>> today on "face the nation", a near miracle as a jumbo jet crashes in san francisco and most on board survive. that as chaos in egypt royal it is middle east. what caused a boeing 777 to crash? at least two are dead but m 0 walked away. we'll talk to chairman of the national transportation safety board deborah hersman. inform cairo, celebrations were followed by more protests and violence. well have the latest from cbs' clarissa ward in cairo. then we'll ask senator john mccain what the turmoil in egypt means for u.s. foreign policy. and as congress comes back to town, the battle over immigration reform moves from the senate to the house. we will hear from two congressman-- republican mike mccaul of texas and democrat

javier becerra of california. then an. inauguration reform debate with janet murguia, the president of the national council of la raza and dan stein, president of the federation of american immigration reform. and we will analyze all of this news with david rohde of reuters amy walter of the cook political report, michael o'hanlon of the brookings institution and our own john dicker son. finally a look back on the 150th anniversary of the battle of gettysburg with scholar harold holzer. there's fireworks everywhere this independence day weekend and this is "face the nation." captioning sponsored by cbs from cbs news in washington, "face the nation" with bob schieffer. captioning sponsored by cbs >> garrett: good morning again. we start in san francisco where just before noon yesterday asian

that air flight 214, a boeing 777 with 307 passengers on board crashed as it was landing from seoul, south korea. two passengers died and more unanimous 100 are still in local hospitals. deborah hersman is the chair of the national transportation safety board and joins us from san francisco. deborah, you've recovered the flight data recorders, the so-called black boxes. what will you be looking at first? >> well s the black boxes are really important to our investigators. the cockpit voice recorder can give us insight into what's going on with the crew in the cockpit. the flight data recorders can give us insight into what's maping with the aircraft. so those are important for us to corroborate with the evidence we're collecting on scene and interviews, radar data, air traffic control, all of it. we put that together and it gives us a good picture of the accident sequence. >> garrett: one question has emerged so far. is it true that the glide path

landing system at the airport was off at the time of the crash? if so, could that have made a difference? what we do know is that there was a notice to air naen indicated that the glide slope was pout. the glide slope had been out since june. there was some construction at the airport, we understand. we'll be taking a loo into this to understand it. what's important to note is that there are a lot of tools available to pilots. the glide slope indicator is just one of those tools. there's information that's more primitive, things like lights that can tell you whether you're lined up too high or too low. then there's things that are more sophisticated like g.p.s., tools that are part of the aircraft that can help you come in on a glide slope. and so we'll be looking at all of this. we'll be looking at what the crew might have been using to get in and we'll want to understand all of that. but everything's on the table right now. we're looking at it all. >> garrett: you mention too old low and too slow.

are there any indications that the pilots were, in fact, on approach too low and too slow? >> i think it's a little early for us to be drawing conclusions. we want to establish the facts and threat facts guide us in our work. today will be our first full day on scene. we've got a lot of work to do. we're going to be working to corroborate all of this that information so we understand not just what happened but why it happened to so we can prevent something like this from occurring in the future. >> garrett: do you consider it a miracle or a near miracle that will so many people walked away from that crash? >> >> what i will tell you is there was significant damage on the aircraft. last night when we arrived we went out to look at it. you've seen the pictures of the burned fuselage, the damaged fuselage but inside the aircraft there's significant structural damage and so we certainly -- when we see that, we are very thankful that there weren't more fatalities and serious injuries. our hearts go out to those who've lost loved ones and to those in the hospital for their recovery. i will tell you this is a

survivable accident. we saw so many people walk away and what's important is for people to understand that airplane crashes, the majority of them, are survivable. >> garrett: deborah hearst man, very good words. chair of the national transportation safety board from san francisco. thank you so very much for joining us. >> thank you. >> garrett: we're now going to cairo from the latest from our own clarissa ward. she's been covering developments across egypt. chaotic ones at that. clarissa, the most basic question is who's in charge? have a distance it appears to be the military. what can we say about the military's attempts to fill key government posts? >> major, the military is almost certainly still in charge, though they are really trying to make it look like they are not. they hate the coup word. they want to have the appearance that the interim president is now running the country so that they can really step back, reduce their footprint, and try to resume a more neutral role in egyptian politics. >> garrett: do egyptians fear a full-scale civil war?

