>> the fight between states and the trump administration over voter information is growing and has local implications. let's get the inside story. ♪ ♪ good morning. i'm tamala edwards. welcome to "inside story." let's introduce you to the panel. first up, a good morning to jim eisenhower. >> good morning, tamala. >> good morning to jeff jubelirer, a communications executive. >> thank you, tamala. good morning. >> good morning, nonprofit exec sharmain matlock turner... >> good morning, tamala. >> ...and law-school professor jan ting. >> hey, tam. >> we're gonna need your expertise perhaps on this one, starting with the voter-roll data. the federal government has said, "we have a list of things to the states that we would like you to give to us." a lot of states have said -- about 22 -- "no, we're not giving this data," including pennsylvania and delaware. some have said, "we'll give you part." some have said, "you can have what is public." now, many of the things are pretty normal.

you and i could walk in and get that information. but let's say -- this is what pennsylvania said they weren't gonna give -- criminal data and the last four of your social. how to look at this request to begin with? >> i think a lot of people are questioning the purpose of this commission. do we really have a problem? it's hard enough getting americans to vote once in an election, right? do we really have a problem with people trying to vote twice? it's hard enough to get american citizens to vote, right? do we really have a problem of non-citizens showing up to vote? >> well, this goes back to trump's fake news after the election that "millions of people voted illegally for hillary." absolutely no evidence of that. and this goes back a number of years, a republican effort to suppress minority vote and the senior citizen vote. and every time you question it -- i go back to governor corbett. where are the instances of voter fraud? how many people have actually been prosecuted? virtually no one. >> they're claiming when they get the data, they will compare it to rolls that they have of illegals in the country and that they will then be able to prove that there is this voting

problem, but first of all -- >> that's kind of circular. >> but first of all, was it smart when so many republicans -- one of the more pungent responses was from a republican secretary of state from mississippi, where he said, "you can go jump in the gulf, and mississippi's a great place to launch from." i mean, if that's the response you're getting from your own party, is it well-considered? >> not at all, and it's a very -- as you said, tam, a bipartisan response. also, you think about core republican philosophy, you think of states' rights. you think of federalism. >> privacy. >> and this -- and privacy. this goes completely 180 against the ability of local governments, whether they be state or localities, to govern their own election laws, to govern their own voter files. >> right, and it also goes against recent trends, at least in some states, of really trying to make it easier for people to register and vote. so, as opposed to going in the direction of, "how do we make it easier? how do we make sure that people maybe can do same-day registration?" -- in pennsylvania, we've added the ability to register online.

some states have gotten the same-day registration with being able to vote. pennsylvania is still 30 days that you have to wait in between registering and voting. i do think that this is gonna continue to depress turnout. 25% of the people in the country aren't even registered, and we can then translate that into the number of people who are voting, which is about 50% of those who are registered. and it seems like to me we have a turnout problem, not a problem of people ultimately, you know... >> jan, what i wanted to know is, can the government compel states to give this information? and then do we need to worry about privacy issues, hackers saying, "here it all is, all in one spot"? >> it seems doubtful that this commission has an authority to compel the states to respond if they choose not to respond. just to respond to sharmain's point, this country has a long and regrettable history of discouraging american citizens from exercising their right to vote, and we're trying to

overcome that now. and i think the flip side of preventing illegal voting is making sure that everyone who's entitled to vote is able to vote. and putting up barriers to try and knock people off the voter-registration list doesn't serve that purpose. >> look, we can at least do what australia does. in australia, everybody is required to register and everyone's required to vote and if you don't, it'll cost you $20. >> i think they should tie it to, like, your cable box or something. if you had to register to vote to get cable, everybody would do it. >> 100% turnout. >> or netflix. >> brendan boyle, the congressman from montgomery county and parts of northeast philadelphia, says his idea is, after citizens are naturalized, it should be uniform, that there should be some means of registering to vote. is that a good idea, that, for incoming citizens, that it shouldn't be haphazard, that all of them -- that's one of the first things they should be greeted with? >> i think it's a great idea. i think it still should be voluntary. i don't think we can compel people to register to vote or to vote, for that matter. we live in a free society.

