but that some friendly forces were also in with some unfriendly forces. He says it's a very confused situation, and they are hoping the investigation will sort it out.
Wolf.
BLITZER: Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. Thanks very much.
And let's turn now to the anthrax investigation. The FBI is now asking the country's 30,000 microbiologists to help them in finding out who sent letters laced with the deadly bacterium last year.
Our National Correspondent Susan Candiotti joins us now with these fresh details.
Susan.
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Wolf. It's a massive new nationwide call for help to what a government official calls a unique population with specific information. But will it lead to the anthrax killer?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CANDIOTTI (voice-over): Nearly four months after the first anthrax death and with no killer in custody, the FBI is making another plea for help.
In a letter to the 30,000-member American Society for Microbiology, the FBI puts it bluntly. "It is very likely that one or more of you know this individual."
It's one more indication of what investigative sources have been saying privately: The four known anthrax letters came from a single U.S. source.
The FBI's letter, obtained by CNN, recaps the latest FBI anthrax profile: someone who's experienced working in a laboratory, with access to select biological agents, with the knowledge or expertise to produce a deadly product, someone who's standoffish and works in isolation, a killer who may have used off hours in a laboratory to produce the anthrax.
Work at this private laboratory is isolating the anthrax spores' genetic sequencing, which could further narrow the list of suspect labs and scientists. So far, not even a $2-1/2-million reward has helped.
FBI SPOKESPERSON: I don't think it's that we don't have any leads. We're looking out for that one person who may be able to give us specific information to help us utilize the investigation that's already being conducted.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CANDIOTTI: The FBI won't say the case is stalled, but is it closed to being solved? Well, the Bureau won't say that either.
And, Wolf, it's not as though the FBI has not been talking to some of these microbiologists already, but, quite frankly, as you heard the FBI say, it's very likely that some of them might know the person who's behind the anthrax attacks.
And we also understand the Society is not very thrilled that their names have been given out to the FBI, 30,000 members.
BLITZER: So is it -- the bottom line: Are we any closer to finding out the culprit or culprits of who sent out these letters?
CANDIOTTI: All the FBI Director Robert Mueller will say is that the case is not stalled and that there are promising new leads and that they hope to learn more information when they're through analyzing the anthrax found in that letter to Senator Leahy.
BLITZER: Susan Candiotti, thanks very much.
And how safe are the nation's nuclear power plants from a terrorist attack? The Nevada Senator Harry Reid who oversees nuclear safety issues in the Senate will join us in the next half-hour with his assessment.
But now to the Enron investigations. Electricity is in the air here on Capitol Hill because of the expected appearance of the Enron former chief executive, but Ken Lay abruptly bowed out, much to the dismay of several lawmakers. Right now, the SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt is testifying.
Covering all these developments for us now is our Congressional Correspondent Kate Snow. We're taking a look at the live picture of the testimony that's underway right now on the Hill, but let's get this report from Kate Snow.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KATE SNOW, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Former Enron CEO Kenneth Lay snubbed a Senate subcommittee, angering lawmakers and prompting new criticism not only of Enron but the Bush White House.
SEN. FRITZ HOLLINGS (D), SOUTH CAROLINA: I've never seen a better example of cash-and-carry government than this Bush administration and Enron.
SNOW: Citing Enron's ties to a host of administration officials, Hollings called for a special prosecutor to look into Enron and a subpoena to force Lay to appear on Capitol Hill next week. The White House dismissed the comments as a partisan attack, calling it disappointing that some are more interested in reading off partisan Democrat attack memos and repeating unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations.
Lay's decision to avoid Congress came Sunday after his lawyer said lawmakers made inflammatory statements on the talk shows.
SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D), NORTH DAKOTA: He should not have expected it would ever be a walk in the park to appear before a congressional committee.
SNOW: Dorgan said Lay was scared off by the Powers Report. Commissioned by Enron's board and released Saturday, it paints a scathing portrait, stating Enron management spent considerable time and effort working to say as little as possible about controversial outside partnerships.
SEN. PETER FITZGERALD (R), ILLINOIS: Enron Corporation went way beyond all hat and no cattle. It was pure bull. In my judgment, in my opinion, Enron was running a gigantic Ponzi operation.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SNOW: Now the author of the Powers Report, William Powers, who was asked by the Enron's board of directors to put this report together, is up next on this subcommittee -- this House hearing that is already underway, which you showed just a moment ago, Wolf.