>> i think at this stage egyptians aren't fearing a full scale civil war but they don't rule out the possibility and they are bracing themselves for more political instability. for more protests, possibly more violence and i think everybody watching very closely to see what the muslim brotherhood's next move here is. whether they step back and regroup or continue to rebel against the military's takeover. >> garrett: clarissa ward in cairo, thank you very, very much. joining us from his home state of arizona, republican senator john mccain. senator, as you know, arizona -- all of arizona has the condolences and the sympathies of this nation after the tragic loss of 19 firefighters. i know you'd like to talk about that. we have a ton of news to get to but how is your state coping? >> i think they're coping but i want to thank the american people for their thoughts and prayers. the support for these families

of these brave 19 and thank you for giving me a chance to say thank you from the people i represent. >> garrett: there are issues arising from sequestration across-the-board spending cuts that impact firefighting not just in arizona but across the country. are you going to do anything in washington to turn it around? >> we need to turn it around. obviously. it will impair our ability to combat these forest fires. a quarter of arizona's forests have been destroyed in the last ten years by forest fires and sequestration and the view of every firefighter i've talked to said it would impair their ability to combat these devastating occurrences so it has to be turned around. >> garrett: let's talk about egypt, senator. was that a coup we saw last week? >> it was a coup and it was the second time in two and a half years that we have seen the military step in.

it's a strong indicator of the lack of american leadership and influence since we've urged the military not to do that and reluctantly i believe that we have to suspend aid until such time as there is a new constitution and a free and fair election we can't -- morsi was a terrible president. their economy is in terrible shape thanks to their policies but the fact is the united states should not be supporting this coup and it's a tough call. >> garrett: let me ask you about this aid question. it's already gone out for this fiscal year. are tow you talking about pulling that back or when the new fiscal year starts if nothing has happened on free and fair elections not providing any in the future? >> i don't think you can pull it back. it's there are the pipeline. but i hope that the pressure that it brings on the egyptian military will make for a very rapid transition, we must make

this transition. but the place is descending into chaos but so is the entire middle east because of the total vacuum and lack of american leadership. whether it be the massacres in syria. lebanon is beset by sectarian violence. jordan is about to collapse under the weight of refugees. iraq is unraveling. afghanistan, we're having grave problems organizing a follow on force in afghanistan. america has not led and america is not leading and when america doesn't lead, bad things happen and other people do lead and egypt is just one segment of a failure of american leadership over the last five years and we need to start being leaders rather than bystanders. >> garrett: do you believe egypt will ever see morsi back in office and should it? secondarily, you criticized what the administration hadn't done. what should it be doing in your

opinion? >> we should be standing -- first of all we should be helping the resistance in syria to stop the massacre that's going on thanks to russia, hezbollah, iran. we should make it clear to iran that their progress towards a nuclear weapon has to be stopped. we have to help jordan and lebanon in this problem. iraq is unraveling. i don't know what you do about iraq. we've already lost peace there. but we have to exercise leadership and in egypt we have to make it very clear that american assistance will be directly related to their transition to a civilian government and we don't claim it's going to be easy but for us to continue to support coups is a lesson of history that we should have learned a long time ago. >> garrett: are you alleging that the obama administration is tacitly approving a coup? >> i think it would be a mistake. >> garrett: do you think that's what's happening?

>> i think they're in a dilemma. i think they're -- as usual on these issues they're undecided and going forward with a debate while events transpire. there's no better example of that than syria as we continue to watch hezbollah and thousands of fighters, we see russian weapons pouring in and slaughter of now over 100,000 people and we're going to send them light weapons? light weapons don't do well against tanks. >> garrett: let's shift our attention to immigration. on the senate republican side you have 14 votes for the bipartisan bill but everyone in your elected republican leadership voted no. what does that say about the republican leadership's attitude on this issue and how much do you think those four votes from the top leaders will affect the house republican reception to this bill? >> well, i was disappointed, obviously, that our leadership didn't vote the other way but i'm glad that there are many, many people and factions and

interest groups going to be weighing in beginning with president george w. bush, our evangelicals, the catholic church, labor, business which is important, obviously, to the republican party. all are going to be weighing in. i respect speaker boehner. i respect the process that he will go through. we are not trying to dictate what the house of representatives is -- should do and i believe that if they can come up with a bill we would be more than eager to negotiate with them. a failure to act is de facto amnesty for 11 million people living in the shadows. i think wherever you are on that issue's agreement on that. so shouldn't we sit down together and solve this issue? not only for the good of if republican party, but for the good of the nation. >> garrett: do you think the republican party can compete nationally in its senatorial issues if it drops the ball this year? >> i do not think that that's

the case. but more importantly, to live with a situation such as we have is not something that -- what america should be all about and it's a tough road to a legal citizen status. it's a very tough road to green card and then citizenship. it's not easy and it shouldn't be easy. but we have shown them a path forward and we hope and pray that our republican colleagues will take up the issue and we can join together, republicans and democrats. >> garrett: i know you're averse-- as most politicians are-- to placing percentages on outcomes. is this a 50-50 outcome? better or worse as you look at the republican majority dealing with this issue in >> i'm an eternal optimist. i have confidence in speaker boehner's leadership. paul ryan, our vice presidential candidate, has been very supportive and many others have and one thing, that, again, we

