Evening Exchange; 2205; Iraq, Weekly News Analysis,Asthma

The rising incidence of asthma among African-Americans in. National politics and the New Jersey Senate seat in international politics and the Iraqi acquiescence on weapons inspectors all next on evening. Xchange. Hi I'm Kojo Nnamdi Welcome to the evening Xchange. Last weekend in London more than 100000 people showed up to demonstrate against Prime Minister Tony Blair's advocacy of a hard line against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Many of them accusing Blair of being a puppet of President George W. Bush. President Bush however has not had to deal with any demonstrations of comparable size. But will he what he has had to deal

with is the vocal opposition to a unilateral U.S. strike against Iraq by several prominent Democrats among them former President Jimmy Carter and former Vice President Al Gore. So in this segment of the evening exchange the talk with Peter Beinart editor of The New Republic which was harshly critical of the former vice president despite having previously supported him. Daniel Smith is the founder of Black Voices for Peace with Justice. Definitely a part of the anti-war movement. And Horace Cooper is a senior fellow at the Center for New Black Leadership. Good to see you Horace. Peter Beinart allow me to start with you. What did the New Republic find so offensive about Al Gore's comments. Well we didn't think it was really very coherent as a critique of President Bush's policy. One of his main points which you hear a lot of Democrats say is that a war with Iraq would undermine the war on terrorism. But we actually think the evidence has really been at least so far quite the reverse that if you look at Germany for instance which has been very vocally against the war in Iraq they have responded by increasing their support for the war on terrorism helping us extradite a suspected terrorist from Pakistan

increasing their support for the Afghan peacekeeping effort. And we really don't think the logic behind this idea that a war in Iraq would undermine the war on terrorism really makes sense because the war on terrorism is in the interests of our allies abroad as well. So we really didn't. This speech was very coherent. Allow me to interrupt on that point because. Could it be possible that Al Gore was assuming as many people do that cooperation in the war against terrorism is necessary from Arab countries and that their populations might be so enraged if there's a strike against Iraq that that could undermine the war against terrorism. He may have felt he didn't need to say that. Should he. Yeah because I don't think even with Arab countries the logic really makes a lot of sense. First of all much of that intelligence cooperation is very behind the scenes intelligence policy is almost by definition one of the less influenced by public opinion matters of government policy. I think if Arab governments want to object to our war in Iraq they are more likely to do it in very different ways particularly because they're in a country like Egypt for instance which is threatened by its own Islamic fundamentalists. It is very much in their self-interest to share intelligence with the United States.

Do you also you also criticized Al Gore for trying to walk both sides of the street at the same time wanting on the one hand is regime change. And on the other hand taking away the weapons of mass destruction and then apparently not wanting them also. Yeah. I mean we think that that that one of the things we find frustrating about the Democrats response to this is is an unwillingness to really say explicitly where they stand what they say. A lot of it as well. We should do this. It would be better if we did this with international support. But I don't think many people would disagree with that. Of course it will be better. The question is if at the end of the day France and Russia would rather have an ineffective inspection regime than war. What does Al Gore say then and Al Gore has not actually come out and said what few of the Democrats have said if we can't get international support which we should try to get if we can't what then. Al Gore didn't answer that question. On the subject of clarity which do you understand the Bush administration do want. Destruction of or taking away the weapons of mass destruction or regime change.

The Bush I think the Bush administration's feeling is you can't have one without the other. That in fact Saddam Hussein will never disarm. Hit his government will never disarm and I think in fact the historical record proved them exactly right which suggests to me that the Bush administration will not see weapons inspectors going in under any circumstances unless the result of that is ultimately the removal of Saddam Hussein. Well I think it's the administration's declaration that they want. Regime change that is complicating the diplomatic efforts in this situation. The fact of the matter is is that Bush and the warmongers in Washington want to overthrow all Saddam Hussein and his government they don't want the weapons inspectors to go back in because this would complicate the efforts to do that. That is the objective of the administration. Now when the Iraqis announced a few weeks ago that they would allow the weapons inspectors to come back in under the framework of the pass United Nations resolutions. The Bush administration said oh no that's not good enough. Now they want a new U.N. resolution with more stringent conditions

place on the Iraqis. Now we've had a delay in the weapons inspection team going to Iraq having the weapons inspection team go in now would have been a good thing in my opinion because that it would have gotten the process going. Changes could have been made later in terms of what needed to be done. Once the weapons inspectors were on the ground by the Security Council and the Iraqis I might add have made some compromises on the logistics of what happens on the ground now. There's been some tweaking of the old framework over the past 48 hours. The argument the dam was making Horace Cooper suggests to me that the Bush administration is anticipating that under a new authority from the United Nations if they can get it that Saddam Hussein is not going to be compliant thereby giving it the opportunity to initiate regime change. But there could still be some confusion among Americans about what we really want. Do we really want to get rid of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction which would mean having the inspectors go in and inspect them

