tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News June 29, 2013 11:00am-11:31am PDT
irst place. we've surcome a long way. ♪ [ le announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn. the obama administration paces another setback as russia refuses to return edward snowden. how should the u.s. respond to this latest diplomatic embarrassment? landmark rulings from the supreme court on voting rights, racial preferences and more. we will break down what the high court's decisions means for race in america. a key senate vote puts immigration reform in the hands of the house and now it face as huge uphill battle. will lawmakers get onboard with the overhaul?
the hunt for nsa leaker snowden. snowden apparently still in a moscow airport where president obama says he shouldn't have to call president putin to get him back. >> i'm not going to have one case of a suspect who we are trying to extradite suddenly being elevated to the point where i have to start doing wheeling and dealing and trading on a whole host of other issues. simply to get a guy consider dieted so he can face the justice system in the united states. >> how will this affect the administration and the united states' influence abroad? joining the panel, "wall street journal" lump mist and deputy editor dan henning her. foreign affairs columnist brad stevens.
washington columnist kim strauss. so, brett, president says that hey, just a 29-year-old hacker. i shun have -- shouldn't have to scramble. >> keith alexander says that snowden has done irreparable damage to zblerns mop the only one. others, too. >> which is -- >> i would -- i would trust general alexander. he is the guy that knows what sort of secrets snowden had in his possible ex-and secrets the chinese and hong kong or russians, the airport in moscow, could easily have downloaded. >> certainly download. >> almost certainly. this is what these guys do for a living. we would like to borrow your computer for brief inspection. we will give it back to you only. that kind of thing. this is a major breach of american security whether snowden meant to hand over these documents inadvertently or advertently the russia than and chinese now have access to the national security agency in a way they didn't have before. terrorists can begin to
understand already how it is that we go -- look at patterns of communications and see how they may or may not be seeking. the president saying this is month big deal is a big deal. >> kim, why is -- the president politically downplay this when justice department is -- brought charge against snowden? >> well, i think it goes to that question you had in the opening was -- american influence. i think the president is worried their influence is such that they may not be able to get snowden back. and so if they turn this into a very high profile issue and lose, then they look back. element of incompetence, too. a strong tendency to rely on this and finding the right papers. the president hinted. this should be routine. you do have to pick up the phone
on things like this. you have to exert pressure because -- just going through the motions is not going to get you what you want. >> reemphasize what kim said. that statement we listened to from barack obama was unpresidential. withdrew go out and say i'm not going to deal with some guy because it is not the president's job to say that in public. and that sort of unpresidential behavior is watched closely by leaders all over the world and if they see as he is suggesting is not up to the job it gives them an incentive to move forward and take risks that we wouldn't want them to be take. >> this is the rodney dangerfield president. i get no respect. which is funny given that this is the president who is supposed to restore respect. >> with dangerfield he did he served respect. this president -- your point he does not deserve respect because he does not seek. >> it also because there are no consequences to confronting the
united states with challenging the united states. you know, in india, john kerry said there would be consequen consequences. didn't specific what they would be for the russians or chinese. the president is dialing even that back. he should be on the phone talking to his good friend slal mere a you and your billionaire friends want visas to the united states, access to the west, if you don't hand over snowden quickly there will be restrictions on that. >> that's the leverage we have. >> right. >> they have to say, look, there will be consequences and a, b, c, d and will be -- not necessarily regarding snowden but other things like visas. >> that's right. left to congress. this is a great joke here. to make some of those threats. with regard to ecuador, for instance, where snowden is supposedly looking to phonily ask for asylum. members of congress coming out and saying, look, ecuador, free trade agreement with you that's up for renewal next month. and you better think hard before you give this guy sanctuary because we are going to block access to your goods.