don't want to do is that's have the people -- republicans particularly in the house think we are dictating to them. we aren't. we just want them sit down with us and work together and republicans and democrats alike and i'm proud of what have the gang of eight did and i'm proud of the leadership my colleagues on the democrat side have shown on this issue and the gang of eight and my republican colleagues. >> garrett: edward snowden has received asylum assurances from three nations. if he attempts to leave russia shah to go to those three, should the united states leave militarily to stop him, divert him or capture him? >> i don't think we can, major. there's certain rules of international law. but the lesson here is look at this -- our relationship with putin. that reset button, we ought to throw that away. it's clear what he is.

he's k.g.b. colonel and he's not interested in better relations with the united states. if he was, he would make sure that mr. snowden was sent back to us. we have to have a much more realistic approach to russia and putin in order to comport with the realities of their relations with us. >> schieffer: senator mccain thank you very much for your time this morning on "face the nation" and we'll be back in just one moment. vo: i've always thought the best part about this country is that we get to create our future. you get to take ownership of the choices you make. the person you become. i've been around long enough to recognize the people who are out there owning it. the ones getting involved and staying engaged.

they're not sitting by as their life unfolds. and they're not afraid to question the path they're on. because the one question they never want to ask is "how did i end up here?" i started schwab for those people. people who want to take ownership of their investments, like they do in every other aspect of their lives. >> garrett: in studio me are two top members of the house, xavier becerra and congressman paul, thank you for joining us. you heard senator john mccain, he wants to make sure you house republicans don't feel dictated to. do you fell pressurized, dictated to by the senate immigration bill? what are its prospects in the house of representatives? >> well, in the house we're

going to do our own thing. we're going to pass our bills regular order. >> garrett: meaning ignore senate bill? >> we'll take a look at it. i have some concerns about the border security piece that was laid out in the senate bill in terms of throwing $46 billion at a problem without any plan, without any strategy, without any definition of our operation control and there's an old saying if you fail to plan you plan to fail. we have no plan and that's the problem over the last decade within --. >> garrett: do you think the money was just covered to get senate republican votes and because there's not a plan from your vantage point it's ill ledge senate >> i believe it's not a responsible plan. i believe it was hatched at the last minute to get votes to pass what they passed in the senate. on the house side, i passed a bipartisan bill out of my committee that will be, i think, the centerpiece of the enforcement and border security piece. we can't go back to 1986 when we

granted amnesty to illegals and then forgot about the security provisions. i think that's the important lesson that we can't repeat. >> garrett: what is the schedule of your bill? do you expect the house to consider that and pass it before the august break? >> it's possible it could be on the floor by july. if not, i think september. the discussion is with other reform bills and we're going regular order in the house that we can get something done by the september time frame. >> garrett: i want to help our audience deconstruct what you say when you mean "regular order." that means you'll take up specific bills addressing specific elements of the immigration debate, not comprehensive reform. you're going to do this piece by piece. and the fear is among senate democrats and republicans who support this legislation is the piecemeal process will by its own slowness and gradual approach kill it off. >> interesting, usually the senate's slower than the house but we're going to do this the right way and pass our bills the right way.

i do think --. >> garrett: why is that the right way, snow >> i think going regular order is what the american people want. they don't want a comprehensive bill like what we saw with obamacare that passed in the middle of the night. now we're seeing what the problems are in that bill. they don't want comprehensive. what they want is regular order pieces of legislation and major, this will put the house and senate in a conference committee position --. >> garrett: but next year. >> well, it could be as early as late this year, maybe early next year. where we do hash out the differences between the senate and the house versions. again, i would argue that what our bill calls for is a plan and strategy that which we haven't had for a decade. it calls for metrics to measure success and defines operation control. these are key ingredients because we haven't had that before. in the past all we've done thrown money at the problem on an ad hoc basis and it hasn't worked. what the senate just passed was, again, a bunch of candy thrown down there, a bunch of assets

thrown down there to gain votes but with that methodical, smart -- without a smart border approach. we want a smart border and smart immigration plan. something that makes sense. is. >> garrett: do you think the president and democrats in the house and senate are setting republicans up and want to see this issue fail and become a dominant issue in the midterm elections next year? >> i am deeply concerned that the efforts should be bipartisan border security on my committee was unanimously approved, completely bipartisan bill. my concern is the political backdrop would be that the white house would like to see this fail in the house so he can blame the house of representatives far and try to take back the house of representatives and then all bets are off on his agenda. >> garrett: that's the politics side of it. before i let you go, the policy side of it is do you believe that there are 218 house republican votes for anything that is a pathway to citizenship or a legalization mechanism that starts very soon after enactment of any legislation?