and having him get rid of them or is that not going to satisfy us. We want him out of there. So your question really points out even further the incoherence of Mr. Gore's presentation. It's the policy it's it's it's federal law that regime change should be sought. And Iraq in 1998 and 1999 we had a number of debates and we ended up passing a law to that which President Clinton signed saying that Iraq was our goal as foreign policy to get regime change in Iraq. President Bush is not announcing some new initiatives some new policy. And Peter is correct. We have enough information for skeptics to see that the only way that we will likely achieve the outcome of eliminating that threat of those weapons of mass destruction is to have the present head of that government and his supporters to be removed. That is the only way it will occur. Well let me just say this Kojo that such a double standard here the greatest threat to stability in the Middle East today is

not the Iraqi government but the Israeli government and it's a criminal barbaric policies towards the people of Palestine in the ongoing occupation in defiance of United Nations resolutions numerous United Nations resolutions. Do we see the United States trying to pressure Israel with sanctions with threats of war anything like that. No we don't see that. And this is what angers people in the Arab world. This is what angers people in Europe. They see this duplicity this double standard this hypocrisy on the part of our government. And I tell you one thing. Once this situation cools down we'll be right back to the central issue in that region of the world. Israel's ongoing occupation of Palestine. That is the main problem we face today in that region of the world. Does that mean that I am being soft on Saddam Hussein. No. Anybody who has weapons of mass destruction chemical biological nuclear must be this or and that doesn't mean just Iraq. There are a lot of

other countries in the world that have the same problem. I couldn't disagree with that more. I got to say I think there are a number of things problems here. One is the moral equivalence issue that there simply is not a credible case to be made that the threat that Israel in any way poses is similar to that that Iraq poses and it's also the case that these specific actions most recently of our kind of contacts of his attempts to support and foment the destruction and overthrow of his neighboring moderate Arab nations. His efforts in Europe to support efforts that would be destabilizing are very very serious and credible threat and it is nothing like that of Israel and it is also the case that over the last 15 years the United States has actually applied a significant amount of pressure to the Israeli government. There were many people including myself who were critical of the excessive levels of pressure to change the policy concerning horoscope of the Bush administration has made a credible case to the American people of Saddam Hussein's links to al Qaeda.

Oh well there are credible cases and links to al Qaeda not necessarily September 11 but certainly that there were meetings that have taken place in Iraq. There are meetings of the intelligence officials of the Iraqi government with senior al Qaeda officials European governments France and Germany both verify that these things have occurred and we have a recent event that Secretary Rumsfeld was indicating had occurred. We have ongoing actions that demonstrate the threat here. And I have a question for you if you wanted to say something. Yeah and I think you know I think it's interesting that whenever whenever the question of Iraq comes up I member It happened during the Gulf War. People always start talking about Israel. The truth is I think that the Israelis not the reason that the people and the people in the Arab world are most alienated the reason that people in the Arab world are most elite and dislike the U.S. government more than most is because we support their repressive governments. The hostility of people in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia and all across the Arab world I think is primarily focused on the terrible governments

they have. In fact they would be lucky to be living within the Green Line of Israel and be governed by a government that respected due process the rule of law and democracy. And the problem that America has in the Middle East and I agree we have problems with our policy in the Middle East is primarily because we have not been serious about promoting democracy throughout the Arab world. That's the root of our problem not Israel and Palestine. Well I think you're completely wrong on that. You're misreading the people on the streets of Arab capitals and towns around the world. Certainly they are dissatisfied with many of their governments but they see the United States supporting Israel which continues to kill civilians on a daily basis continue to carry out that occupation. And well you've been so soft on Israel. And you also know that even if even if one is not necessarily soft on Israel or on the other hand soft on Yasser Arafat. Clearly there was an explosive situation in the Middle East between Israel and the Palestinian the Palestinians that contributes to instability generally in the Middle East.

I don't think any short. No there's no there's no question about that. But the fundamental problem in in that region is not the Iraqi policies. It is the fact that Israel continues to fight. That to me a fundamental problem is not democracy in any country in the Middle East and outside of this problem of mis understanding outside of the United States. The world is a very different view as more of the latest times with the Kuwaitis for a while before we go to Israel because if in fact what is necessary in Iraq is regime change. It makes it seem as if the Bush administration seeking a stronger authorization a stronger resolution from the United States with weapons inspectors is merely a facade that the Bush administration is really not interested in weapons inspectors at all. No I don't think so even if you even if he were opposed to regime change. And I think certainly the moral position the much better thing for the Iraqi people would be regime change. But even if he were not supportive of regime change the historical evidence is clear that only the threat of war will make

Saddam Hussein comply with weapons inspections and the 1990 aka the threat of war exist. He complies with the compliance and said that the threat is coming from the Bush administration exactly what you and France and Germany want to take off the table. All right back to where we are now. That is correct. The fact of the matter is you know if you look at this historically within recent years the arms inspection teams that were in Iraq were able to destroy much of what Saddam Hussein completely destroyed Scott Ritter who was what I know people going to try to discredit Scott rather rocky. He says he has said something or other is going on at the time that a lot of weapons of mass destruction were destroyed. Now there have been problems for sure. Now the Iraqis are saying come back in do the weapons inspections down under the old regime of the United Nations resolution these defensive weapons of mass destruction. I guess what I'm not quite sure why this isn't a policy here in THE SITUATION I know better than to