We do expect him to give some interesting testimony. He, the author of this report, will say that what he found was appalling. He will say they found that Enron employees involved in these partnerships outside of Enron enriched themselves in the aggregate, he says, quote, "by tens of millions of dollars."
Wolf.
BLITZER: And, Kate, who else will be testifying on this issue of the Enron scandal in the days and, indeed, weeks ahead?
SNOW: Yeah. It's Enron week here on Capitol Hill. We have a number of more hearings coming up in the days ahead, about seven of them.
Tomorrow, we expect to hear from the top person at Andersen. The CEO of that company, Joseph Berardino, expected to be here.
And then on Thursday, we expect to hear from Jeffrey Skilling who is the former CEO of Enron. We do expect to hear from him -- we expect -- we're told right now that he will testify.
Two of his colleagues, Andy Fastow, the former CFO, chief financial officer, of Enron, and Michael Kopper, his associate, we're told, are going to be pleading the Fifth. That from Representative Billy Tauzin.
Back to you, Wolf.
BLITZER: Kate Snow on Capitol Hill. Thanks for that report.
And joining us now to talk about Ken Lay's sudden decision not to testify on Capitol Hill and other legal reasons that might be involved, the Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz. His new book is entitled "Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age."
Professor Dershowitz, thanks again for joining us.
Let me read from the letter that Earl Silbert, Ken Lay's attorney, wrote to the Senate yesterday explaining the sudden about -- reversal in not wanting to testify.
"In the midst of our preparation, particularly disturbing statements have been made by members of Congress. He," referring to Ken Lay, "cannot be expected to participate in a proceeding in which conclusions have been reached before Mr. Lay has been given the opportunity to be heard."
Does that make sense to you legally speaking?
PROF. ALAN DERSHOWITZ, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: Well, it's a lawyer's letter, obviously, trying to justify his decision. I think he would have been crazy to appear without immunity in front of a belligerent congressional committee. There's, obviously, the possibility of criminal prosecution.
You'd think everybody would have learned the Clinton lesson when his lawyer, Robert Bennett, allowed him to be deposed, and that led, as we all know, to impeachment and disbarment and all the rest of that. There's no legal obligation for him to appear. There's been so subpoena.
Now there will be a subpoena. He then has to make a very tough decision. Does he invoke the Fifth Amendment or does he testify? Once there's a subpoena, those are the only two options available.
BLITZER: Well, isn't -- there's a third option that he would granted immunity in exchange for his testimony, right?
DERSHOWITZ: Well, he has to first be subpoenaed and invoke the Fifth Amendment or indicate a willingness to invoke the Fifth, and then he'd be granted what's called use immunity, which is that anything he says to Congress in response to questions can't be used against him, nor can it be used as a source of other evidence.
You'll remember from the Oliver North case that can create enormous problems for the prosecutor. North testified in front of Congress. Then he was prosecuted, and then the court reversed his conviction, saying it was very difficult to disentangle what he had said in front of Congress from what the prosecution may have used to prepare witnesses.
BLITZER: You heard his wife say last week in a televised interview that he really has nothing to hide, that he wants to fight this battle before court of public opinion. Presumably, that's why he had been willing, at least until yesterday, to testify. Were you surprised by those comments and his apparent willingness to testify?
DERSHOWITZ: Well, no. I mean, the -- any good criminal-defense lawyer knows you put the wife on for the spin. She'll get the softball questions, and if she gets a hard question, she can always say, "Well, I'm just the wife. I didn't know."
What she may have done, though -- she may have waived some of her own spousal privileges in relation to her husband. So it's possible now for Congress to subpoena her and to ask her questions about what he may have told her, if they're within the scope essentially of what she said on television.
You can't just turn on and off the spigot and say, "Well, I'm prepared to talk to one television station or another, but I'm not prepared to talk to Congress." So she may have opened up some doors.
BLITZER: That would be playing pretty much hard ball, the U.S. Congress. Do you have any recollection of when they've ever done such a thing, bring in a spouse because the spouse appeared on television and gave up his or her privilege?
DERSHOWITZ: Well, you remember in the Lewinsky case, they, in fact, called Lewinsky's mother to testify in front of the grand jury. So hard ball is not so unusual when politics is the name of the game.
And the other thing that we're going to see, too, is calling people like Lay -- Ken Lay in front of the committee to see him invoke the Fifth on television -- I have to tell you that is really dirty pool. We didn't like it when Senator McCarthy used to do that, and I don't like it now.