>> we have a g.o.p. conference on wednesday to talk about immigration --. >> garrett: but you have a sense already, don't you? >> what's that? >> garrett: off sense of this question already. >> i think you've identified two of the key hot spots, one would be path to citizenship and one would be applying obamacare. so those will be the issues thaw will be hashed out in our conference on wednesday and we have a full healthy debate about it. but i think as the speaker said we need to be the party of solutions and not always obstructing so i think there's an effort here that we have a broken immigration system. we need to fix this immigration system and, frankly, i want the best and the brightest in here. i don't want an uncontrolled southwest border and a random lottery system. >> garrett: congressman mccaul, thank you for joining us. congressmen becerra, you heard him. let's talk about the politics first. republicans believe democrats are trying to set them up on this issue. how do you believe, that perception-- true or not-- may influence the outcome legislatively. >> major, first i think's a reason to feel comfortable with

a lot of what chairman mccaul just said. because he did pass a bill that was a bipartisan bill on border security. he did talk about getting this done. where we probably disagree is on trying to do this in a piecemeal way which won't fix the entire machine. you have to fix the entire machine. >> garrett: what's your feel about a piecemeal approach? >> if the machine is broken you have lots of broken parts. you fix one part doesn't mean the machine will work well. and we have a system that americans across the country say is broken. it needs to be fixed at the border and the workplace and knees to be fixed for those folks coming in the right way, the legal way, through a visa and you need to fix it for 10 or 11 million people still working and living in this country in the shadows. so you do want -- you still have a system that's broken. so i think there's a reason to feel optimistic if indeed chairman mccaul's republican colleagues follow him. let me guarantee you, democrats aren't doing this to try to have a political issue next november.

the senate had a bipartisan bill 68 out of 100 senators in a place that hardly gets anything done, 68 is a good vote. and the fact is the amendment put up by republicans, as chairman mccaul said, probably beefs up the border but probably throws away some money, that was because republicans needed essentially a security blanket to feel comfortable about border security. democrats supported that because i think we understand the american people are saying get it done. >> schieffer: some skeptics might say democrats accepted that money because it's authorized only, meaning not appropriated, mean nothing guarantee behind the money, and that the other elements of it, border fencing, there there's a law in existence right now that calls for border fencing, not enforced. that it was a kind of fig leaf that accomplished something legislatively but won't happen. that's why it made it easier for democrats to accept that. how do you respond to that? >> our immigration laws reflect american values and priorities.

not republican values and priorities or democratic values and priorities. so when we do something on the border or at the workplace or with the undocumented, it should reflect ma what americans want us to do and they're saying "fix the entire system." so i this i what you're finding is there will be a compromise, a smart compromise. you have to be smart, you have to be tough, but you've got to be fair. and if you can do that, you'll have a full fix. i think the senate-- while i disagree with some proponents of the senate bill and a lot of the components of the senate amendment as chairman mccaul said threw money at the problem-- i think what the senate did was what the american people are wanting: get it done. >> garrett: you know very well the house democratic caucus, its sentiments on this. let's talk about the two issues the chairman raised. application of obamacare, which the president uses and embraces in that terminology, no longer pejorative, and either legalization or pathway to citizenship. where does your caucus want this legislation to end up on those two issues?

>> well, you can't tell a kid who was a valedictorian at his high school who's been accepted to stanford university or one of the best colleges in his country he can't move forward anymore because we can't get things done. as senator mccain just said, failure to do anything, failure to act on immigration is de facto amnesty. >> garrett: so you need legalization and a pathway to citizenship? >> you cannot fix our broken immigration system if you don't deal with the four components. >> garrett: do you need the application of the president's health care law? >> i think democrats and republicans agree we're not going to start by providing taxpayer subsidies to the folks that we're going to try to bring into the system legally. so therefore i think democrats and republicans agree they'll be outside the system for a while. they will be --. >> garrett: the health care system? >> they would be able to pay for health care, they won't get the taxpayer subsidies american citizens will get. but they'll never be outside the health care system because if they get hurt, we're a civilized society, we won't watch them die like dogs so we'll have to

figure out a way in a smart way, tough, because they'll have to pay their way, but smart. >> garrett: what is your best guess on a timetable for this ledge administration? >> the chairman said it could be in conference late this year or early next year. >> garrett: are you that optimistic? >> i would hope we would do it sooner than later. >> garrett: are you fearful the longer it goes the greater the chance for failure >> once you start into 2014 it's all politics. so i hope that republicans recognize we have to get this done quickly but that's the question republicans have to answer because now the ball is in their court. we can't have them using this so-called hastert rule, which is a republican rule. we have to use process that lets us get this done. >> garrett: congressmans me sara thank you very much. >> garrett: congressmans me sara thank you very much. we'll be right back. the e on a bayer aspirin regimen. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. go talk to your doctor. you're not indestructible anymore.