have a chance to say go ahead. How is it credible that the maniacal desire to destroy these weapons provide him with the ability to do are continually being created being resourced warehoused and hidden. Why is that not seen and recognized as the affront that it is going to go for at least some of the chemical weapons that he had during his war with Iran. Does that matter at all. Just one more thing. It gives us a moral claim with a greater argument for us to go in and see to it that those are no longer being used. I don't understand. You know I think it was maybe in 1983 when Donald Rumsfeld was in the Iraqi capital with two shaking Saddam Hussein's head. And when I go them in the United States government under Reagan administration provided him with the nold know how to create weapons of mass destruction that's fine. And I is one once during the Iraq Iran. What is the documentary about. Newsweek magazine and others. And all of a sudden we are upset with them and we

create this massive violence in it. We created him and now we want to selectively focus on him when in fact there are greater problems in the middle left. And I think they are undertaking to say about it as going into the details of what America did of Iraq. And it's there's no question that America was deeply naive vis Iraq in the 1980s and to the left always make this argument during military conflicts which is to say because we had a bad policy a policy which which the left says was immoral in the past for the sake of logical consistency we should have that same policy. It makes absolutely no sense in the world. The truth is the United States change its policy on country on South Africa and it was good. And we are changing our policy on Iraq and it's good. Well let's talk a little bit about what happens in the international body the United Nations the United States looks as if President Bush certainly has it seems is his his whatever lined up in the U.S. House of Representatives still has to deal with the Senate still has to do with the U.N. still has to deal with France and Russia. Any chance you think they'll be that resolution that the Bush administration and the U.N..

I think it's going to take several weeks. The British are certainly having a lot of trouble in the U.N. The question will be once they get the House and Senate how much momentum does it give them with France and Russia. I think France is the sticking point when they get France they'll get Russia and China. You know this is very interesting because as you say those of you on the left. Well Germany is not on the left. It is that. It isn't. On Would it not not on the level which you're talking about the fact of the matter is nations in the world. European countries are raising questions about it. Right. Spain are supporting us like Volcker's is divine air instead of focused on diplomacy as the first thing that must be done no. What does it all mean let there is not a containment and deterrence can't solve this problem. Diplomacy can solve this problem. The rush to want to send young men and women and spent a hundred and twenty billion dollars on this immoral criminal war is wrong. Here's what you're likely to get. Russia and France on board with there are likely to come up with a resolution that says yes if in fact Saddam Hussein does not comply with the weapons

instructors the weapons inspectors are going to be consequences. But we have to vote another time on what those consequences are likely to be. How do you feel about that. I think the Russian government is going to be much more concerned about getting a cash infusion into their economy by whatever means possible with austerity. You say that I don't think that's a Senechal issue. I think that's a serious need that they have. And if they see that the United States is actually not acting as a way to crowd them out geo politically but by helping them they will be much more supportive. But I agree with Peter that the French government is a much more problematic circumstance and it will be a question of the momentum that comes out from the passage of the grant of authority by Congress don't you think the resolution that they come out with out of the Security Council is likely to require a second vote before military. We don't know the Bush administration may give on this is really a question of tactics and timing. The question what the Bush administration needs is a clear violation by Saddam Hussein. They want to avoid ambiguity. And the French and the Russians want to trap them in ambiguity. So it's really a tactical question what we need is more time and we don't have it on the. And so come to the end

of this segment. Thank you all for joining us. The New Jersey Supreme Court. The Democratic Party caused this Senate seat may bring the U.S. Supreme Court back into politics. Our news analyst. When we come back. The deadly game of political chess over the future of Saddam Hussein he's made a move intended

to stymie his U.S. pursuits. He's negotiated the deal with the U.N. that will allow weapons inspectors to return. However that's been delayed. Joining us to discuss the possible next move on this international chessboard and other issues in the news asking Mohamed of the Washington and former and final call Mark Plotkin of WTOP Radio. Elinor Tatum of the New York Amsterdam News. And Gerry Eddings co-founder and executive director of the foundation for African media excellence. We started off in the first segments talking about around the weapons inspectors made the agreement with the Iraqi government but now it has been delayed. The head of the weapons inspectors saying that it would be unfair to go in there and then suddenly be facing a new resolution coming out of the United Nations. Do you think there will in fact be a new resolution. Well right now France China and Russia are still reluctant to go along with the United States. And so that makes it unlikely those three have vetoes in the Security Council that

the United States and Britain unless they can somehow prevail upon them to change. The irony is that the Bush administration is saying no weapons inspectors when in fact the confusion is not at the U.N. level but the confusion rather is that the United States since May the Iraqis have been trying to negotiate the return of weapons inspectors the United States. First we wanted regime change. And now in the face of worldwide renunciation of that concept he said well we want disarmament and so how do you disarm them without having a weapons inspection inspection regime. Your satellites photographing flyovers photographing now they want on the ground access to the totality of Iraq. Do you think they're likely to get resolution. And if so what kind of resolution is that likely. I really don't think it makes any difference. There are going to nuances any way they can. They're going to bypass the U.N. who said the U.N. has nothing to Trent Lott say a debating

