. from washington, "the mclaughlin group," the american original. for over three decades, the sharpest k. . issue one, demography rules. fasten your seat belt. get this -- white births make up less than half of the births in the u.s. today, numerically. they're dominant in the u.s. today. the implications for politics, the economy, and the nation's

identity are noteworthy. and the cencus bureau has made it official now 49.6% of all births in the u.s. today are white. this is the first time in history that white births registered below 50%, so says the leading demographer at the institution, dr. william fry. he says, we have been william f he says, we hain the last several years. the u.s. cencus data on the ship was made public for the 12- july. dr. fry says, last july. dr. fry says, "this is an important tipping ., a transformation from a mostly white baby boomer culture to the more globalized, multi- ethnic country that we are becoming." the new york times calls this a milestone for the nation. here's the times piece.

"such a turn has been long- expected. but no one was certain when the moment would arrive. signaling a milestone for a nation whose governor. was founded by white europeans and has wrestled with issues of race from the days of slavery through a civil war, bitter civil rights battles and most recently highly charged debates over efforts to restrict immigration." question, is the hispanic birthrate surging or is the white birthrate being delayed? >> the white birthrate has been below replacement level for about 35 years, john. and if you want to see what the future of america will look like, i think you ought to look at california, where whites are clearly already in a minority. they're down i believe to close to 40% now. what is happen to the golden land? it's got lowest bond rating in the united states, its budget is completely in deficit. you've got the test scores of

california students on average are declining dramatically. you have the departure of the middle-class black and white, americans from california, because the taxes are going up dramatically, and politically, john, you have the death of republican party. and i think as -- because 90% of all republican votes are white folks. and they're only 60% of the country now, and as they fall to say 50%, you got to get almost all of them to win the election some the change is dramatic. >> when i use the word delayed, i'm referring to white females today who are postponing, delaying, what would have been an early childbirthing period, because they want to accomplish something in their jobs or whatever. >> right. >> so this is really a -- a question that may not have a basis in fact what we say on the screen. >> i don't think the white birthrate will catch up with the hispanic birthrate. but this is a -- a tilting of

america that we've seen coming for a good long while. and i agree with pat on one thing, it's the death of the republican party. if they don't change some of their policies and the tone of their rhetoric towards the new america. i don't think it's a negative thing, and i don't think it has the fire as a political issue that it once had. you have illegal immigration from mexican -- mexico slowing down dramatically. you have many people, my own family included, who have multi- cultural aspects. it's not a scary thing to most people. people are fine with it. and the generation that this new generation babies, they'll be -- they're the workers of tomorrow. if we didn't have them, we would be in trouble. >> my peering . is still not addressed. white females are having babies later. latino females have their babies in their 20s.

therefore, the statistic is based on what is not -- >> this is one statistic, john -- america is no longer going to have a self-identify as a white nation. we are as this researcher said, joining the multi-cultural world. and even if more white women have babies, i don't think that will change the trend. >> they have them later! [overlapping speakers] >> you're leaving out income. >> this is not a natural thing. this is a product of deliberate government policy starting in 1965, when we changed our immigration laws and for four decades you've had this overwhelming tide of immigration immigration. -- [overlapping speakers] >> 1965, teddy kennedy. >> liberalization since then. but the optimistic occasion which eleanor makes, if you want to make that case you can look back to the turn of the century when in 1910 when a higher proportion of foreign-

born people than we do now. 15% then, now it's 12. a lot of people then weren't -- they were considered minorities, not end time whites, italians and jews and the rest of and they were assimilated perfectly fine. the thing that is different now is one after 1910 but a big pause in immigration so it did stop and digest. and you had a much stronger simulation ethic which has really erode ed now and i'm between pat and eleanor with pat representing a plausible but pessimistic scenario and eleanor representing -- [overlapping speakers] >> there's a column here publish in the chicago tribune. america's uneasy browning, clarence page, may 23rd. what is your . here? >> the thing is it's hardly dead. i find it laughable not only a

mixed race president but what marco rubio, in florida, you've got governor of louisiana, governor of south carolina, parents indian born assimilating very well. the melting pot of mulligan stew still works. california has been troubled because of people like howard jarvis of proposition 13, in 1970s, that put this lid on taxes. so they no longer wanted to pay for the wonderful educational system california used toe have if you don't pay for it, you're not going to get it. same thing with more recently why the republican party is losing because they alienated the hispanics. america. fortunately, most americans -- >> let me talk, john. >> you'll get a chance, pat. most learns are ostomies tick about the melting pot, and i think a cencus made a mistake by not counting mixed race people as -- as white or some