"that starts with one of the world's most advancedy," go talk to your doctor. distribution systems," "and one of the most efficient trucking networks," "with safe, experienced drivers." "we work directly with manufacturers," "eliminating costly markups," "and buy directly from local farmers in every region of the country." "when you see our low prices, remember the wheels turning behind the scenes, delivering for millions of americans, everyday. "dedication: that's the real walmart"

it's nice to have the experience and commitment to go along with you. aarp medicare supplement insurance plans, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. keep dreaming. keep doing. go long. plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+. >> garrett: stay with us for more "face the nation." ,,,,,,,,,,

>> garrett: welcome back to "face the nation." we're joined in studio by dan stein, president of the american -- federation for american immigration reform and janet murguia, the president and c.e.o. of the national council of la raza, she joins us from kansas city. janet, let me start with you. what is the best thing about the senate-passed bill that you think republicans in the house ought to know but don't know. >> pelley: >> well, i think t best thing about the senate-passed bill is that it tries to address the issue of immigration reform in a comprehensive way and that there are real answers for this problem in this bill. we want them to know that there is a path to legalization and citizenship that is a tough and

narrow one that allows for criminal background checks, that allows for folks to go to the back of the line and that we make sure we are doing everything from a security standpoint to create a strong immigration reform system and for us i think that's really important. it's clear that there has been a lot of concern around the security aspects of this bill but i think it's fair to say that there has been a lot done. it's very above and beyond what we know is from a policy perspective necessary but i think politically it does address all the issues most republicans would care about. >> garrett: dan, what's wrong with the senate bill that senate republicans don't understand and need to and should inform the way the house republicans deal with this issue? >> major, if we scrubbed all 1200 pages of this bill i could tell you and i guarantee the senators who voted for bill and most of the republicans have not read the bill. it's huge massive bill. the so-called path to citizenship, amnesty, is a fraction of what the deal bills

with. it unleashes a massive increase in overall immigration, major increase in job competition at a time when we have structural unemployment, increasing income equality, wages are flat for most workers. essentially it gives up on the american worker by simply suggesting that at every level of the labor market employers should be able to bring in foreign workers. we're talking about a population increase under the senate bill of over 70 million people in 20 years. 70 million people. now c.b.o. went and scored -- the congressional budget office looked out for only ten years and said some workers will be paying social security but not taking benefits without looking at the long range. over the long term we are -- if you pass a bill like the senate bill, the borders will never be secure we'll see americans driven out of the labor market and special interests that control the debate through the senate process will lo control how many people come in and under what conditions the house has to basically say forget about the senate bill.

the bill was drafted in a corruption fashion with special interest. no amendments were adopted on the senate floor, reid had the fix in, schumer did and let me tell you, we've been down the road with schumer in 1986 and we know senate bill will not control our borders or stop illegal immigration and it won't serve the interest of the american people. >> garrett: but there was an amendment, a very visible amendment, a big amendment. $26 billion of border security, increasing the border patrols, that's a lot of money. that a total -- >> everything about this -- the senate bill is special interest, power politics financial greed. we're talking a public policy disaster. who is not at the table in the senate bill, the american people. what we're going to do is spend millions of dollars to make sure the american people understand what is in the senate bill, already they're starting to demonstrate outside members of congress's offices. this is not the path the american people or this nation should be taking on immigration. >> garrett: i know there's major

things you want to respond. jump in, please. >> i think fact is this bill does have not only broad bipartisan support and we saw strong republican support in the senate bill but it has the strong support of the american people. what what dan said couldn't be further from the truth. the fact is we have a majority of support of the american people for this bill and certainly for a comprehensive approach reform to immigration system and this bill has the support of progressives and conservatives, grover norquist has thrown his full support behind this bill. he is not someone who is a softy or lefty here. we have also seen evangelical conservative support behind the bill and the chamber, labor, business, all kinds of folks from across the spectrum are supportive of this bill and it's because it has the broad support of the american people. the american people want a solution and this bill offers a solution. but what's key is for the house to offer their own version of

the solution if that's what they want. and we want to see progress on this reform. and the house has a unique opportunity right now to really put their imprimatur on the a bill and move it forward. that's all the american people want. they want to see us create a solution the senate bill is a bipartisan solution. it has broad american support. we want a house to create a solution and let's get this issue done and off the table. that's what the american people want. the senate bill offers a great model and a framework that has bipartisan support and is great and widely supported by the american people. >> garrett: you heard on this very set congressman mccall and becerra agree on one thing, that the senate amendment that added all that money on border control was probably too much money, that there isn't a good plan behind it and may waste taxpayer dollars. do you agree with that? >> absolutely not.