society. I don't know who said it. The Bush administration has to pay some homage to the U.N. but they don't have to abide by them. They're going to go alone whatever when I talk later about the resolutions that are passed in the Senate the House the Gulf of Tonkin which is Wayne Morse and we go in in earnest GRONING who voted against you you have the similar situation whether it's an international organization or your own legislature. There are certain boundaries. But if this administration wants to go to war they will go to war. I'm say them you think the U.N. is likely to go along with the United States and get a resolution out here that authorizes some form of retaliation if Saddam Hussein does not comply. Well I know that's what the Bush administration wants and seems at this point that if the Bush administration does not get what he wants it will find some other way to do what it wants to do. And that's the bottom line because that's what we've seen the Bushes do historically very early as you come to us from South Africa and we don't hear a great deal in the media in this country about what's being reported in that

part of the world in southern Africa on this issue. Could you tell us what's being said. Well much the same is being said in the media there in terms of what the various sides want what is different is the response to both the Bush administration and and to Saddam Hussein in much of the developing world you find a great deal of support for or at least not the same level of animosity for Saddam Hussein and Iraq. And alternatively what you find is is a lot of doubt about about the sincerity of the Bush administration. There is there is a layer of anti-Americanism in much of the Third World that layer of suspicion of the great big power and and added to that is is the history that that America has not always been on the right side of issues in Africa. Spiegel is there also a sense of helplessness. Well this is something we really can't do much about because of the Bush administration decides to go ahead. It will. Well that may be the case for much of the world including those with veto power like France and

China. But I don't think you particularly feel see hear hear what what I would describe is helplessness helplessness coming from people on that side of the world. What you hear is some doubt skepticism on the part of much of the West on the part of the U.S. and to take a call on the United States the bully in this case. Mandela has been very strong in what he has said about about Iraq and about Bush he is not very happy with what he has said basically as the president and ended up talking to his father. Well I think maybe he feels more comfortable with the father in any of that. But but what what Mandela has said is that the United States has tried to put itself above the United Nations so that no nation no matter how big or how powerful should put itself ahead of the U.N. and that the U.N. is a legitimate agency and the one appropriate to deal with these issues. President Bush of course has now forced to convince the U.S. Senate. It would appear as if he has succeeded in convincing the leadership on both sides of the aisle in the House of Representatives that he has those ducks lined up in a row.

That's the first I can remember offer to convince the sun Well you're right. Dick Gephardt who is the Democratic leader in the House who voted against the 1991 resolution on the war today did it come up and said I regret having done that. And he was standing right next to George Bush when he came up to the Horseshoe as was Senator Joe Lieberman the guy who seems to be torn and he and I admire him for his sort of self-introspection made public is Tom Daschle the majority leader of the Senate at least majority leader for now who is going to allow who has not signed on with Gephardt has not signed on with Bush and is saying wait a second. Is there going to be two resolutions being offered alternative resolutions one by Carl Levin which kind of is. I thought Bush lite if you allow me and the other one which is by Joe Biden the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Richard Lugar who is considered very well respected which is more to the case of not only slow down but there are certain steps we should do.

I think coach or whatever the wording is it doesn't make any difference. This president and this administration the way and I'm sorry to make this you know conventional parallel but Vietnam it reminds me of Vietnam. There were few dissenters at the start and then once the war started being We've had short wars in Bosnia and in the 91 war. So there hasn't been time for opposition to mouth but it seems to me the same thing people don't want to seem unpatriotic. They're going along. It's going to go along. It's my understanding that most if not all of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus on the House side are opposing the war and I don't know if they're actually going to vote that way when the house gets together but it looks as if the Senate is likely to fall in line if not as supportive as the house or strong is. This is true. You do. You do have this major holdout Tom Daschle was conspicuous in his absence from the love fest at the White House as well the Congressional Black Caucus members who passed a made a statement issued a statement last week saying

that there should be no preemptive action that it should be as after all diplomacy has failed. But then you also have a couple of House members from the Vietnam era. James McDermott and David Bonior who was number two in the house before he decided not to run for re-election who said that McDermott reminded both of them are Vietnam era veterans a German physician who treated soldiers coming back and organizers including those coming back from the Apocalypse Now sailors and bonier who is a veteran of Vietnam who said that the president only wants war and they and a few others Kucinich and a few other liberals will undoubtedly vote against it. So warning advising that yes Johnson got his Gulf of Tonkin voice vote in the House to vote opposing in the Senate but he was not able to run for re-election. We just went to take a look at the badly flawed and arrogant as a predictor of other prominent dissenters.

One is Bob Byrd of Albany. Ninety five to one he said stop. The other is Nancy Pelosi who does come from San Francisco who is the number two person in the House. Let's go closer to Eleanor's home and talk about the Senate race in New Jersey where the Supreme Court has voted unanimously to allow the Democrats to replace the the state Supreme Court the state Supreme Court has a lot. Most of which were appointed by Republican Governor Whitman Whitman to allow the Democrats to replace the name Frank Lautenberg on the ballot. But the Republicans say we are going to the Supreme Court and it looks as if this might actually get decided by the Supreme Court. What's the talk your way about. Well most people hope that it doesn't get decided by the Supreme Court and the state Supreme Court gets to stand that decision gets to stand and gets stay on the ballot because some people and I agree with them saying that there needs to be representation on both sides. It needs to be a real election and with no name on well with our name on the ballot that someone that is not running anymore that's the other side of that argument is look the guy finds he's losing in the race on the inside.

