. . >> jamie: this week on the journal editorial report. pitting republicans against republicans as the choice becomes clear. looking back to 2010 or ahead to 2012. plus, with unemployment still stubbornly high, ge's jeff immelt tells fellow business leaders to stop whining about government and start hiring. is it really that simple? >> more and more states are passing voter i.d. laws, sparking cries of jim crowe from the left. bill clinton is the latest to play the race card. we'll tell you what he he he said. said. welcome to the journal,

editorial report. i'm paul gigot. as the debt dragged on this week, a rift occurred within the republican party. it's 2010 against 2012. house republicans owe their majority to the 2010 elections and some are pushing for a tea party style showdown with president obama over taxes and spending and a possible government default, but looking ahead to 2012, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell floated a plan that gives president obama a unilateral authority to raise the debt ceiling and his spending mess. i refuse to help barometer to get reelection marching republicans into a position where we have co-ownership of a bad economy. a default is not better today than when newt begin fritch tried it in 1995 is that it's a brand and the president an opportunity to blame

republicans for a bad economy dan henninger, james freeman and kim strassel. kim, a lot of conservatives are saying that mitch mcconnell is selling out their principles and what's he really up to? >> well, what mitch mcconnell is actually up to is saying, look, we took a big bet on this debt ceiling thing opening to use the mefrj to make the president agree to spending cuts. what house republicans want. it's not working. everything he wants meager spending reform, wants higher taxes or he's saying he seems to be willing to go all the the way to shut down default. lets he' step back and let him take control of this and consequences of the action of not dealing with real spending reform. >> paul: dan, sellout. is this giving up too easily as a lot of right wing,are saying?

>> no, i don't think so, paul. i think they overestimated their ability to leverage the president into big spending cuts. somehow, it seems to me, behind all this have is a misunderstanding about the power of the presidency, it is vast and getting into a big fight over big spending cuts and let's make it clear here, we're talking about reforming entitlement spending, medicare, medicaid spending to try to get into a debt limit negotiation and force the president of the united states to reform medicare if he doesn't want to i think is fruitless and they discovered that and now they're trying to climb back down from the mountain they climbed up on and i think that mitch mcconnell has given them an opening to get past a bad situation. >> do we have a dissent here, james? are they giving up too easily? that's the core of of the argument. now what, let's take this, the conservatives saying let's take this right up to the brink and obama will be seen for, will get the blame for a default. he'll get the blame for a credit rating downgrade of

u.s. debt from triple-a to double a if that happens and then we can drive the reform. that's what they think could happen if only republicans had the nerve to take it that far. >> there's a little time here and we could see a few more cards. republicans hoping they get close to the 2 trillion in cuts they want out of the senate. the hope is that senate democrats up for reelection, clare mccaskill, missouri, and ben-- they're probably going to lose anyway, but definitely going to lose if there's no reform in this and they have to end up having to vote for it. >> that strategy is smart for taking-- >> it is smart. believe it or not, negotiating with harry reid and the democrats as opposed to the president is a good move here. president has been strengthened in the fact that the economy has gotten worse and he's totally to blame for it. the down side of of the big mess that everyone shaurs the blame is now less than it used to be. in strange way his negotiating

position was strengthened. he's got a deficit cutting plan and the republicans do. the only plan he's put in writing that they could score washings plus 3 trillion dollars in debt and deficits over the next decade. he's making the problem worse in what he proposed. >> do you think that speaker john boehner basically agrees that this is the exit strategy if it comes to this and can't say so publicly yet? >> he he may well, because again, he has so many of these members who are demanding that there be some giant, you know, again, the whole tea party crowd, they were going to go in there and they were going to force the president to do this. now, john boehner is not dumb. he knows that you can't run washington from one house of congress. and so, there's going to have to be a way out of this, but he has got to-- his big challenge has always