some people have moral grounds where they don't wish to vote. it's not all just neglect. but i do think that we could make it easier for people to register. and if you're already there in an immigration setting, naturalization setting, and you're filling out a million forms, it's, to me, not much of a burden to say, "by the way, here's one more you can register." and i bet we'd see the numbers go up. >> there's no issue in that situation as to whether these are american citizens. >> right, exactly. >> it's pretty clear that they are. >> but, tam, shouldn't we expand it? i mean, we all sit in doctors' offices -- god bless them, i'm related to one -- that we wait for two to four hours. there should be voter-registration forms there. when we're waiting to pay our cable bill, if we go to the office, there should be registration forms there. let's not stop at immigration offices. >> but that's if people really have an interest. the problem is, is that we've had this tension of, there's a group of people who are trying to keep certain people from voting and making it a lot harder for them and the rest of us who are trying very hard to try to open up the process and believe that america will work better if everyone gets a chance to participate. >> actually, jeff, i want to ask a political question on that

because you deal a lot with optics. on one hand, you keep certain people off the voting rolls, it's better. you might have a greater chance of winning. but there's the long-term impression you could be dealing with of pushing people out the door. if you could get the administration to listen to you, which one is more worthwhile? >> getting them in the tent. and this is where there's a concern in the republican party of you -- this is time and place. our country is, as we all know, more diverse, a younger generation, more interested in opportunities for people that may not look like us, sound like us, or come from different places. you must, if you're the republican party -- it may not be today, but that generation's gonna die off. and who are gonna be the new voters? these are the folks you're talking about potentially prohibiting from enrolling, and that's a big mistake. >> let's quickly turn to the pennsylvania budget. they say that we have a budget, but we don't know how we're paying for it. >> and it's even turned into a fight between the senate republicans and the house republicans, the senate republicans saying no to something called vgt -- like, you would walk into any bar, any

tavern, and you would have tableside gaming -- and the house republicans going, "no, no, maybe we should consider that." is that the real story out of this, that the republicans can't figure out how they feel about the expansion of gaming? >> partially, and the fact is there's one word -- and jim's been in office -- and it's called governing. and it's what's missing from this process. it's, why can't our elected officials -- and i don't want to sound like i'm just on a soapbox -- make hard decisions? that's what we elect them to do. they need to raise revenue, and usually there are two ways to do that. you find new ways to get revenue, or you cut services. and there has to be some sort of blend. this is what happened when they used to be in office. >> but what about the idea that we can just gamble our way, privatize our way into covering this budget? >> so, who's paying for gambling? you know, it's individuals who generally are more -- they're lower income and they lose money and then we have to provide them with services. >> this isn't even a record. i chaired the pica board one year. we didn't have a budget till labor day. and that was almost done at gunpoint in harrisburg, when the last rendell budget -- i'm sure you remember that one. you know, this thing about

increasing gaming is really just a way to have a tax, but it doesn't look like a tax. and people can't say, "you raised my taxes. that gave me more opportunity to gamble and therefore pay tax that way." i think people are smarter than that, and i think that some of the proposals for raising taxes and revenues make a lot of sense, particularly when the priorities are schools. and that's really the number-one driver of our budget right now. >> on the table is also borrowing the money, privatizing liquor, which people have been enjoying going to the grocery store and other places. is that a worthwhile idea, the borrowing or expanding where you can buy your booze? >> well, they're all worthwhile ideas. what we'll find out -- whether people are smart enough to think their way out of this box. we've seen this movie before. and it tends to go on. it's human nature. people love spending, right? spending is popular, but taxing is very unpopular, so you've got to find a way -- we've balanced budgets before on gambling, but i do think there's a reaction to more gambling this time around. and there's resistance that maybe that's not the right way

to go. >> right, but there is a new proposal -- at least, i heard recently -- also of going back to the idea of making more gaming licenses available as a counter to doing the sort of, you know, every bar in your community having slot machines. but, you know, i still think that people can run on the notion that, for 14 years, pennsylvania has not raised its personal income tax. and that seems to be a strong enough message that we can get to the point that we can do broad-based taxes in this state. >> well, the problem with the more gaming licenses is -- and i've been part of that process, too -- it takes years to build these casinos, years to compete for them, years to get through the litigation that inevitably follows. most of them have been successful, but how much is too much? how many -- if we're gonna have two in philly, can we have four? can we have six? >> and there's talk again of maybe bringing one to south philly again, so we will see. let's go on to something we saw. july 4th, usually everybody goes back to their district, marches in the parade, kisses a baby. we saw a lot of republican