Oh I'm losing. I'm going to drop out and see if we can get somebody else on the ballot even though that's that's supposed to be against the law at this point. And then and then he counted in terms of look I'm doing so much for my country and that was checkers too. That's all I want to say the most appalling just disgusting speech I've ever heard in politics. And if he never appears in politics again good riddance to bad rubbish the guy is awful. And I have to tell this one story because you said that him to be pressed on the issue. No I'm not going to tell that much of the story that he supposedly said to Democrats look I was in charge of the Senate Campaign Committee. I raised a hundred million dollars. Why isn't there any gratitude for me. And I didn't do anything worse than Bill Clinton. Why are you not people coming to my defense. And somebody said to him but Bob people like Bill Clinton. The other issue of course is whether or not the Republican challenger who was campaigning only on the basis of the fact that he was running against Bob Torricelli has any kind of campaign left at all well Forrester is just the kind of guy who might be beaten by none of the above.

This is the danger that Doug Forrester. But he does have all of the heavyweight the Republicans lined up for him. And then there's the the the issue and whether it resolves in a baggage for Lautenberg and that is that the Lautenberg Torricelli feud may have some lingering feud that they may leave the the Democrats divided but it could be that could be positive for the Democrats as well because everyone that saw what Torricelli did was say well Lautenberg was the exact opposite of that and that we need coffee. It's up to them he says. But he says he's able to but he says I'm not going to enjoy the 70 billion dollars in the bank said I don't need this guy to get my money. It's wonderful. It's overly overwhelmingly Democratic state the last time they elected the Senate who was 1972. Clifford came and the rest of the the Republicans Republicans think it was 1972 and Gore won the state by 16 percentage points.

And you know and if the Supreme Court does weigh in on this and says You know Bob we can't replace the name on about can I really think that the state committee and everyone around will rally around voting for Torricelli on that and then McGreevey able to appoint somebody. OK. From the New Jersey Senate race to the New York governor's race Pataki and McCall tell us what's going on there. I'm I understand that. Of course there were some hip hop artists who are apparently supporting Pataki the Republican candidate who was not expected at all what's going on. Well let's start with hip hop and politics to begin with. It started basically with Russell Simmons coming out from Mark Green in the mayoral election in New York City and finding his own political action committee Russell Simmons. Exactly. And Russell Simmons was not politically active before so to speak. And then he came out for Andrew Cuomo. And then when Andrew Cuomo dropped out he came out and supported Carl McCall and in fact has named his fat from classic sneaker for the month of October. After after Carl McCall should this be taken seriously.

Yes. OK. It needs to be taken seriously for one reason and one reason only. The hip hop generation and voting because they have actually been able to motivate young people who may not have been politically active at least shown them that you know there is a reason to be politically active. And then with the latest L.L. Cool J endorsing Governor Pataki we found that rather odd because locals who had been politically active in the well know he just registered to vote actually he's never voted. Just got interested. He just got interested and I can't tell you what the motivation behind that was. What did he give us his reasons for the endorsement of Pataki. I haven't really been clear on that yet. I haven't been able to figure that one out. But in general what I've seen is that moguls in the hip hop industry have seen that it's time for the young people that they have been selling records to in selling clothing to them it's time for them to get politically active because if they don't they're going to be in real trouble.

How's the race shaping up overall. George Pataki the Republican incumbent McCall the Democratic challenger. Well the newest flap that's been going on but by the Post the New York Post that is murder is the idea that Karl has been doing some things that are not right by sending recommended sending resumes along and notes about people to types an industry that maybe that the controller may have had stocks in their companies where he or she reminds them of. Yes that tells them how stock he actually has a long resume for his are just outrageous. Now it's his wife and his daughter reportedly got a job and lost the job because that was because she got the job several years later. It had to happen. Has he ever really had a chance of winning. I think so. Yes he does have a good chance of winning. A lot of ground. I don't know yet because I don't know who is actually saying that this is a problem or this is what everybody down 60 points down. And before he was even know he was never even closing that gap excuse it

was closing but it's always been it's always been the more than 60 it was in the double digits maybe 14 but not that far. But again when we look at polling who are they polling well who are they poll. Exactly. A lot of people may be familiar with the work of the poet Amiri Baraka who used to be known as Norah Jones which you may not know is that he is now the poet laureate of the state of New Jersey and is characteristically some would say in the middle of controversy even as we speak. He wrote a poem some time ago after 9/11 in which one of the references in that poem is how according to him 4000 Israelis knew to stay home in advance from the World Trade Center that day. That rumor had been circulating before it has generally been debunked but has but it has drawn attention once again to Amiri Baraka. The impression I get that he kind of likes this attention. Well I find it very interesting because he is a poet and there was poetic license. And it is rumored that it's been generating from the day

after 9/11 it has been going on through the Internet. You've heard it in every neck of the woods and yes most people are saying this is not the case but it is something that has been talked about. So it's nothing new it's nothing that he created. It's something that he yes he is repeating. That is one of the urban folklore so to speak. He has some some bad facts in the poem but it's not rocket science it's not brain surgery. His music is more deep. Are you. Are you putting down points. No I mean I'm defending him as well. I think it's as important as rocket science has an artistic license. I mean he's got the blues people a tone that is really representative of the blues music and its contribution to American society I think nobody argues with Amiri Baraka he's a snapshot of his heart. Nobody he deserves to remain as poor as as poet laureate. And he wrote a bad song. Oh not a bad pun but nobody argues with the structure of my right. I mean is that subjective. It all depends on not only does he have a responsibility this is a field that I really

