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®

AirTalk’s LA Riots special: What happened 25 years ago

AirTalk looks back at the LA Riots and discusses how the city has changed in the last 25 years. Plus, the filmmakers of "LA 92" talk about their new documentary on the riots, and critics review this week's latest movies on FilmWeek.

‘A Nation Engaged:’ The use of executive orders by presidents

As President Trump approaches his 100th day benchmark, NPR News launches another “A Nation Engaged” conversation on the topic of “Power & the Presidency” - we take a comparative look at the use of executive orders between the last two administrations. We'll also cover Trump's new VOICE office; debate Measure C; how should parents should talk to kids about past drug use?; and more.

State audit of UC President's Office finds widespread mishandling, hidden funds; UC pushes back

According to a state audit released Tuesday, the University of California Office of the President has kept a $175 million secret reserve - we dive into the findings and pushback surrounding the California State Auditor's report. We'll also debate the expected cuts in President Trump's new tax plan; the latest ruling on protecting funding for sanctuary cities; flying cars; and more.

Hollywood reacts to the WGA strike authorization

WGA is negotiating with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers today, but if no deal is reached, how would a potential strike impact Angelenos? We'll also cover the NRA's lawsuit over the assault weapons ban and implications surrounding the newest SCOTUS justice; whether California can resume lethal injections by next year; and more.

Browse the AirTalk® Archives

    Enjoy AirTalk®? Try KPCC’s other programs.