Even as a Democrat, I don't like Congress calling people in front of a congressional committee just to show that they're raising their hands and taking the Fifth Amendment. That's just not right.
BLITZER: But why can't they do that in terms of hard ball -- they want him to testify -- and make him take that Fifth if he's not going to testify?
DERSHOWITZ: Well, the courts and some bar associations have said that it's an improper use of the subpoena power to call somebody knowing that that person is going to invoke a privilege simply to put them under public apogram (ph) for invoking a privilege.
Now, you know, there's so much partisan politics. My friend, Senator Hatch, today is justifying Mr. Lay, saying, "Well, I don't blame him for not doing this." I myself don't blame him either, looking at from the point of view of a criminal-defense attorney.
But you'll remember that the same Senator Hatch has frequently condemned people for hiding behind the Fifth Amendment and for not cooperating with Congress. So it really depends on whose ox is being gored here.
BLITZER: All right. Bottom line, Alan Dershowitz, if you were representing Ken Lay, what would you tell him to do?
DERSHOWITZ: Well, it depends on whether he was innocent or guilty or whether I thought he was innocent or guilty. If I thought there was any reasonable prospect of guilt and a criminal prosecution, I'd have him play hard ball at this point.
He's not going to win in the court of public opinion with a belligerent Congress or least senatorial majority. Better less said. Let his lawyer speak for him. Let other people speak for him. He's better off at this point not exposing himself to very difficult questions under oath.
BLITZER: The Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, the author of the new book, "Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age." Thanks, once again, for joining us.
And the SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt and Senator Byron Dorgan will be among the guests on LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE. That's less than an hour from now, 6:00 Eastern, 3:00 Pacific.
Pediatricians weigh in on the controversial issue of gay adoption. We'll hear from both sides at the half-hour.
Also, has the trail gone cold in the search for the kidnapped reporter Daniel Pearl? We'll have the latest from Karachi.
And football's world champions are back home. We'll follow the Patriots' convoy to fans waiting at the stadium. And we'll be live there for the big welcome.
Also, find out who among us picked the Super Bowl winner and the exact margin of victory.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Now checking these stories on today's news wire.
Four prisoners who escaped from a Texas jail last week may be in Southern Oklahoma. Authorities say they believe that's where the fugitives broke into a vacant house and took a revolver and a truck from another home. The truck was discovered abandoned over the weekend. Authorities add it's possible the fugitives are split into two groups and may have changed their appearance.
A construction worker in Pacific Palisades, California, became trapped up to his shoulders today after a dirt trench collapsed. He was stuck for about 90 minutes before firefighters rescued him. The man was apparently in good condition but was taken to a hospital to be examined.
And students are finally back in a New York public school devastated by the September 11th attack. It was closed since the World Trade Center burned and collapsed three blocks away. The building went through extensive cleaning and environmental testing before it reopened.
What's the value of a life? I'll ask Kenneth Feinberg, the special master of the government's September 11th compensation fund, on a special edition of WOLF BLITZER REPORTS.
We'll also hear from families of World Trade Center victims before they confront Feinberg at a New York town meeting. That's at 7:00 Eastern tonight, 4:00 Pacific.
Our check of this hour's top stories is just ahead.
Plus, pediatricians say it's OK. How do you feel about gay adoptions? Stick around for a debate on that subject.
And how safe are America's nuclear plants from a terrorist attack? One senator will tell us much more needs to be done.
And don't get up. A little later, see the highlights from the Super Bowl ads.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Here's the latest news.
The White House released its $2.1-trillion budget today. President Bush was at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida rallying support for at least one of his budget provisions, a five-year plan to increase military spending by some $120 billion.
The search for missing journalist Daniel Pearl is extending beyond the boundaries of Karachi into other parts of Pakistan. Authorities are also considering the idea that organized crime may be connected to Pearl's disappearance on January 23rd.
Enron's former CEO Ken Lay was scheduled to testify on Capitol Hill today but backed out at the last minute. Now Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Earnest Hollings says he's ready to subpoena Lay.
And this just in. The Justice Department today released the following statement on the Enron investigation.
Quote, "The Justice Department sees no reason to appoint a special counsel to investigate the Enron matter. Our investigators have a duty and a responsibility to enforce the criminal laws in this matter. Regulations call for the appointment of a special counsel when prosecution by the department would both present a conflict of interest and serve the public interest."
"But," quote, it goes on to continue, "Neither of these criteria exist for the Department of Justice in this case. No conflict of interest exists. No person involved in pursuing this investigation has any conflict or any ties that would require a recusal. The ability to carry out our duties and responsibilities in investigating this matter would not serve the public interest."