don't want you but as a result of what you're going to say I don't know how much you allow me to do. But does he ever write How about that to say to perpetuate something. Does he actually think it's true that 4000 Israelis is proven not to be true. There were Israelis who died there. Why. Why should he perpetuate something that is untrue. Well I think that I wouldn't say that he should lose his job because I don't think that's a determination because of one point. But why does he include something that we have not said about Amiri Baraka is that what he has achieved most of his fame as a poet is also well known as a radical political story. If you get Amiri Baraka you get the whole package you get the point and you get the radical political news you do. I want to ask for information sake that isn't just the as you address the accuracy of that and then tell me why you include something if you don't believe me. Will say it was written in the passion of the moment. And so it was written then and so why doesn't the times editorial what it

shows is that he's he's incorrect on his facts he should be reprimanded for saying it but do not prevent him from speaking because you know this is what you are getting when you got Amiri Baraka to be your poet laureate. But he denounced him for the Federal Reserve and Howard. He's a proud alumnus of Howard University to make me kind of wanted to go to the situation in Africa because we don't have jury things with us every week here and we've been reading a great deal about the coup and the counter called in Cote d'Ivoire or Ivory Coast. What's the latest there who's in charge. Well I think that different people are in charge of different parts of the country which is what happens very often in a situation of a coup. The government is certainly in charge still in Abidjan the major city the commercial capital the rebels who took who began to make problems about 12 days ago are in charge of a couple of major cities in the south. You know the the problem with that Cote d'Ivoire is that it's a very sad situation for West Africa because there have been a

couple of points of stability in West Africa throughout all the turmoil that has been going on there over the past 20 years or more. And and for was it was a completely stable place. And and really a little jewel until about three years ago in 1999 when the first of these coups began. This latest coup is this is sort of a result it's a chain thing as a result of the original one there was a coup there was an election. Everybody didn't believe it was a fair election. There's a there's a military there's a segment of the military now that's not very happy with the government. And as it turns out after they began the coup there were a lot of people who have been supporting that side with the military. It's still up in the air. Still if there's good guys and bad guys they are going to fight. It's hard to do. There is there is a government that it's has been an accepted government for for some time. And and and this is this is a coup that has been a challenge that government and it's not a government that's been particularly abusive or horrible.

And one of the things we did here and this might be a saving grace is that something like this is going to cease fire. Is that the rebel the military have not been really abusing civilians in the way in situations like this in the past. Rebel military groups have been accused of abusing civilians. The other thing we're not reading a lot about is the new economic development policy that is being pushed by the South African President Thabo Mbeki. Tell us a little bit about what's going on. I never had. That is a wonderful initiative. The idea of NEPAD is a wonderful initiative. The whole idea the whole concept is that African leaders take responsibility for both African development and Africa and observance of human rights and not depend on the West to enforce nothing on the West to enforce sort of human rights in Africa. The problem is that it becomes very difficult for them to do it in the face of Robert Mugabe and in Zimbabwe allowing his thugs to kill farmers because they legitimately that they legitimately are are on farms that they got illegitimately in. And through

history I mean they purchased the farms they didn't they didn't seize them in this area. But throughout history they have attained too much disproportionate amount of the land in Zimbabwe. That is true. That is clear. But but but people have been killed in the last last couple of years and they've been killed by thugs that have that have been encouraged by the government. And the position that this puts people like tabel Mbeki the president of South Africa more or less against Obasanjo the president of Nigeria who is saying this is a new Africa and we will develop it and we will push for human rights as the West then says well you can't control Robert McAfee. I'm afraid that's all the time we have. Thank you all for joining us and we didn't get the opportunity to speak about the District of Columbia budget because Mark Plotkin can't discuss it in 20 minutes or less and we don't have time when we come back. Asthma and the African-American population. We'll be right back. Come.

Back there was supposed to be a program in place that would lead to the reduction of the incidence of asthma among African-Americans. What happened to it. Some progress but not enough years. Evening exchange special Health Correspondent George Strait. Jessica Smoot has learned how to catch a ball too often this five year old has trouble catching something else her breath. She had. Breathing problems where she would stop breathing. For a few seconds. Jessica is part of an asthma epidemic in this country 18 million Americans suffer with it more than five million are children. In fact asthma is the most common chronic disease among children and the number one reason for a child to be hospitalized. Yet getting a proper diagnosis can be difficult. Jessica's mom experience is typical. I would take it to the hospital or a doctor's appointment they would say it's all normal but it didn't seem normal to me because none of my other children had those problems

and had to be terribly upsetting upset. It was I was really confused because they didn't think it was anything in particular. They say well one time he said it was a bronchial problem. They name a number of things but they would never say much. And I had no experience with asthma so I wasn't sure myself. Asthma is a growing problem for adults as well. My eyes sting and burn my nose and burning. But the worst part is not feeling like you can breathe. Brenda Boudreau is like more than 10 million other adults as matics simple everyday things like going outside often means having to cover your nose and mouth to filter out the pollen and other allergens that can trigger an attack. Every perfume. Every chemical. Can adversely impact you so you may have left her home. OK. But by the time you get to your transfer point you are either wheezing or going into some form of allergic response.