of them as white. it's hard to know how many of them count. but the fact is we're going through a browning process right now. more and more people have somebody of a different race in their family -- >> let's talk a little -- looking you're going to get new taxes this fall hopefully, jerry brown will raise the income tax over 10% in california. whites and african-americans are leaving california, the middle-class. why can't republicans get hispanics? sip the reason half of all americans don't pay incomes taxes. vast majority of hispanics are under that, they get food starches, free education, health care. and the whole thing is when texas goes, john, texas whites in texas tips the way of california, it's the ends of the republican party, the conservative party nationally, because republicans cannot win a voting bloc, hispanics half of whom drop out of high school. >> i disagree. i think the republican party is going to reinvent itself. they've got a number of figures

within their ranks that are rising stars, that represent the optimistic view on the changing demographics. and if they don't adapt, they will die. but i think they will adapt. pat, you're on the wrong side of this. >> i'm on the right side. [overlapping speakers] >> mixed race people some identify themselves as white, also half of hispanics on the cencus identify themselves as white. and actually talking about assimilation, this is a cause for opt minimum. the longer they're here, the richer they are, the more they call themselves typical americans. >> they've become republicans! >> and the more they call themselves identified as white and the more -- >> when we come back -- >> by the way -- >> when we come back, sky cops! issue two, sky cops!

the u.s. military now deploys up to 10,000 uav's, unmanned aerial vehicles, drones. these drones have no pilots onboard but they are piloted. the pilots may be located thousands of miles away in sites like norad and colorado. these give assistance and surveillance and reconaissance and then fighting the enemy. congress recently passed legislation that opens up domestic airspace to unmanned drones. the law directs the faa, the u.s. federal aviation administration, to streamline permits for u.s. police nationwide and first responders to pilot commercial drones from an electronic switchboard promotely. the faa must also saferly integrate commercial drones into u.s. airspace by 2015.

smaller lightweight cheaper mode else's are now in use by law enforcement agencies at all levels who want to be able to use drones to detect crime before it happens. the faa predicts as many as 30,000 drones, that's 30,000, will be flying in the skies within eight years from now. privacy advocates don't like this at all. like the aclu. drones will be to invade privac >> they can be to invade privac >> they can be armed with various types of weapons and police department inside the u.s. expressed an interest in being able to use various forms of non-lethal force on the drones some they raise privacy concerns, but also safety concerns and could shape -- con doors in the u.s. >> a former judge on the new jersey supreme court and a current fox news analyst is against drone use by the fbi

and by local police without first securing a court order. >> the first american patriot that shoots down one of these drones that comes too close to his d become yard will be an american hero. >> question, is the use of police drones different than the use of police helicopters? if so, why the fuss? >> it's the same idea, spying. but the little drones are like big brother on steroids. some of them are very tiny, like the -- part of a disco ball. and you can imagine them floating everywhere, gathering all kinds of information, and i think they're going to be laws that are litigated that go to the supreme court over how you control these things. and there are safety concerns as well. but it's a wave of the future. they're coming. and frankly, i'm not all that upset about it. >> the cheaper than helicopters. >> look, they can be abused, sure. you get them over your swimming pool in the summer, peeping in your window. >> looking for topless sunbathers? >> yes, but at the same time look at police use helicopters

in car chases, they use them in riots, they get hostage situations. all of these things. they can be enormously helpful. they're cheap and also don't risk lives the way helicopters do. and so are they open to abuse? sure they are. but everything else is as well. and they're going to have rules and regulations. i love the judge but don't shift --. >> of course, noisier, and fly over the house. >> you can't do it secretly. >> you know the chopper is there. otherwise you can go on the web now and see pictures of mechanical drones, as small as a humming bird, one called that because it's the same size. and the future of this is remarkable. but the question is, how much -- the old question, how much of a tradeoff to you want to make between liberty and privacy? how much do you trust the government and not abusing? >> there is no privacy in america, smart phones track your movement even when you turn then off. google can driver every street,

and up every signal and sweep up passwords and it's legal. facebook can collect volumes of personal information from users. that's better than anything big brother it dreaming and so third parties klug ones with contracts to share the data. there's no privacy left. is anybody appalled by this? >> seems like -- [overlapping speakers] people are volunteering giving their information. you don't center to go on facebook and give them your birthday. the swimming pool example with the drone is a good one where the line will be very fuzzy because the line is -- are you in places where you have an expectation of privacy? so driving on the road you don't if you're speeding. and drones make it hard to speed. >> why do you want so much privacy? >> but if you're sunbathing on your backyard -- drone overhead looking at you, that's a place -- >> take a look at this one. >> george allen is campaigning, talking, hey, look at him in