And after a two-week break, the Pentagon says it will resume flying al Qaeda and Taliban fighters from Afghanistan to a U.S. detention center at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Currently, there are 158 detainees at that facility. Another 324 prisoners are in Afghanistan.
The American Academy of Pediatrics offered an endorsement today for homosexual adoption, saying these parents are just as capable as their heterosexual counterparts. That decision goes against laws in a handful of states that ban gays and lesbians from adopting.
Florida is one of those states, and as CNN's Kathy Slobogin reports, one same-sex couple there is fighting to keep their family together.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KATHY SLOBOGIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Dan Skahen and Wayne Smith are licensed foster parents. In the last two years, they've taken many severely abused and neglected children, like this 3-year-old, into their home.
DAN SKAHEN, FOSTER PARENT: We've had eight children through our house, ranging in ages from 7 months to 15 years old.
SLOBOGIN: But although Smith and Skahen are considered fit to be foster parents, by law, they cannot adopt children because they're gay.
WAYNE SMITH, FOSTER PARENT: There's literally a question on the application, and it says, "Are you homosexual? Yes or no." And if you check yes, the form tells you, "Stop right there. You're disqualified. You're out of the game."
SLOBOGIN (on camera): These men live in Florida, one of three states which ban homosexual adoptions. About a dozen states have considered such bans in recent years.
Smith and Skahen are two of the plaintiffs challenging the Florida law in federal court. They lost the first round. Now they're appealing that decision.
(voice-over): Today's American Academy of Pediatrics report endorsing homosexual adoption puts the weight of several child welfare groups on their side.
DR. ELLEN PERRIN, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS: What the research shows is that there's no disadvantage conferred upon children by being raised in a family where the parents are gay or lesbian compared to a family where the parents are heterosexual.
SLOBOGIN (voice-over): A recent review by the American Psychological Association concluded "Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect."
But Ken Connor of the Family Research Council says homosexuals make poor parents. KEN CONNOR, FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: The rates of depression are higher. Drug abuse, again, higher still. The number of sexual partners dramatically greater. And I think it's fair for the legislature to conclude that these aren't circumstances that bode well for the best interests of the child.
SLOBOGIN: Smith and Skahen say they should be judged on their own merits, not as members of the group. They say they've seen severely traumatized children blossom in their care.
(on camera): Do you think it's harmful for a child to grow up without a mother and a father figure?
SMITH: I think that it's more harmful for kids to be neglected, I think it's more harmful for kids to be abandoned, and I think it's more harmful for kids to be abused, and all of those things occur in all kinds of family settings.
SLOBOGIN (voice-over): Smith and Skahen's case goes to the appeals court next week. But win or lose, they say they'll continue to take children into their home.
Kathy Slobogin, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: The American Academy of Pediatrics decision to support gay adoptions is certainly a strong endorsement, but critics say the Academy looked at some skewed data.
Joining us now with more on this issue is psycholo -- psychotherapist Rudolph Calabrese and Lynne Gold-Bikin, the former chairman of the American Bar Association's Family Law Division.
Thanks to both of you for joining us.
And, Dr. Calabrese, let me begin with you and read to you an excerpt from the decision from the American Academy of Pediatrics.
"The American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes that a considerable body of professional literature provides evidence that children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can children whose parents are heterosexual."
What do you -- you disagree with that assessment?
RUDOLPH CALABRESE, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: Yes. Yes, I do. I disagree with it because it's contrary to clinical experience, it's contrary to years and years of a whole body of research and studies that's been done, and the difficulties that are manifested here already with these children who are in foster care and need the nurturing experience of a mother and a father, a male and a female, and...
LYNNE GOLD-BIKIN, PAST CHAIR, FAMILY LAW DIVISION, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION: You know, I have to tell you that I don't know what kind of clinical experience you're talking about, Dr. Calabrese, but I've been doing...
CALABRESE: I'm...
GOLD-BIKIN: I've been doing adoptions...
CALABRESE: I'm talking about specifically -- I'm talking about specifically doing a home finding for adoptive parents.
GOLD-BIKIN: Well, I've done...
CALABRESE: ... for the surrogates for...
GOLD-BIKIN: I've done this for 26 years, and I haven't seen any examples of children coming out of...
CALABRESE: I've done it for 35, and I've seen a lot of pathology being manifested by homosexuality because...
GOLD-BIKIN: Well...