Right. So what is asthma. That was the Dr. Elena Reese. His brand is Dr. Asmaa has a little bit like love. Everybody knows what it is but it's hard to define it but it is an inflammatory condition in the lungs and it's important to note that it's inflammatory. Because a lot of people think of asthma that somewhere in their head people are putting on the airways become congested and blocked off so to speak so that air doesn't move very well through those airways and it it's do because of contraction of muscles around the airways it tends to close up those airways. And also there's swelling of the walls of the airways. Dr. Floyd Malveaux is dean of the Howard University Medical School and an asthma expert. That's a problem that is not only big but it's a problem that has worsened and especially over the last 20 years we've seen worsening in terms of the numbers of people who develop asthma. Now this verity of the disease the

emergency room visits the hospitalizations all of those things have actually gotten worse. The incidence of admissions and deaths from asthma is much higher here in the District of Columbia than it is in the suburbs. African-Americans are three to four times more likely to be hospitalized for asthma than whites. And four to six times more likely to die from asthma. Poverty is only one reason. It's also a function of not having good access to primary care physicians who will then give the best level of care. Many pediatricians are afraid of using good medications and therefore they use emergency type medications very effectively but they don't give the long lasting good asthma medications that they should. Too many doctors treat asthma episodically instead of managing it as a chronic condition with asthma reaching crisis proportions among African-Americans. Family doctors at Howard University created a new treatment paradigm.

They teamed patients with asthma specialists and asthma counselors to provide a coordinated attack on the disease to shake it up first and then you put it right. Trained counselors like Elinor Thornton teach patients how to use instruments such as a peak flow meter which measures lung capacity. Now if you just listen to what I tell you to do OK as well as teaching them how to avoid allergens in their environment. The doctors primarily monitor the patient's symptoms and compliance with their medical regimen. Also they oversee the administration of allergy shots. And the doctors are there to answer questions. It certainly is our feeling that children with asthma should be able to do everything that other children are doing. Jessica Smoots mom is trying to decide whether allergy shots are right for her five year old children who really outgrow their asthma or the ones who get their shots. It's conversation that treats the child's asthma by easing the anxiety of

her mother. They taught me how to use an inhaler. They taught me about the medicines that she's on and. Educated me about that. So I would be armed with this information any time I am faced with another physician that would you know try to dispute anything I had to say for Brenda Boudreau. Counselors showed her the kind of air filter to bomb the proper air conditioner to use that even helped her buy the right kind of paint for her was very semi-gloss paint on this wall. Now a lot of people don't like shopping but the reason it's on the wall is because I can clean it I can clean the ambient dust settles on everything off of the wall. And once a month the asthma team in Howard meets to review the project's results. We have noted at least a 50 percent reduction in symptoms in nighttime symptoms coughing at night waking up at night with asthma symptoms ability to play. So we've been able to actually realize at least a 50 percent reduction in

symptoms. Just use an asthma counselor along with these. These specialists care that we give here. Eleanor Thorne even has an idea on how to expand the operation. Elliotts talking about taking out my counseling to another level. It's going to be mobile counseling is going to be. The start of it that's where you want it to go. You. Have counseling. That's the goal here is to allow patients like Jessica Smoot and their families to live with asthma not in spite of it. We're pleased to have George Strait join us now. Good to see you George secret. And it's a special pleasure to welcome Dr. Floyd Malveaux dean of the Howard University College of Medicine. Dr. Malveaux good to see you. Good to see you. We know that Howard University is a traditional African American institution tends to focus on problems of health as they relate to African-Americans. But I was frankly surprised by the rise in the incidence of asthma generally and it's dramatic

and deadly rise among African-Americans. When did you begin to observe that. Actually we started to observe that about 20 years ago. That's when we started to notice the increase in the number of asthma deaths in this country. And then when we looked at it even closer the asthma deaths of course increased for for everyone the entire population. But when we looked at it closer it increased disproportionately at a faster rate for African-Americans. Dr. MALVEAUX it seems as though there's a problem in getting good diagnosis for everyone as well but especially for African-Americans. Why is that. Is it because this is such a specialized disease that general practitioners general pediatricians don't just don't recognize the symptoms. No. It's under diagnosed. I agree with you. And there was some stigma associated with this disease. I think in the past so that doctors were really not making the diagnosis and were reluctant to make the diagnosis. So at

that time they were calling it many other things. Bronchitis and so on. So they just did not want to label the kids with with the diagnosis of asthma. We as a nation boast of having the best medical care system on the entire planet. Why is asthma therefore getting worse. Well I wish we had the answer to that. I think there are reasons of course. When we look at certain segments of the population it is clearly worsening in some segments of our population. My among African-Americans and minorities in general I mean Hispanic populations as well. I have seen an increase in the number of hospitalizations and the number of deaths from asthma. I think a lot of it has to do with environmental issues. We have seen of course reports from the Institute of Medicine that talks about the inequities of health care the delivery of health care. I think that plays into it the limited access to specialists and so on. So I think there are many many factors involved.