you know. the president has not been the one making this, outlining the issues. >> there's some -- evidence that snowden may have been working with some other people before he took the job at the consultant booze allen and had so much access to the nsa files. he was working with apparently with the reporter glen greenwald before he took the job. what -- do we know everything yet about the store write? is there a lot more to come? >> there is a lot more to come, paul. the idea one guy could have pulled all of this off, he had help in hong kong. he had safe houses there. regardless of how the president once characterized it, the fbi and national intelligence has got to chase this guy down and pursue this story until we get him back. get the full story out it is not the case of a whistle blower. he went to the nsa looking to leak information. >> right. how quick -- a person of that experience have access to had a stuff, so much across the board? we need to get to the bottom of this. when we come back a big week for
the supreme court, includinging a surprising ruling that dramatically shifts the debate on race in america. hey linda! what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support gularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. starts with freshly-made pasta, and 100% real cheddar cheese. but what makes stouffer's mac n' cheese best of all. that moment you enjoy it at home. stouffer's. made with care for you or your family.
... you thought wrong. seize the summer with up to 50% off hotels at travelocity. when he said "everyone gets health insurance"? but now congress says 7 million americans will lose their health insurance and your insurance rates could increase by 200%. some health plans even get hit with a 40% tax and over $700 billion in medicare cuts.
so now we're really sad. but you can be happy again by getting the obamacare survival guide. it's already and over 500,000 americans have gotten a copy. newsmax says it's "the best guide" to the new law. you can get your copy at obamacare911.com. it gives you the tips, strategies and loopholes you need to know. get your copy of the obamacare survival guide at stores everywhere for $19.95. or get the internet only offer of just $4.95 and save $15. go to obamacare911.com to claim your copy now.
the u.s. supreme court redefines civil rights and equality in america this week. series of landmark rulings and one controversial position struck down, key part of the voting rights act of 1965. one descejustice said the demol of the law. joined by jason riley and senior editorial page writer collin levy. come in, let's take on the voting rights decision first. lot of liberals saying that this is going to send us back to the era before the voting rights act before jim crowe where black voters were disenfranchised. how do you see this decision? >> i think it is really for to
know this is not a radical decision. what the court said here basically was that the constitution requires that all states be treated equally except in extraordinary circumstances. those extraordinary circumstances existed in 1965 when the voting rights act was passed because there was rampant and extreme discrimination in certain states. those conditions no longer exist. and as chief justice roberts wrote current burdens on the state immediate to be justified by current needs. they said that take the formula that you had in 1965 and reconsider it 37 p you still think it is for you can do it but you need to come up with a new formula which they get the extra scrutiny. >> robert signaled in 2009 and earlier cases invite congress to rewrite that formula. it didn't. >> and -- >> that's right. that was an 8-1 decision. >> right. in roberts -- the democratic -- liberal justices who supported that signaling even though they opposed this decision.
>> the president's view on this, his reaction is -- decision is disappointment. very telling. telling of the view. first black president pretending like nothing changed on the voting rights front in the past 40 years. just a ridiculous notion to begin with. it speaks to why the left likes this provision. they don't like it because they are worried about voter access or black voter access. black voter registration in the south exceeds what it is in other regions. last election, black voter turnout exceeded white voter turnout. >> hard to make the case. >> they like this law what it can do, racial jergerrymanderin blocking voter i.d. laws. s that why they are so wedded to the provision. nothing to do with ballot access which was the original intent of the voting rights act. >> huge success on that. >> let's move on to the fisher case where there was a more
ambiguous ruling on racial preferencing. the court said in education basically said texas and the lower courts must read this and their formula for admitting students and not make race as prominent a feature but -- victory for the plaintiff, fisher. it did not declare racial preferences were unconstitutional. >> well, it said that they have to make justice kennedy argued, the previous decision which said the diversity was a -- was -- >> justification. >> justification. and they had to -- test called strict scrutiny and what -- kennedy said in this case was that you cannot just gesture in the direction of scrutiny and say oh, we have tried to have a race neutral program. it doesn't work. we are going to go to a race based program. you have to prove it and have to do analysis and there is a lot of legal analysis going on about this case by people that have written about it, edward blum
who was on -- fisher's legal team. they think that a lot of these universities are really going to have a difficult time passing justice kennedy's test, there will be a move away, less they face a way of litigation of this course not universal view, though. a lot of people think, well, justice kennedy, 76 years old, swing vote on these cases. she missed -- hit one of the last opportunities to really make a firm clear deck la ration on racial preference. >> racial preferences constitutional. that's the question we immediate decided. justice thomas gets this. pointed this out. the problem here -- with the baby steps is the harm that racial preferences are doing to the intended beneficiaries. we have -- lot of new remember search showing that -- it is hurting black graduation rates and kids sent to school with -- less likely to graduate instead of going school so they can succeed.