i believe there is an excessive amount of security money in this bill. there's no question about that. >> garrett: and you're willing to live with that? >> well, look, this is a difficult process for many of us who want to see a solution on this. there have been a lot of compromises already made in this senate bill and, frankly, there are folks in my constituency and across the spectrum who have a lot of concerns about the investments we've already made on security. we put $18 million alone last year, more than all enforcement agencies combined on securing the border. and an additional $30 billion so for folks to say it's not going a long way to address this problem is not true. we will have a secure border. the question is we need to reform the rest of the system. we have a great approach this the senate bill that addresses the legal immigration system and one that will bring order and restore the rule of law.

that's what the american people want. >> garrett: dan, what you're hearing from janet is on the left or from her perspective and constituents they're at the breaking point. they've compromised all they're going to compromise. >> there's no compromise in the gang of eight and the senate process. the amendment reperot says was locked in in judiciary committee and the floor. there were nine amendments when there were 300 something files. reid basically kept a lockdown. look, the senate bill ultimately is a political disaster for the republican party for one very simple reason: latinos are going to vote remember when the economy provides an opportunity if-to-provide upward mobility. the democrats in 2008 started playing ethnic power politics and trying to basically convince the republicans that if they didn't play -- they didn't bend the rules, if you will, with amnesty and other things, they were going to forever be annihilated and lindsey graham has repeated that canard. the republicans need a populist message about restoring the american middle-class through a

tighter labor market. the democrats need to stop playing ethnic power politics with this system created with the senate bill. what we have to do is start over in the next congress. we can't see the senate bill get conference with anything that passes the house because the senate bill is a 1,200 page behemoth public policy disaster and the reason why boehner and those guys don't want to go to conference is there's so many special interest gifts in the senate that it would never produce a good bill. >> garrett: dan stein, federation for american immigration reform and janet murguia of the national council of la raza. thank you for joining us. we'll be back in just one minute.

>> garrett: now our very capable panel is here to tell us what this all means. david rohde is a columnist in from reuters and the author of "beyond war." michael o'hanlon is a top expert -- trust me, he is-- at the brookings institution. amy walter is with the cook

political report and last but not least, we always say, that john, great to have you, john dicker son, cbs news political director. david did the u.s. government see what is happening in egypt coming and senator mccain dodged this question, do you ever think mohamed morsi will be back in power or see yesterday's news forever? >> did the u.s. government see it coming? i think they didn't. and i think that a fair criticism of the soogs that they had a hands-off approach to egypt. they could have been more aggressive from the beginning with a simple line of "we support democracy." then when morsi veered from that they could have put more pressure on him publicly and now they're in a big mess. mohamed morsi may be gone but the muslim brotherhood is not. they have a very large group of supporters, it's a very dangerous situation and thinking we could just go with military rule. >> garrett: what's the biggest danger? >> it polarize it is situation more that members of the muslim

brotherhood resort to violence. they listen to what we say and our promotion of democracy and then we have an elected leader who is toppled in a coup and they see that hypocrisy from the west and, frankly, that helps hard line islamists, extremists like al qaeda who say "you want democracy for yourselves but when an islamist wins you don't allow democracy." >> garrett: the administration tells me "we did see this coming but there's not a lot we could have done to stop it." second of all, they say with morsi there were many different factors involved: decent relations with israel, gaza, sinai, all of which they were generally cooperative on. we couldn't have beaten them up over other things though we might have wanted to. is that a legitimate argument? do you see-- as senator mccain saw or sees-- this kind of either indifference or lack of authority for the voicing of the administration on this question? >> i think administration was a little passive. but i think the bigger question now is how do we make sure we do better next time? and i think what we're going to have do is push the caretaker