CALABRESE: ... homosexuality...
GOLD-BIKIN: But that's what you're looking for, isn't it, sir?
CALABRESE: ... is -- homosexuality is a pathology, and that's my clinical experience, and that's my...
GOLD-BIKIN: Well...
CALABRESE: ... clinical statement.
GOLD-BIKIN: ... that's not what the DSM IV R says. As a matter of fact...
CALABRESE: Well, you should read...
GOLD-BIKIN: ... they don't...
CALABRESE: You should read the DSM IV and you should practice it because I know that it -- they took it out at one time, but if you look under the -- certainly under the diagnostic category of the paraphilias, you'll see that -- exactly what I'm talking about, in fact.
GOLD-BIKIN: Well -- but the fact that people have a different kind of sexual behavior has nothing to do with the way they parent, and I've done many...
CALABRESE: Well, I think it does because the sexual...
GOLD-BIKIN: Well, if I may finish, sir, many, many couples that I have seen and counseled and gotten children for have raised wonderful children.
And, by the way, 95 percent of homosexual children come from heterosexual parents. CALABRESE: Well, you see, there's the circular...
GOLD-BIKIN: So that's where -- you know...
CALABRESE: ... there's the circular argument. You know, to take some statement and then to try to give it to the public as scientific fact. What 95 percent? I think you should show me research, and I...
GOLD-BIKIN: Ninety-five -- well, most of the homosexual...
CALABRESE: I think you should say to another clinician...
GOLD-BIKIN: ... children come from...
CALABRESE: ... who's had experience with the treatment of homosexual patients...
GOLD-BIKIN: Really? Well, I'm the one that does the custody cases, and I see the children, and I don't see custody cases coming out of homosexual couples. I see them coming out of heterosexual couples, and I've...
CALABRESE: It comes out of...
GOLD-BIKIN: ... seen some very, very dysfunctional...
CALABRESE: I ask you to just -- I ask you just to explain to me how the paraphilias come about, and I -- and children -- you see, homosexuality is a regression to and a fixation at certain levels of psychosexual development, so the children are...
GOLD-BIKIN: You don't think that God made homosexual...
CALABRESE: ... not going to get the full...
GOLD-BIKIN: ... children?
BLITZER: One at a time.
CALABRESE: ... capacity.
GOLD-BIKIN: Well, it's very difficult -- it's very difficult to -- you deal with people who have problems, and I deal with people who adopt children and who fight over custody, and the custody fights are among hom -- heterosexuals, not homosexuals. Homosexual people can be very warm and loving people, and the fact that they have -- that they're attracted to their own sex has nothing to do with the way they parent. Nothing.
CALABRESE: I don't know where you get that information from.
GOLD-BIKIN: Well, from my own clinical experience with thousands...
CALABRESE: I've been practicing...
GOLD-BIKIN: ... and thousands and thousands of...
CALABRESE: ... for 35 years. Thirty-five years I've been practicing, and I see pathology every day.
BLITZER: Well, let me ask you, Dr...
GOLD-BIKIN: Because that's what people come to you...
BLITZER: Let me ask you...
GOLD-BIKIN: They come to you for that.
BLITZER: Let me interrupt. Let me interrupt both of you.
Dr. Calabrese, specific question. Homosexual couple that has a child or a couple of children -- what specific problems do you see developing with those children that might not develop according to you analysis from heterosexual parents?
CALABRESE: The total fusion -- the total commitment to being a person -- the child needs in the environment sexuality in terms of emotional sexuality from the mother, a female, and from the father. It needs a dual type of relationship.
Otherwise, all of our culture and our history in terms of the biological development and the psychological development is all false, and I think that this research that they're quoting and that she is quoting -- it does not really follow the truth in what happens clinically.
GOLD-BIKIN: Well, respectfully...
BLITZER: All right. Lynne, go ahead and respond.
GOLD-BIKIN: Thank you.
You know, then what you're saying is that a single mother cannot raise a children and a single father cannot raise a child because then they don't have the sexuality from the other sex.
I mean, we have thousands and thousands of children every day being raised by one parent with no access to a parent of the opposite sex, which would seem to fly in the face of everything you're saying.
You're saying that the only people who can raise healthy children are a mother and a father in the same home?
CALABRESE: I realize that it's unpopular to say this, but the fact is that single parents will be the first ones to admit that there's a lot of problems, a lot of lax in their raising of the child. The other parent is...
GOLD-BIKIN: You're assuming that every...
CALABRESE: ... needed.