senators do something else for fear of being attacked over healthcare. pat toomey did something a little different. he did have a town hall, but it was a little bit more controlled, in a television studio, with a moderator. and he was able to somewhat control how the questions were coming in, not just screaming all over the room. is he brilliant in what he did? or will it eventually catch up with him, that he is not holding large-scale, "come one, come all, all my constituents can find me"-style events? >> well, listen, he made his decision months ago that he wasn't gonna have a -- talk about optics, having come to philadelphia more than any other place in pennsylvania and get absolutely harangued for his position, which has been very consistent. we may not agree with it, but he has been consistent on his position on cutting back on medicaid benefits or requiring the states to divvy up more than the feds. so, at this point, once he's made that decision, there's no benefit to come to philadelphia or to go out and do a live town-hall meeting. and the media's only gonna cover what's the most spectacular thing. >> it will be a political

liability for him. >> if i'm running against pat toomey... >> but they're not voting for him anyway. >> ...in five years, i'm going to run ads saying, "the biggest issue of our time, and you couldn't find him." >> he would say, "here i am. you could reach --" i'm not saying it's right. what i'm saying is the response -- "here i am." he did facebook town halls. >> remember, this is a man that would not announce whether he voted for president trump or not until 7:00 on election night. >> and still won. >> do you think that it becomes a trend, actually? i mean, that's the opposite side, that his republican colleagues look at him and say, "maybe this is what we should all be doing, is these more controlled events." >> he's not gonna run again for five years. >> that's a lifetime. >> so there may be other issues that come to the fore. people have short memories. they may not remember whatever it is that happens here. i think the hope for the democrats is that this thing passes because i think it's gonna be so disruptive of our healthcare system. 2.9 million pennsylvanians are on medicaid, which is like one in four almost. so, it's gonna have a big impact

on pennsylvania. so, i mean, a bad reaction to a bill that passes -- >> well, senator mcconnell now is talking about giving up on getting rid of it and trying to perhaps put some fixes, which is a positive thing. >> it must have been fun at his house this week for the 4th of july. >> all right, speaking of the 4th of july -- we're going to take a short break -- we will talk about chris christie on the beach and the reaction of his lieutenant governor to that. we'll be right back. >> "inside story" is presented by temple university. remarkable change isn't easy, but for those who take charge, it comes naturally. explore temple's impact. visit temple.edu/impact.

♪ >> welcome back. i'm tamala edwards. this is "inside story." and we would be remiss if you all did not get your opportunity to look at the now-famous photo of chris christie on a closed state beach while other people did not have access to it. his family was there. there's a residence. he said it's part of where the governor can go, he should have been able to go. but other pols -- like kim guadagno -- you see what she said there -- "if i were governor, i sure wouldn't be sitting on a beach if taxpayers didn't have access to state beaches." let's start with chris and then move to -- christie -- and move to guadagno. what does this tell us about where he is? one one hand, it's nothing new, very low approval ratings, hasn't been able to get very much done. what does this mean for the voters of new jersey for the next six months while he is

governor? >> well, you know, on one hand you can say this is because of lame duck and status and he doesn't care because he's not gonna run for anything. on the other hand, he's always been like this. he's always been arrogant, obnoxious, willing to do things that are sort of in the face of the voter. and in the past, it's kind of worked for him. here i think it just shows how out of touch he's become. and i think he just genuinely doesn't care. >> and you would think that there were other places he would have had access to that wouldn't have been as charged. it's sort of surprising he made this call. >> yeah, it was the proverbial middle finger that we can't show on television or i will not be asked back. he knows. he's not dumb. any advisor would tell him or anybody that this is the most tone-deaf thing you can possibly do is shove it in residents' -- not just voters' -- residents' face, residents from not just new jersey, but across the northeast or the mid-atlantic traveling to new jersey over the july 4th holiday. he has put the seal on the coffin with this move. >> certainly, the conventional