government towards the early election bus also with some kind of willingness to let the muslim brotherhood win again if they do win within different constraints --. >> garrett: no matter what that means? >> well, no. it matters how they would govern and that's where i think the egyptians and the international community need to say there are going to be different constraint this is time because we're at a point of creating a constitution creating a system that works and in that period of time you have to be inclusive. you have to be inclusive in form and substance. you have to have a cabinet that's diverse. you can't shut down civil society. you can't try to pressure the media. and you need to govern within certain bounds. and you could have debates about some things we wouldn't hear. you know, dress codestor way in which friday prayers have to be allowed by any employer. things that reflect islam that's very important in egypt. and you have to acknowledge egypt wants that kind of debate and the muslim brotherhood has a right to insist on it. but you cannot see a trend towards autocracy, towards the muslim brotherhood or anybody else trying to shunt off or

stomp and prevent other groups from participating in politics. you've got to have con strabts on the future by that which any new winner would govern and that needs to be set clearly by the egyptian military, by the caretaker government and by the united states. >> garrett: do you think passivity the one that will stick with this administration and do it any long-term harm? >> i think it will in part because if you look across syria, if you look at egypt, if you look wherever that the administration is -- if you look at the edward snowden case, the rap against the president is that he doesn't get involved, he is a bystander, he reacts to events and, of course, what you hear from the administration is, you know, if we were missing with egypt, if we were trying to assert our will that would immediately destabilize the argument going on because this heavy hand of the imperialist is messing in here. and what they -- what's been hard to find is an argument for

intervention-- maybe it's now, maybe it is in this coalition government that has to be formed for some way to get a role for the muslim brotherhood. but what the argument is for what they could have done that wasn't passive. what intervention they could have played that would have affected and changed things in a significant way to change the outcome. >> garrett: i want to talk to you about immigration and we had a lively debate and an interesting one between members of the democratic and republican side. where do you think the house republicans are currently? they have a huge private behind closed doors meeting wednesday here in washington to sort out where they're going to come down. where do you think they are and where do you think they'll evolve to or at all in issue? >> where they start a different place where from the senate starts and where the national party starts. the national party and folks in the senate are worries about 2016 and the electoral college map about winning latino voters and winning national elections. if you're a house member you're

worried about 2014 and the reality for these members of congress who are republicans is that 2014 elections is not dictated or determined or affected very much at all by latino votes. most of these members sit in very, very safe districts and when you look at the most recent redistricting what you come up with is an average republican district that's 75% white. so increasing the vote of latinos, increasing the percentage of the vote that republicans get from latinos isn't going to affect them. what they're more worried about is if they vote for a bill that's going to get name challenge from the right. that's their bigger concern. >> garrett: is it your sense that it's racial politics just in a different level and viewed from a different prism for house republicans as they look at primaries? not the broader context of the demographic changes in america? >> well, i think it is a broader context of the demographic changes. it's just the question of an incentive problem, right? so the it's about what's in it for me in politics. so there's not a lot in it for

many house republicans but they're being told by leadership and what they're being told by folks at the national level is "this is good for the party. we can't win elections without this." >> imagine you're a member standing up in august at what are going to be some tough town halls. you cannot stand up and say "well, you know politics of this work out." the people in your district are going to be angry. and they're hurting the comprehensive immigration reform movement is that the politics are falling away. there's an argument that the problem in twelve wasn't the hispanic voters, it was the falloff in white voters. as long as that is a debatable proposition, it removes one of the weapons from the argument, those who would argue for comprehensive immigration reform. >> garrett: i want to get back to the middle east because senator john mccain brought up syria and other issues. when i talk to people at the white house, what they also talk about this is a completely present book we were handed. changes are hour by hour, day by day and very hard to get your arms around. if you intervene you could run a

greater risk of making a bigger mistake than this allegation of passivity. how do you respond to this that? >> i think the administration could have a clearer public position about its goals in the region. there's more option than we control everything and dictate events on the ground. >> garrett: how close to do you think they are to absolutely nothing? >> well, you know, this is an incredibly cautious white house and one of the best things i've heard is that they're very good at making sort of clear decisions on clear issues. the really, really difficult decisions they tend to split the difference. and you saw that in syria with arming the rebels, you see that a bit now in egypt the president has a tough statement and i don't know how this happened but it was terrible optics, the next day the president goes golfing and secretary kerry is on his yacht. what does that say to young people in egypt across the middle east whether -- whatever part of the debate about america's interests in the region and democracy and this --

there is an historic struggle in the region between conservative islamists and secular liberals, we should be backing those secular liberals. >> garrett: and this is exploding before our very eyes and nobody knows where it's heading, says the administration and don't fault us for being timid. >> well, on egypt i think this is a moment where we need to be willing to offer a goode jipgs government egypt is the heart of the arab world. we've been giving them must be for a long time. if they do the right things we should think about doubling it as part of an international effort. their economy is half the problem. this is small potatoes compared to the size of our economy or any war budget we have to account for if a place like that falls apart. that's where they could go without having to go to an t extent of iraq or affidavits. >> garrett: there was a big decision made on the health care law. tell us what the politics are and break it apart. >> in a policy matter this