The comprehensive approach is being used here. Howard is it a national model do you think. What are some of the. So I know that it hasn't been easy to sort of get this in place what are some of the hurdles that you've had. Well let me tell you about the model. I mean we use an asthma counselor and the asthma counselor really compliments what the physician does. A physician certainly can't do everything and certainly cannot spend the time especially in the way healthcare is practiced today. We do six minutes. Absolutely. Very little education occurs in six minutes and with a complicated disease like asthma you need a great deal more time really talk about the issues the environment the medications and so on. So an asthma counselor a person who can really relate to that family talk about the medications. Talk about the need to have visits to the physician and so on is very very important. And that started out of a study that we participated in. It was called the it was supported by the National Institutes of Health and we had Howard was one of eight centers around the country

that participated in a National Co-operative city asthma study and we used the model as a consulate model in that particular study and it worked. We were able to reduce hospitalizations emergency room visits and so on. And by doing that then it's a logical step that obviously we would employ that type of methodology in managing a disease such as asthma legitimately able to do it. Mersch in the end what are some of the hurdles that have to be overcome to deal with new customers or expensive I guess. They are expensive and you've just I think identified the major hurdle. We don't get reimbursed up for those services actually. And so the insurance companies would not reimburse us. But on the other hand HMO has picked up on picked up on this very readily because they recognize if you can keep an individual out of the emergency room and out of the hospital you've obviously saved a lot of money. So in fact now they have picked up on it and they're using asthma counselors.

A lot of people looking at this might be saying OK we don't have asthma counselors but what can I do to protect my family. Is there anything that I can do to help my family. Not all members of my family not get asthma or from exacerbating this problem that already exists. Well you know the ironic thing is that we know more about this disease today than we've ever known in our history of medicine. But at the same time and we have the best medications said we ever had available but at the same time we've seen this rise in hospitalization deaths and so on. I think what there are ways in which we can prevent asthma symptoms there are environmental things that we can do. And people have to be educated about it. And one of the things that an asthma counselor does by the way is the asthma counselor empowers that individual. So when that person now goes to the physician's office will now ask for the appropriate medications the anti-inflammatory medications that are needed to control this disease. There are two or three things that you could tell someone who is watching someone

who suffers from asthma or someone who is a friend or a family member who suffers from that. So they could argue with the care that they're getting were because they're not getting remember. What are the two or three things that you could let someone know so that they could take that home and then take a look into this meal. Great. Well first of all I think that every asthmatic can live a normal life. This is a controllable disease. It's not a treatable disease. So what are the things that they can do. Well if they are able to sleep through the night without waking up without having coughing or wheezing during the night then I think that's very important. They want to make sure that they are on anti inflammatory drugs drugs that prevent the development of asthma symptoms. Very very important. And I don't expect patients to know specifically what those drugs are but they need to be asking those questions. Am I on that type of drug that is going to prevent me from having an asthma attack. That's very very

important. I think they need to be educated in terms of what makes their asthma worse. People are allergic to certain types of things that will make their hands my worse. But clearly things like tobacco smoke being exposed to tobacco smoke. You cannot certainly control your asthma. And in that type of environment. So they can control many many things within their environment and reduce their symptoms. Are there other environmental factors you know there are those among us who are very suspicious of exhaust emissions for instance people who feel that the kind of industrial activity that goes on in certain parts of the country all of factors are those environmental factors. Those are very important factors to I I'm I'm an adviser actually to a group at the University of Michigan that is looking at the effective diesel fumes on asthmatic patients. And one of the things that they notice as the trucks come across from Canada into into Detroit

for example there is a place where the trucks have to stop at a traffic signal and it's in a in a minority neighborhood and near a school. And guess what the asthma symptoms are much worse among those kids and those families in addition to the environmental care because other genetic factors as well as it runs in families asthma is something that runs in families and is usually an association between hay fever asthma and eczema. So you can usually find in the family of an asthmatic someone else who either has asthma hay fever or has eczema. So there is a genetic predisposition in addition to using the kinds of medications that can help one to control asthma especially if you have as a young child. Is there a point at which you quote unquote get over it completely and don't have to be medicated anymore. There is that point and in fact about I would say 80 to 90 percent of individuals who develop asthma will develop it as a child in the first

place. And about half of those who do develop asthma will lose their asthma symptoms sometime during puberty. So hormones play a role here but many of those individuals will regain their symptoms later in life. So I don't think your ass ever goes away completely. It doesn't really. Your symptoms may subside for a period of time but it never really goes away. George Strait when you undertook doing this report were there any surprises along the way. I for one was surprised at how the incidence of asthma has risen so dramatic. You know it's one of these diseases that you know is around you but you just don't know the extent to which it is so prevalent. As a kid I had asthma too and some were miraculously were in the sixth grade I quote unquote grew out of it. So the new statistics 18 million Americans and so many African-Americans it's just it's astounding. We're very thankful that you did this report and Dr. Malveaux were very glad that you were able to join us. Thank you. You'll be seeing more of George straight here on evening. Thanks to all of our panelists for joining us most of all.

Thanks to you for watching. Stay well. Goodnight