wisdom is he has no future politically. but he was really trumpian before trump in the way that he would slap around people. and it became great entertainment, and people would tune in just for the entertainment value. and so, you know, he's recovered from a lot of those things in the past, as has trump. and so you can't really for sure say this is the end. >> well, sorry to be, like, a conspiracy theorist, but i have to try to figure out -- i mean, does he want his lieutenant governor to actually win an election in new jersey? i mean, even if he was giving the proverbial finger, i mean, he knows that his lieutenant governor's gonna be in a tough race. registration is certainly not there. why would you present this picture and this video for her opponent to be able to use, okay, for the next six months? >> well, funny you should bring her up, lieutenant governor kim guadagno, because she has begun her recently taking a few

shots here and there. we started the show talking about voter-roll data. she has said, "i got to recuse myself from the issue, but if i were making a decision, i would protect new jersey voters' privacy" -- so, saying, "i wouldn't give the data in that way." and if we can -- i think you just got a chance to see what she put out on facebook, saying, "i wouldn't have been on that beach." is it enough? does it give her cover from how people feel about him? >> well, i think it's a start. you know, we know that new jersey has elected republican governors, even though the state is largely democratic. and they've elected women republican governors. so, i think for her own political purposes, these are smart moves. whether it's enough to get her past christie, who she's gonna be tethered to by the democrats in november, you know, we'll see, but at least it's -- it's a smart move on her part. >> yeah. >> it's her only hope, really. i mean, she has to, as a bare minimum, separate herself from the unpopular incumbent. and i think we were saying

earlier she's got a shot at this in the sense that her democratic opponent is a goldman sachs guy, another goldman sachs guy, which new jersey is getting used to now. so, you know, she's got a shot if she can separate herself from christie and pose as a republican moderate in the tradition of republican moderates in new jersey. >> sharmain makes an interesting point, which is, she's got to always gauge that you can say something and he might fire back. he's not one to let her do what she needs to do. >> i think she has to separate, but i also think she's gonna have to criticize him. i don't think she's gonna get away with, "well, i wouldn't do it," and, "i wouldn't close down the bridge," or, you know, "i wouldn't send the voter files." i think she has to say, "that's wrong. that's absolutely incorrect." and then she's got to figure out the calculation. does that then, you know, push some of his voters or supporters away from her? but i do think she has to appear to be stronger, and she's gonna have to take some risks if she's going to win something. >> and this is a national election. what i mean by that is, it's an odd year, and there's only two

elections across the country that are statewide. i think virginia's the other state that has off-year elections at a state-wide basis. so money's going to be coming into this left and right. so her profile is gonna be raised. she has an opportunity because of the profile of her democratic opponent and where he has worked before, but it's gonna be awfully tough, given, frankly, trump more than christie. >> but i'll tell you -- i would never have thought a democrat could get elected attorney general after kathleen kane. in pennsylvania. >> and josh shapiro's sitting there... >> and i was completely wrong, and he won easily. so you never know. >> well, speaking of elections, let's turn and talk a little bit about philadelphia and the district attorney's office. we know there will be an election coming up in the fall, but in the interim, the city needs a d.a. and a couple of people have said, "a panel has to appoint somebody in two weeks. i would like to do it." joe khan, who ran for the office, is saying that he would like to be nominated. kathy martin, who was seth williams' number two and is now running it, said, "well, what about me?" should the panel appoint either one of these two or look for a third party?

>> well, the first thing is, is that we're nominating jim eisenhower. >> i think that's a great idea. >> what do you say, jim? >> you can do that for six months. wonderful. >> he has until the 14th to get his application in. >> you're the first person to ask, sharmain, so thank you. >> we're nominating him. but i think the fact that there is a process, that it's a public process, i think, number one, is really good. it's not -- it may be the two of them, and we can talk about them maybe as being the front-runners, but there are opportunities for others to apply. it's a three-judge panel that's gonna receive this information. and then there are 88 judges, i think, 88 or 84 judges, in this circuit, in the common pleas circuit, who are gonna ultimately make this decision. so i don't think anything's written in stone yet. >> look, i know both the names you mentioned -- joe khan and kathy martin. i think they're both excellent choices. they're very good attorneys. and the key now is to stabilize the office. there are a heck of a lot of great people there. >> who would be better at that? >> well, you know, i'm not gonna say because they're both -- >> well, that's kind of why you're here.