been how do you manage all of these different factors and a huge number of say we're not going to vote for anything unless it's big and he has to convince them. >> the other thing, the balanced amendment to the constitution. and a lot said we won't vote for it without the balanced budget. is that a plausible strategy? >> i don't think so. let me say i have a lot of sympathy with the forces behind the balanced budget amendment or even the tea party people who would like to get some leverage for the president. spending is out of control. but the idea that a device like the balanced budget mechanism is automatically going to solve the problems and the problem is, as i just said, entitlements, medicare, medicaid and now the obama health care law, that's going to have to be reformed by congress and the only way the republican are ever going to do it in a way that matters, that's significant. if they control the white house. the tea party should be out there in the country

organizing the country for the 2012 election, rather than thinking that a balanced budget amendment is going to bring them to the promised land. >> you understand the frustration, the tea party, the conservatives, they saw george w. bush spending, and barack obama sent it-- >> to the strats sphere. >> 25% gdp and then looking at mitt romney, is he going to-- the turn and spending is going to have to happen after 2012 in at all and pick somebody who is a spendser. >> and means that the debt referendum and spending, has to be in 2012 in that election and big reforms to 2013. even if we get 2 trillion in cuts, ten years right now and a lot of those may or may never happen. >> a lot are in the out years, out budget years, you have to have a president to do this. the other thing about the

balanced budget amendment. you cannot the get the votes for this in the senate. paul, you've got to have 60 for something like this. and if they tie it to the debt ceiling, they give a bunch of democrats the cover of saying, hey, i voted for a balanced budget amendment even though it's not going to pass in the end. >> paul: you can never go wrong in washington voting for something that fails. >> exactly. >> paul: can't be too cynical. ge's jeff immelt has a plan to put america back to work. telling companies to stop whining about government and start hiring. why didn't we think of that?

>> coming off last month's grim unemployment numbers, business and government leaders are hoping to jump start the economy in the second half of the year and general electric chairman and ceo jeff immelt has an idea. immelt who chairs president obama's council on jobs and competitiveness told his

colleagues at the u.s. chamber of commerce job summit this week to well, stop whining and start hiring. >> for the people that are part of the business sector, the people in this room and all of our colleagues, we have to stop complaining about government and get some action underway. there's just no excuse today for lack of leadership, so let's get with it. >> paul: all right. before we get to mr. immelt, james, our liberal columnist blinder this week called it a jobs emergency. do you agree? >> i do. i think the more people looked at the june employment report the worse it got. 9.2% very disappointing, but beyond that the number of people who just quit looking. if you go back into 2009, if that many people were still in the work force trying it work we'd be at 11% unemployment. you have to go back decades to find a similar percentage of people in the work force, labor participation rates. it's that bad. >> 6 million americans, 44% of

those unemployed, dan have been out of work for six months or more, unbelievable and the percentage of working population is lower than it was now, lower now than it was at theened of the recession, 2009. >> one of the things that happens when people are out of work that long, you have erosion of what economists call human capital, skills that people have that they bring to a job and i'll throw a bone to jeff immelt and the jobs council, and what they're recommending, a few good ideas. what america needs are skills relate today advanced manufacturing and health care, people with scientific skills and we are not training people adequately in our school systems to take those jobs. they prp more vocational, community college communities, to raise the level of skills. you can't graduate people who then perform the jobs that are available. >> the skills mismatch is

real, but the skills mismatch has been with us, particularly in an information economy, certainly with us in the 1990's and 2000. these are longer-run solutions. now, we have 9.2% unemployment. and what is the cause? why isn't the economy creating more new jobs? >> well, lack of incentives. and mr. immelt shaming people into hiring people is not going to solve it. there's a problem with our corporate tax rate and a problem with the regulatory burden that continues to be placed on american business. so, until his council is talking about real regulatory relieve and incentives to grow and invest, it's not going to go anywhere. >> what are the ideas the out of washington if there are new ideas or even old ideas recycled for doing something about unemployment now? >> you have things like the jobs council which mr. immelt sat on and came out with as