the -- one of his little phones there! takes pictures and that cost him his senate seat. >> exit question, does america need a national law protecting citizens' privacy from both corporate and government snooping drones? yes or no? >> we've got enough laws now. and it will -- >> we've got not laws, plus there are already 40 members of a drones caucus in the house on capitol hill. >> really? >> support these things. >> drone contractors in there! >> we don't need another law. >> name something they want to hide. quickly. >> we don't need a law. we have the 4th amendment. >> no matter what law they pass, it will be obsolete. technology is moving ahead. >> pending legislation, is inadequate. we need a law. issue three, overhauling the tsa. >> my theory is let's clean out, not have the officers look for the knives and small things. focus on bombs, toxins, things that could destroy the plane. >> he is frustrated with the

tsa, the transportation security administration. the agency he oversaw from 2005 to 2009. he now says airport security is broken. tsa was created in the wake of the 9/11 attacks to bolster flight security. but long lines, patdowns, and rigid baggage screening has built public animosity towards the tsa. all they suggest the change of focus, away from searching for low risk items, like nail clippers, to detecting high risk threats like strange behavior, which would-be passengers carry bombs. he add mites that knives, even small knives, can be dangerous but cockpit doors are now locked and reinforced. >> you just cannot take over a plane with the knives, and it's a risk management issue. you say yes, somebody could bring a knife and stab the guy next to him. that is a risk. and when i tried to get small

scissors taken off the -- items list, there was a scream of, there will be blood running in the aisles! but what i want and risk management would dictate is you've got to find the bombs, because the bomb will take down a plane. >> he has these suggestions. one, more tsa officer plexability. tsa officers should have more discretion to interact with passengers and to work and lucid teams throughout airports. no security agency on earth has the experience and pattern recognition skills of tsa officers. two, eliminate baggage fees. passengers may overstuff carry- on luggage to avoid multiple bag fees. resulting in a check . nightmare in the bag content search. three, randomize security. the more terrorists know what to expect at the airport, the grthe chance to evade the

system. question, is there an additional benefit inside the cabin from going back to allowing free checked baggage? >> yes, he is saying you don't have people stuffing so qeñq their carry-on bags, they'll be less of a hassle -- >> claiming space in the racks that someone else claims? >> also the exit process and entrance process slowed up? >> obviously a man who is on a lot of planes, john! no once a week. >> everything he says makes sense. but it's just incredible. he counts it a great victory that he made a possible for people to take ice skates on to planes again. and if that's big change at the tsa, probably none of this will happen. we should have an israeli style system that is focusing more on individual passengers, but is hard to scale that up in a big country and the political obsequies are enormous. >> israeli situation, are you consultant, everybody is consulted by -- a woman agent, and she identified herself,

asks you a few questions and most your head. that's a quick process. it's an interplay, and it's quite civil i'd. >> that's right. but it takes time. and like rich said, the volume our air traffic here is so much larger than's. you need a lot of trained people. the lines are already bad. this program, i've had the experience of checking in at the airport and the guy goes, hello, mr. page. may i see your i.d.? has that happened to you? >> everywhere -- [overlapping speakers] >> i get the full 9 yards. snook with patting? go ahead. >> take your shoes off. >> what did they use on 9/11, they used boxcutters, and one guy came in his underwear, and the shoot bomber had explosive in his shoe. you've got a lot of these things you can deal with on the

person's person. >> the tsa recently removed henry kissinger from his wheelchair in order to frisk him. does that prove that it's overh tsa? >> i think henry probably enjoyed being treated like an i tsa and thanks in part to his efforts, rarely do you wait more than 10 minutes some they've gotten it down. it seems like a bizarre system, but i don't know which of the the same -- safeguards i would remove. >> it is primitive. primitive! >> yeah, well, it's -- >> let's do it at least the way the israelis do it. and think of the problems in the israelis' would have -- >> three don't have nearly the number of planes we have! [overlapping speakers] >> it has been trouble-free, the moment you have someone inappropriately profiled -- [overlapping speakers] >> bring down the pleas and

planes and it comes back. the israelis don't have one- tenth the passengers we do! >> what the israelis is doing makes sense to me, pat. we'll be right back with predictions.

prediction, governor scott walker of wisconsin will be recalled. yes or no? >> no way. he's home free! >> yes, but that 25 million dollars is a lot to overcome for the democrats. >> no! >> yes, but narrowly. >> the answer is, no! bye-bye!