>> tam, i'll say. >> honestly, i'm not trying to avoid it. they're both excellent lawyers. they both would do a great job. kathy martin's been there. i thought the speech that she gave the day of the conviction was very profound and said a lot to a lot of my friends who work there who feel the morale is low and they feel, you know, they're really in a bad position. joe khan brought a lot of great ideas in the election. he did lose the election. you know, unlikely the judges will pick another judge because you'd have to give up being a judge just to serve for a few months. so, i'm not trying to dodge it. i just think they would both be excellent choices. >> would either one of them get something out of it, in terms of running in four years, like just for having done it for six months? >> both of them, but i think the problem -- each of them have pros and cons. with kathy martin, i think she'd be a great stabilizing force. she's been there. but she was brought on by seth. whether that's fair or not, she was brought on by the gentleman who just got convicted for some very bad things. joe khan -- very qualified, but

you look at him and you think, "you're not done yet. you have to --" i mean, i don't know this to be true in fact. it just seems like, "you have a bright future ahead. are you truly a caretaker that doesn't have an interest in this?" so, you want someone who has no interest in running for d.a., at least for some time. >> i would be stunned -- >> that's why jim would be great. >> i would be stunned if the judges pick anyone other than kathy martin. i mean, the interest is in continuity, of getting the d.a.'s office through to the next d.a. and i think kathy martin is there. if you're talking about not disrupting the office further, don't bring in somebody new. let the team there carry it through to the end. >> well, i ultimately agree with jan. as long as nothing comes out of this sort of open process that she had any connections at all to anything that happened... >> this is philadelphia. you know that's the kind of thing that wouldn't happen until, like october. then you find out. >> which is why i think it is important that there are other candidates who are interested -- because if something comes up out of this and we don't have someone else in the process,

then i think it continues to -- i mean, in the end, we need justice and so on being responsible for that in the city. >> right. >> i'll hold that thought. >> you hold that thought. [ laughter ] time for another commercial, and we will come back to "inside story." ♪ ♪

>> "inside story" is presented by temple university. remarkable change isn't easy, but for those who take charge, it comes naturally. explore temple's impact. visit temple.edu/impact. >> welcome back to "inside story." jim, your inside story of the week. >> tamala, democrats are beginning to really gather around senator daylin leach as their candidate to run against pat meehan next year. pat meehan is considered vulnerable by democrats. it's a district that hillary won. you're gonna see national money flowing from all over the country in this particular election. it's gonna be a real big one.

>> all right. jeff? >> just this past week, it was announced that senator john mccain is gonna be this year's recipient of the liberty medal, given out by the national constitution center. and who will be bestow the liberty medal itself onto senator mccain? none other than one of our favorite senators from a neighboring state -- delaware -- and now the former vice president -- joe biden. it will be a nice shot of bipartisan across the bow in these very tough times. >> it'll be true affection -- two decades of friendship between the two. >> so nice. >> sharmain? >> tamala, tomorrow thousands of teens in philadelphia are gonna be hitting the streets not to hang out, but to actually go to work. they're gonna be in barbershops. they're gonna be in stores. and i really want to thank all the employers in the city of philadelphia who hired a teen. thank you very much, but don't stop there. make sure that you talk to them and help them plan their careers. >> those first jobs are so important. jan? >> donald trump's issue was immigration. it got him elected, and it disproved the notion that everybody was on board with amnesty and sanctuary cities for illegal immigration.

this week, a bunch of democratic intellectuals have come out with a flurry of articles in the new york times, the atlantic, cnn, brookings institute, on urging the democratic party to reverse its position on immigration, to get back in the flow of where the american voters are if they really want to get out of the wilderness. >> all right. thanks to all of you for being here. thanks to you for being here. we'll see you next sunday on "inside story." ♪ >> i'm nydia han along with jeanette reyes in for gray hall. coming up on "action news," a tragic scene in delaware after a vehicle crashes into an spca building. what we are learning about the accident that killed a woman and several animals. >> why iraqi troops are optimistic in their fight against isis. the very latest on markell

fultz condition. those story and more next on "action news."

>> good afternoon it is sunday, july 9 i'm nydia han along with jeanette reyes. >> here's some of the stories we're following on "action news." family members of a woman who died after crashing h