affects businesses with more than 50 employees. they are no longer going to have to buy-- for a year anyway-- insurance for their employees. but that only affects -- 934% of those companies already cover people. so this affects a small number of those businesses. only that 6%. politically the white house decided to take the hit now, take the embarrassment over the july 4 weekend instead of having drip, by drip, by drip as this gets implemented. >> garrett: indicative of deep embedded flaws or as the white house says we're listening and adapting? >> there are going to be some serious problems ruling this out. they know this is going to happen. but what's going to happen with obamacare, the biggest threat is death by a thousand anecdotes and this is going to be an anecdote of companies laying people off or not reupping their hours, things like that, because it takes that issue off the table for now but there are still plenty of other anecdotes. if you're an individual, you still have to get covered. >> garrett: amy, john, michael,

david, thank you so very much. we'll be back with a little bit of civil war history.

>> garrett: last week marked the 150th anniversaries as one of the decisive battles of the civil war, the battle of gettysburg. reenactors were out in force recreating the battle that started on july 1, 1863. to tell us a little bit about that battle and what that war means today, scholar harold holzer, he's the author of more than 40 books on president lincoln and his new book is "the civil war and 50 octobers." you're also a script consulting on the movie "lincoln." it's a delight to have you on the set. for those who are not immersed in civil war history why was gettysburg so important not only as a battle but as a symbol of that war and reconciliation? >> first of all it was a battle. it represented the confederacy's last attempt to humiliate the north into giving up the idea and heading, i think -- i've

always thought toward philadelphia to raise the confederate flag over independence hall on july 4. i think that was was the subtext of lee's invasion of the north. >> garrett: and why he was so adamant to keep fighting the battle even though on the first two days the south suffered setbacks and people were urging reforming. >> second guessers saying he should have gone around the round tops and headed back toward washington but he wanted to fight it out there. he decided on that ill falted picketts charged. >> garrett: why does it matter so much? >> lincoln concentrates it in november as a place where the new birth of freedom occurs. once and for all it's clear that slavery won't live in this country. the emancipation proclamation is only six months old and when lee's forces enter maryland they're picking up free african americans and kidnapping them or whatever and intending to send them back to slavery. so this is an anti-african american march by the

confederacy. as lincoln points out we still have unfinished work to do when he gets to gettysburg but we've moved tra american will survive free and then the great reconciliation, i guess, people talk about 1913, a hundred years ago when these old veterans walked across the field on their shaky legs and shook hands. but it was a reconciliation that did exclude african americans. it was about the white soldiers having one last blast having one last blast on the place they achieved modality. >> garrett: i want to talk about your book and the 50 objecteds in the civil war. we've identified one. it's charred bible used at a colored orphan sigh sigh lum 1863. talk about why this is so important to you. >> i'm a new yorker. this bible was used in the so-called colored orphans'

asylum in new york city. 150 years ago next weekend was the new york city draft riots and after the shock of gettysburg that people don't talk about that much. >> garrett: briefly, those were? the draft riots? >> a reaction against conscription but it turned into a full blast race riot. sort of a pag ram to get african americans out of new york and to punish them for the draft law because it was perceived by some in new york that the war was now being directed toward emancipation instead of union and the draft itself was very unpopular because it -- which people could get out -- rich people could get out by paying a bounty. so the riders on -- july 13 leeched this orphanage, set fire to it with 233 kids trapped inside and they have nowhere to go so the headmaster leads them out and a little girl grabs the bible from which prayer were read every morning and as she walks out it's singed with smoke and flame and it survived.

the kid kids survived, barely. >> garrett: the kids and the book survived. >> and they're in the new york historical society. >> garrett: thank you so much for joining us. we appreciate it very much. that's it for us today. thank you very much for watching "face the nation." we'll be right back.

captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> the following is a paid presentation forthe wen healthy hair care system, the secret to soft, lustrous, beautiful, shining hair, by celebrity hair stylist chaz dean, brought to you by guthy-renker. what does it take to get your hair this shiny, bouncy, strong, and beautiful? the wen healthy hair care system by chaz dean. >> people ask me all the time: does wen cleansing conditioner really work? i started using wen two years ago. so...you tell me. does wen really work? ♪ >> i've seen a lot of changes since i first started using wen. my hair's so much healthier now, it's so much smoother, it's so much silkier, and it all starts with wen. >> with wen, it's just like this "kumbaya" product