it hurts the number of black scientists and doctors that we get because kids are going at the field where it is easier to graduate than -- because of the schools they are going to. there's actual harm being done and it is not just about the equal protection and so forth. intended beneficiaries of these policies are actually being damaged by the policies. >> i appreciate -- yeah. i appreciate jason's point. that's absolutely true in the larger sense. i really think that you can't minimize the fact that you have seven justices signing on to the opinion that says that racial preferences are extremely disfavored and that the united states are entitled to known deference in how they enact the policies in terms of, you know, trying to put through race based policies when race mutual ones are available. that's a big deal and signals where the force will go. >> we have to mention here the gay marriage rulings which are obviously landmarks. as well. what does this tell us about the future of gay marriage in america? >> well, i think it tells us
that the effort to -- making it valid in the united states will continue but the battle will be joined in the state there and rather than you cannot get redress in the congress or federal government. that will not work. the battle will continue. >> we will see where that ends up. coming up next the senate passes historic immigration legislation. will hurdles in the house bring the reform in the house to a halt? when you experience something great, you want to share it. with everyone. that's why more customers recommend verizon, america's largest 4g lte network.
[ susan ] i hate that the reason we're always stopping is because i have to go to the bathroom. and when we're sitting in traffic, i worry i'll have an accident. be right back. so today, i'm finally going to talk to my doctor about overactive bladder symptoms. [ female announcer ] know that gotta go feeling? ask your doctor about prescription toviaz. one toviaz pill a day significantly reduces sudden urges and accidents for 24 hours. if you have certain stomach problems or glaucoma, or cannot empty your bladder, you should not take toviaz. get emergency medical help right away if your face, lips, throat or tongue swells. toviaz can cause blurred vision, dizziness, drowsiness, and dreased sweating. do not drive, operate machinery or do unsafe tasks until you know how toviaz affects you. the most common side effects are dry mouth and constipation. [ susan ] today, i'm visiting my son without visiting every single bathroom. [ female announcer ] today, talk to your doctor about toviaz.
what are the prospects for this legislation going forward? >> on balance i would say it isn't s an improvement because i think the major problem with the current system is two-fold. too few legal ways and expands that and gives people more legal ways than other countries which is what drives illegal immigration to begin with. secondly, does something about the huge illegal population we have already have here in you. puts them on path to citizenship. if they need certain requirements. i would say those are the two major problems we have today. this bill takes a step in the right direction to address both. >> isn't the 1,200-page bill, though, by some definition played? mine, just -- write this -- omnibus legislation and it is so much in there that isn't even related to immigration. what's the -- >> right now it is too complex.
we to get over that. it is not going on ange. as jason is suggesting, it does in principle create better system, high-tech workers. >> automatic green cards for science and technology. graduates from foreign countries. can you grad -- if you graduate from stanford and then you are made a job offer you are it, you can stay in this country rather than return to india and china and start a company there. >> i think you resolve the grinding problem to the center of each of those subjects we should probably move forward and get the bill passed and let the americans marketplace sort through it. won't be easy. i think we have enough space in the market to consume they will be able to get i across the goal line. >> what about if the prospects in the house? speaker boehner is saying he is not going to pass anything that does not have a majority of republicans in support. republicans in support. that's a pretty tall barrier given a fact some republicans simply will not vote for had path to citizenship jason describes.