GOLD-BIKIN: You're assuming that every heterosexual couple that lives together is not dysfunctional? What percentage of...
CALABRESE: I would like you to...
GOLD-BIKIN: ... the couples that stay together are in dysfunctional relationships?
CALABRESE: I would like you to come up with the proof in the clinical research and the clinical experience, and this is what I'm talking from.
BLITZER: Well, let me ask you, Dr. Calabrese -- you're talking about proof, but we only have a few seconds left. Do you -- don't -- what's wrong with the recommendation of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which studies this kind of...
CALABRESE: I don't...
BLITZER: ... material on a very, very close basis?
CALABRESE: Well, I'd like to see the research because I think that they're in error.
GOLD-BIKIN: Maybe you should see it before you speak about it.
CALABRESE: I think that they're in error, you know, because what -- what these homosexual parents can only give this child is very, very limited, and then what further they're exposed to is even further pathology.
GOLD-BIKIN: They give them love. They give them attention. Just like this couple that we saw before we started to talk. They give them love, attention, affection, education, food, clothing.
CALABRESE: I don't believe that to be true.
BLITZER: All right.
CALABRESE: I don't believe that to be clinically true.
BLITZER: This debate, obviously, is going to continue. Unfortunately, we are all out of time. Dr. Calabrese, Lynne Gold- Bikin, thanks to both of you...
GOLD-BIKIN: Thank you.
BLITZER: ... for joining us very much, and we'll continue this discussion. Obviously, it's not going away.
And we want to ask our viewers: What do you think? Our online poll asks, "Can gay couples make good adoptive parents? So far -- and this is not scientific -- the majority of those voting say no, but to cast your vote, log on to cnn.com. AOL keyword, of course, is CNN. Remember, as I said, this poll is not scientific.
Dr. Laura will no doubt have an opinion on this issue, as she has on every other issue. See what she has to say on LARRY KING LIVE. That's tonight, 9:00 Eastern, 6:00 Pacific. Dr. Laura Schlessinger.
His fate remains uncertain, but are we any closer to finding kidnapped reporter Daniel Pearl? The latest from Karachi is next.
And danger here at home. Are the nation's nuclear plants an easy target for terrorists? We'll also discuss that when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back. Protecting the nation's nuclear power plants. Some critics say not enough is being done to shield these facilities from possible terrorist attacks.
Now Democratic Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, along with two Senate colleagues, is drafting legislation aimed at beefing up the security at the nation's nuclear power plants. Senator Reid joins us now to talk about this issue.
Senator, thanks -- thanks for joining us. What's the basic problem? Are these facilities not secure right now?
SEN. HARRY REID (D), NEVADA: Well, Wolf, these facilities were built many, many years ago, decades ago when there was certainly no terrorist threat as we now know them.
We have a problem. All -- they have certain security problems. Some are worse than others. We have security forces that vary from plant to plant. Even the president in his state of the union message mentioned the problems with nuclear power plants.
They are a problem because they have plutonium. These -- these fuel rods are very, very dangerous, and we have to make sure there's a way that they are protected.
BLITZER: And the president did say they did find diagrams in the rubble of Afghanistan in those terrorist training camps, those compounds, showing diagrams of nuclear power plants in the United States. Now most of them are in the northeastern parts of the United States, although they are scattered around the country.
Specifically, what needs to be done in the short term to make these plants secure as far as a terrorist attack is concerned?
REID: Wolf, I'm so concerned, it seems like every day there's a new problem, as I see it. I travel because of my responsibilities on the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee of Appropriations where we appropriate lots of money for the national laboratories every year.
I was in Sandia last Friday, and it was stunning how the information I received there indicated that I must come back to Washington -- I'm here now, and I'm going to have a classified hearing -- they're done very rarely -- where they're not open to the public because of the sensitive nature of the information that I learned at Sandia.
And I think we have to get right to the bottom of this. The -- there are things we have to do.
I think that we have to look at federalizing the workforce there so the workforces are the same. If we don't do that, we have to at least set standards that are the same everyplace else. I think we -- that are the same everyplace.
I think we also have to make sure that we do something to make sure that these plants are safe from air attacks. You know, the problems we have there -- if a plane crashed into one of these power plants and got to the core, it would send out a plume that would be dangerous, you know, and some of these power plants are in very, very heavily populated areas.
BLITZER: Well, Senator, you know, one of the things that they did suggest that the terrorists were contemplating hijacking a commercial airliner and flying that plane into a nuclear plant. What would happen, God forbid, if they were to succeed in that kind of strike?
