AirTalk®

Lively and in-depth discussions of city news, politics, science, entertainment, the arts, and more. Hosted by Larry Mantle

AirTalk® for

AirTalk for August 29, 2011

From This Episode

1

Could initiative reform destroy direct democracy?

California Democrats are pushing several bills that would make the initiative process more difficult. Among them are proposals that would raise the filing fees for initiatives, require signature gatherers to wear badges showing whether or not they’re paid, and one that would list the largest donors to any initiative in the voter information guide. Democrats say these new rules will make the initiative process more transparent. According to them big-money interests have hijacked the process in recent years and passed laws that have put untenable restraints on lawmakers. According to state Senator Mark DeSaulnier, one of the major backers of the bills, legislators are hamstrung by initiatives that earmark state funds for expensive projects and programs while making it difficult to raise taxes. Detractors aren’t having it. They say the democrat’s reform bills are nothing more than an attempt to destroy direct democracy in the state. Both parties have benefited from the initiative process over the years, but initiative experts say the new proposals would have a greater impact on republicans. It’s unclear whether or not the bills can pass. Some of them may need republican support to do so and that’s unlikely. It’s also unclear whether or not Governor Jerry Brown will sign any of these bills into law. He’s long been a supporter of initiatives and recently vetoed a bill that would have outlawed paying signature gatherers. Is the initiative process out of control? Or just working for the wrong side according to the majority democrats in the legislature? Do any of these bills stand a chance? Will they reform the initiative process and make it more transparent or destroy it and dismantle the most direct route voters have to democracy?

2
3
4

Biden on China’s one-child-policy – gaffe or diplomacy?

Vice President Joe Biden has stirred up controversy again over something he said, which, his spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff asserts, he didn’t really mean to say. On August 21st Biden was in China giving a speech to Chinese leaders. In response to a question about that nation’s one-child policy, the V.P. said, “Your policy has been one which I fully understand—I'm not second-guessing.” He then added that the policy was economically unsustainable. On Tuesday, Mitt Romney’s camp issued a statement saying that “Biden should have condemned it in the strongest possible terms. There can be no defense of a government that engages in compulsory sterilization and forced abortions in the name of population control.” In response to the criticism, Biden’s office issued its own statement, “The Obama administration strongly opposes all aspects of China’s coercive birth limitation policies, including forced abortion and sterilization. The Vice President believes such practices are repugnant.” But this hasn’t stopped the GOP from blasting Biden for supporting China’s “gruesome and barbaric” one-child policy, which was adopted 30 years ago. China’s policy limits most couples to one child, with exceptions made for rural families and for couples whose first child is a girl. Many couples willingly follow the rule, but coercion is common. And couples who break the law face fines or joblessness. Whether Biden supports the policy or not, the kerfuffle begs many questions. Do lawmakers routinely say one thing in one country, and something else altogether upon returning home? Is that diplomacy or duplicity? If Biden does support or “understand” China’s policy, is it right or wrong for him to say so? And moral questions aside, is China’s policy economically unsustainable?

Recent Episodes from AirTalk®

Adam Schiff on re-introducing the Rim of the Valley Preservation Act

As of yesterday, the Rim of the Valley Corridor Preservation Act has seen renewed life. We delve into details of the bill, which hopes to add 191,000 acres to the Santa Monica Mountains, and inquire into the potential pushback from local communities. We also explain tips for earthquake preparedness; converse with author Jessica Bruder on her latest book "Nomadland"; and more.

LAPD Chief Beck: LAPD’s new drone program, event security post-Las Vegas, and more

LAPD Chief Charlie Beck joins Larry for his monthly check-in with the next steps regarding the LAPD’s drone policies after its one-year pilot program was approved yesterday. We also debate a proposal to ban items like pepper spray and gas masks at Los Angeles protests; sit down with the Lakers General Manager Rob Pelinka ahead of tomorrow’s season opener against the Clippers; and more.

Should California spur on the shift to electric vehicles or follow the industry?

San Francisco assemblyman Phil Ting has proposed a bill that would ban gas or diesel-fueled cars by 2040. Though Ting's bill sounds extreme, auto makers have long expressed a decreased interest in diesel cars, sparking a debate on whether lawmakers are falling behind on industry trends. We also get the latest on Raqqa and its political future; explore the roles of power lines in California wildfires; and more.

Week in Politics: Divisions within the GOP, Iran nuclear deal gets decertified, NAFTA is being renegotiated and more

The start of the week brings a whole new list of political happenings that need mulling over: a battle of the IQ's between Trump and Rex Tillerson, Steve Bannon declaring internal "war" on the GOP, the decertification of the Iran nuclear deal, and more. We also look into the realities actors face in speaking out against major studio heads; discuss Ron Chernow's new biography with the author himself; and more.

Browse the AirTalk® Archives

    Enjoy AirTalk®? Try KPCC’s other programs.