>> yes. that line he put on the there could really -- here is the reason why. all along, the house has been saying this will in pieces p will not take up the senate bill and not pass an overwhelming -- the reason why -- >> that makes sense it does. it does. it is because -- boehner knows that he has certain i coalitions of republicans and support some of the free market aspects of the bill. for instance, guest worker programs. the problem he always had is were he can get a majority of the majority to support a path way to citizenship. that's a big problem, too. because if the republicans think that they can pass a -- sort of halfway immigration bill out or pieces of it that does not include that half pathway, and the president may find they are cheating themselves. >> dan says pass and it then -- let the market sort it out. jason, what's your advice to the house? >> i would keep in mind there are a bunch of democrats out there that want this issue and think that demographics are on their side and time is on their side. the --
>> they don't want to as if i will exactly. not only next n the midterm but going forward. democrats would love to be able to paint republicans as anti-hispanic. a lot of democrats are indifferent as to whether this goes forward. >> yours would be to pass it but how you would improve it? ? one way to improve it would be to expand the -- legal ways to come. particularly for low-skilled workers. think think that's a big deal. visas are not adequate for agriculture and that's -- becomes an incentive for more i will deal exactly. that's the problem with 1986 people talk about. they talk about the amnesty provision. the real problem with this is labor flows going forward, getting u.s. employers access to the labor they need going forward. 86 didn't do that. they shouldn't make the same mistake again. >> we are talking about 11 million illegals and can't become citizens until 10 13shgs years from now. i think just a fraction of those
11 million are actually going to waited that long to become citizens. problem is overstated. republicans hud fight it out in the political marketplace over the next decade. they will not be voting for ten years. >> kim, what do you think the real prospects are? just -- thinking about it, in cold-blooded fashion. >> i think that -- from a very cold-blooded fashion, i think that the most likely thing that you see at least looking at things right now is that you see the house pass out a border security element because that's, of course, something republicans are obsessed on. you also see them potentially doing something on some of the guest working programs. less certainty about, for instance, the pathway to citizenship and some of the other reforms that are in the senate bill. >> interest sounds like you think this could go down a notch. >> i think that the republicans are -- leadership at least understands that it would not be to their favor not pass anything. i think that there are going -- they are going to try to pass a product.
the question is will it add up to a comprehensive bill that the president signs? that's -- i think the real issue. >> republicans are not, then they use their power in the house to improve this bill. increase the avenues for legal immigration, worry bless harassing the business and letting big labor get in. we have to take one more break. our hits and misses of the week.
>> kim, first to you. a serious miss for president obama for his latest attack on the economy in terms it came in the form of his sweeping climate proposal for this week. new fuel efficiency standards for cars, new money for solyndra products. if the president put half as much passion in things that
would help all of those out of work the economy may be get something where. >> another serious miss. susan rice. outgoing united states ambassador to the united nations who in leaving the u.n. denounced that body for which he said was the disgrace of its performance on syria. saying history would judge the u.n. harshly. it is funny she should denounce the u.n. for doing nothing about syria but it is her own administration that has been leading from behind and doing absolutely nothing and stop the blood letting. >> all right. collin? >> i have a miss, too. levin, democrat on the house ways and means committee suggested that hey, there was no political -- when the u.s. tried to slow roll hundreds of conservative groups because more progressives appeared on one lookout list and some liberal groups may have been agreeing to democrats are trying to make this story go away and it is not really work. >> progressives were not as
targeted as the others. >> all right. that's it for this week's show. thanks to my panel and all of you for watching and be sure to follow us on twitter. hope to see you right here next week. i'm not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker. >> the president displayed his hands-off attitude regarding edward snowden, a man wanted for espionage charged with stealing u.s. secrets. the story getting major media attention but is it enough? >> why shouldn't, mr. greenwald, be charged with a crime? >> media shots take shots at greenwald. is he a pair target for the press? or is there an agenda at work? monumental decision by the supreme court. >> big maas from the highest court. media reacts to key decisions on voting rights and then