dan said a few ideas here or there and you're having discussions with debt talks, for instance, whether or not you couldn't have some sort of comprehensive tax reform. something the community has been urging. i would just add to go with james' point. one of the problems here is uncertainties and the debt talks are a perfect example of this. one of the reasons it was so important to pass extension of the bush tax cuts, so that businesses could plan and yet, four or five months on from that debate. we are already-- president obama put those, the potential of a huge new tax hike on companies, back out on the table and adding that uncertainty back again and that's playing into their lack of hiring as well. >> the extension of the payroll tax cuts seems to be the white house's for another year. it's a 2 percentage point cut in payroll taxes for workers this year and they want to extend it for another year. very expensive 120 billion dollars or so and it does add to the deficit. if it was going to work in 2011 wouldn't we see, more job creation now?

>> the more exciting opportunity that you hope would rise to the form of these discussions is repatriate tryings, allowing a tax cuts and the businesses can bring home all the cash they have overseas and that's the real potential game changer, but-- >> i don't know about that, james. even that would just be temporary. and-- >> well, i'm talking in the context of negotiations, and president obama here. >> a false claim, but i did the column this week and interviewed robert lucas who won the nobel prize for economics and he, in our sdugs discussion, got into the point. everything the obama administration is doing on taxes is temporary, the payroll tax cut, repatriopay tryings. and if you're an employer and you want someone to contribute value over 15 or 20 years. and a short-term tax fix is no incentive whatsoever for an employer under those

conditions. that's not the way that employers think about their hires. you have to have some consistency as kim was saying, over a long period of time in the tax code. >> paul: there's a lot of evidence if you cut corporate tax rates it helps real wages and helps employment. here is another idea. how about a five year moratorium on regulations? five years, no new regulations for five years, do you think that would help this. >> sounds reaganesque. >> paul: all right, thanks. when we come back jesse jackson calls it a modern equivalent of the pole tax and bill clinton warns jim crowe. wh find out next. ♪ achievement: plays well with others. ♪ achievement: loves getting its hands dirty. ♪ achievement: is ready for the world. that's why pnc created grow up great®, our 10-year, 100-million-dollar program committed to early education and helping achievement start young. pnc bank. for the achiever in you(sm).

i don't always have time to eat like i should. that's why i like glucerna shakes. they have slowly digestible carbs to help minimize blood sugar spikes, which can help lower a1c. [ ma announcer ] glucerna. helping people with diabetes find balance.

[ male announcer ] you don't makeby pressing a button.cken it takes a cook. we're kfc and we've got a certified cook in every restaurant freshly making the colonel's original recipe, today and every day. 11 herbs and spices, hand-breaded, hands down the world's best chicken. today is a kfc day. so bring home a real meal -- 10 pieces of that famous chicken, 3 large sides and 6 biscuits. enough real food to feed a family of four or more, just 20 bucks. today tastes so good. > >> you need i.d. for planes and trains, cash a check and

why not to vote? a voter i.d. law join alabama, south carolina, tennessee, texas and wisconsin, similar legislation is underconsideration in dozens of other states. and liberals are outraged. jesse jackson this week said south carolina's new law amounts to a modern day pole tax and last week, former president bill clinton told a group of young liberal act riss that it marks the return of jim crow. >> one of the most pervasive political movements going on outside washington today is the discipline, passioned determined effort of republican governors legislators to keep most of you from voting next week. there has never been in my lifetime, since we got rid of the pole tax and all the other jim crow burdens on voting, a

determined effort to limit the franchise that we see today. >> paul: for more i'm joined by opinion journal.com editor james toronto and editorial board member mary kissle. so our viewers understands, what does a voter i.d. law require. >> usually government issued i.d., a driver's license or passport or something like that. >> that's all, you have to show them you are who you say you are. >> that's right. if you don't have an i.d. rhode island passed a law last week we'll give you i.d. for free if you can prove you are who you say you are. >> give you an i.d. for free. >> paul: on the spot? >> if you bring a birth certificate and prove you are who you say you are. >> you don't have to have a driver's license, you need to show some sense, in some way that you're not somebody who-- you're not an imposter. >> or a british citizen.