REID: Well, it's -- it's something that is scary, to say the least. We know that it would be not good, but the only good part of it is these power plants wouldn't be easy to hit most of the time, but some of them would be.
So I think, Wolf, this is something that is extremely important. We -- you know, the -- having people walk around the security perimeter of these facilities is important. I'm glad we have strong fences. But it doesn't solve all the problems we have with this modern wave of terrorism that's sweeping the world.
BLITZER: All right. Senator Reid, we'll be following your legislation. We'll be following the work that you do. Obviously, very, very critical right now. Thanks, once again, for joining us. Senator Harry Reid, the number two Democrat in the U.S. Senate.
BLITZER: And there's frustrating silence today in the case of the kidnapped "Wall Street Journal" reporter Daniel Pearl. His captors have not yet been heard from since they threatened to kill him last week. Pearl's wife today urged the kidnappers to contact her.
Meanwhile, Pakistani police are looking into the possibility organized crime in Pakistan may be behind his disappearance.
CNN's Ben Wedemen reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BEN WEDEMEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Pakistani police have expanded their search for kidnapped "Wall Street Journal" reporter Daniel Pearl. While hard-line Islamic groups are still the main suspects in the kidnapping, the police are now looking into the possibility of involvement by Karachi's extensive criminal underworld.
And while Pakistan believes that Mr. Pearl is probably in or around the Karachi area, they are looking into the possibility that he might be in adjacent provinces. Now no verifiable message has been received from Pearl's kidnappers since last Wednesday. That was the last time any Pakistani or international news organization received an e-mail with Pearl's photograph. At this point, the Pakistani police say that any e-mail without Mr. Pearl's photograph will be considered bogus.
Now early Monday morning, there were reports that a body was found by the side of the road -- of a road in Karachi. Now it was initially believed that that could be Pearl's body. However, a "Wall Street Journal" spokesman said that that was not Pearl's body.
They say that they believe that Pearl, in fact, is still alive, and they're appealing to the kidnappers to resume communications and provide the newspaper with a photograph -- a recent photograph of Mr. Pearl.
I'm Ben Wedemen, CNN, reporting from Karachi.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: Hillary Clinton for president? The latest poll when we come back.
And a hero's welcome for football champs. The Patriots' homecoming live from New England just ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Now checking these stories on today's news wire.
Hillary Rodham Clinton made the transition from first lady to U.S. senator, but should the junior senator from New York consider running for president?
The poll by Marist College suggests it might not be a good idea. Sixty-five percent of those surveyed say Senator Clinton should not -- repeat not -- run for president.
Search-and-rescue efforts for the victims of a powerful earthquake have been called off in Turkey. At least 43 people were killed in yesterday's quake and hundreds were injured. Soldiers and aid workers are trying to provide food and shelter for the homeless.
The Olympic torch is in the home stretch towards Salt Lake City and the opening of the winter games there. This morning, it was passed through the Delicate Arch, a naturally occurring sandstone monument in Utah's Arches National Park. The flame is due to arrive in Salt Lake City on Thursday.
And we'll go to Boston right after this to check in on the homecoming celebration for the Patriots.
And if you were watching last night's games, you may have seen some of them. We'll have a look at the highlights from those high- priced commercial spots.
Stay tuned.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Let's get a preview of LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE. That begins at the top of the hour. Lou's here in Washington tonight.
Lou, we're looking forward to the show.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you very much, Wolf.
Coming up at the top of the hour, we'll be telling you about what is a crisis of confidence on Wall Street. Stock prices plunge because of the Enron scandal.
Tonight, we'll talk with Senator Byron Dorgan about Ken Lay's refusal to testify before his committee.
We'll hear from Senator Joe Lieberman about the government's failure to see Enron's collapse.
And we'll hear from SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt about plans to prevent future Enrons.
Senator Kent Conrad will also be here to talk about the new trillion-dollar -- $2-trillion Bush budget.
All of that, a lot more, as we broadcast tonight live from Washington.
Wolf.
BLITZER: Looking good in Washington. Thank you very much, Lou.
And they've just won the Super Bowl, but what are they going to do now? Bask in the adoration of their hometown fans, of course. The New England Patriots returned to Boston today, fresh from their stunning victory in New Orleans.
Our Boston bureau chief Bill Delaney joins us now live with a look at the homecoming festivities.
Bill.