>> canadian. >> okay. why are liberals so upset? >> because they think that voters who are less diligent about registration and are getting i.d. and so forth are more likely to vote democratic. >> paul: really, so, this is a straight partisan argument? >> basically, yeah, but of course they add this jim crow aspect? >> what's that about? obviously in the american political context, that's a i incendiary charge because voters were blocked, african-americans were disenfranchised. >> it was about total segregation, a notorious case involved segregated trains. you mentioned in the opening you need to show an i.d. to ride on amtrak, okay? no one has said this is discrimry, this is how you know this is-- >> no one said that requiring i.d. is racially discriminatory unless in

voting. >> paul: and you brought up, not a core of the old confederacy passing this law on bipartisan basis and link chasy, not a conservative, signing it. >> that's right, and you also had african-american democrats in rhode island supporting this very vocally. it's an odd thing to be against. there was a poll out just last month that said that some 75% of likely u.s. voters support voter i.d. and that's been consistent over many, many years, those kinds of results. >> so the claim is by a lot of the critics, said you know what, voter fraud is an invented program. it doesn't exist, it's a fantasy of conservatives. how big a problem is it? >> well, let's take the acorn scandal a voter registration fraud and if they had tried to go to the polls they would have had to show i.d. and couldn't have done that. >> acorn activists trying to generate voter turnout and we found out over time that a lot

of the vote they'res they tried to generate were made up names. >> that's right. but let me give you more specific example. last year, there was a state representative election in kansas city, missouri won by one vote. later we found out there were 50 smomali citizen thaz voted in had an election. and that would have changed if they had have voter i.d. why is this opposition, james, arising route now, politicalically. >> two reasons because republicans in the state legislation are in a position to pass this kind of legislation, many of these states. >> paul: okay. >> second, raising the specter of jim crow is a way of appealing to the racial fears of black voters and getting them to turn out for democrats. >> the supreme court has litigated it, they've ruled on whether these voter i.d. laws are unconstitutional. they found they were in fact constitutional. >> in a 6-3 decision. >> paul: 6-3.

>> upon by justice john paul stevens one of the most liberal justices. >> paul: and that found, was it the georgia law? i forget which law. >> indiana. >> paul: the indiana law, so basically they're saying that this was not an attempt to disenfranchise voters, it was an attempt to try to make elections more honest. >> right, and justice stevens, by the way, who was from chicago cited the experience of chicago as an example of why we need protection against voter fraud. >> vote early and vote often, the chicago motto. okay, we have to take one more break. when we come back, our hits and misses of the week. you noticed! these clothes are too big, so i'm donating them. how'd you do it? eating right, whole grain. [ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain tend to weigh less than those who don't. multigrain cheerios... five whole grains, 110 calories. toi switched to a complete0, multivitamin with more. only one a day women's 50+ advantage has ginkgo for memory and concentration, plus support for bone and breast health. a great addition to my routine.

[ female announcer ] one a day women's.

>> time now for our hits and misses of the week, mary. >> this may be a little can bit after controversial miss. i'm giving a miss to the india officials after the terrible triple bombing in mumbai this week. they've seen five terror attacks, since the mid '90s, serious ones and indian politicians did little more than to say they try to do better next week and the indian citizens need to expect more attacks in the neighborhoods because they're in a bad one. this doesn't inspire confidence. they don't just to fight the war on terror, but fight of ideas. . >> paul: james. >> a miss to the governor of minnesota they think to cut off the beer supplies. the company who make millers

and coors, were unable to get the licenses approved because the agency was closed. but the agency enforcing the licenses were open because it's essential. makes you wonder how essential the government is. >> i'm sure a lot of minnesotaens are saying that. >> a hit to mcdain's, a restaurant in pennsylvania, adults have the right to eat in peace and no one under six. some are saying it's violating kids rights. theres' something about my generation, and i'm liberating-- i'd love to go to a restaurant that banned kids, my own including. >> are you con fining the strassel clan now to applebees and mcdonald's now with na? >> i think we have lots