BILL DELANEY, CNN BOSTON BUREAU CHIEF: The homecoming festivities just getting underway here, Wolf, in Foxborough Stadium. The team bus with the Patriots on it is just about 20 minutes away or so, and we have an enormous crowd here outside of Foxborough Stadium, as I think you can hear.
The Patriot nation -- every single one of them, Wolf, said they were a believer from the beginning, even when this team was going nowhere at the beginning of the season. None of them will admit they were surprised at what happened yesterday.
Now, Wolf, I'm going to attempt to talk to a couple of fans here, Young Kristin Gracie (ph) and her mother, Rita Gracie (ph). Now, Kristin (ph), what's so special about this Patriots team?
KRISTIN GRACIE (ph), PATRIOTS FAN: Well, I think they came a long ways this season, and they proved everyone wrong, and we've had faith in them since the beginning. Go team!
DELANEY: What...
(CROSSTALK)
DELANEY: We will make an attempt to talk to Kristin's (ph) mother here.
Rita (ph), you know, as someone who's raising kids -- as someone who's raising kids WITH a lot of big-time sports figures making a lot of money, a lot of big egos, what's special about this team?
RITA GRACIE (ph), PATRIOTS FAN: They showed team spirit yesterday, and that's what got them there. All the way. Right to the Super Bowl.
DELANEY: Thanks very much.
(CHEERING)
DELANEY: Wolf, we expect the Patriots here in 20 minutes or so, as I said.
Back to you, Wolf, in the studio.
BLITZER: All right. Looks like they're having fun in Boston. Thank you very much. Bill Delaney, our Boston bureau chief.
And, of course, Super Bowl Sunday isn't exactly just about football. It's also become a showplace for Madison Avenue and those clever ad campaigns.
Here's a look at some of those commercial high points during the big game.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RUDY GIULIANI, FORMER NEW YORK MAYOR: For all New Yorkers, I just want to say thank you, America.
BLITZER (voice-over): Whether they weary of the war on terror or just tracking the trends, advertisers seemed to be shifting gears.
E*Trade fired its chimp for a more serious approach.
CHRISTOS COTSAKOS, E*TRADE PRESIDENT & CEO: A musical? What were you thinking? It's a disaster. I'm really sorry, but you just don't fit our new image.
ACTOR #1: There's a new Lipton Brisk that tastes so good, it's sells itself. DANNY DEVITO, ACTOR: So where's the director?
ACTOR #2: So you puppets are fired?
BLITZER: Lipton let its puppets go. No word on what happens with their 401(k)s.
The events of September 11th and afterward were prominent. The war on drugs took on the anti-terrorism theme, while the Budweiser Clydesdales gave a nod to ground zero.
Bud did find some time, though, to lighten up.
ACTRESS: I've got cold Bud Light.
ACTOR #3: Ow.
ACTRESS: Honey?
ACTOR #4: OK. I'd like you to choose between this untoasted sub or this toasted one.
BLITZER: Quizno's tried to blow out the competition.
Blockbuster went a bit wild.
ACTOR #5: Oh, I'm a maniac! Maniac!
ACTOR #6: No argument here.
BLITZER: Yahoo! had another splash.
ACTOR #7: How did you find this place?
ACTOR #8: Yahoo!
Wait, wait, wait. Wait.
ACTOR #7: What?
ACTOR #8: How did you learn how to talk?
ACTOR #7: Yahoo!
BLITZER: And you couldn't have missed Britney.
And we finally found out what an "M-Life" is.
ACTOR #9: Now we truly can. Welcome to "M-Life" from AT&T Wireless.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: OK. "M-Life."
The Patriots were 14-point underdogs, but they did win, and while most of the so-called experts were wrong, I draw your attention to this note. In Friday's political hotline, I offered this analysis.
"I am an old American Football League fan, going back to my youth in Buffalo. I remember the Patriots when they were the Boston Patriots, so my sentimental choice is New England.
"My heart will be with them, even though my brain says the Patriots' luck has run out. I hope they beat St. Louis, but I am still not counting on it.
"Still, as they say on any single day, bottom line, Patriots by 3."
And I backed up those words yesterday on LATE EDITION three hours before kickoff.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: I guess we're out of time. Super Bowl -- I'm saying the Pats by 3.
ROBERT GEORGE, "THE NEW YORK POST": I will say -- I'll -- I will agree with you. Pats by 3.
BLITZER: All right. That's it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Robert George copying me.
Look at this. Final field goal. It's up. Three points. Be assured I'm not giving up my day job.
LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE begins right now.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
