Passengers board Metrolink subway trains during rush hour on June 3, 2008 in Los Angeles, California. ; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

Last time we spoke with L.A. County Metro CEO Phil Washington, we asked him about the delays and overcrowded cars that were plaguing the recently-opened Expo Line from Santa Monica to downtown L.A.

Its backers hope the new line will alleviate traffic congestion on the 10 Freeway during rush hour. There have been some challenges since its launch, from overcrowded cars to maintaining the speed necessary to keep the trains on time. Washington says Metro is making progress.

"We’re working with the city of Santa Monica to synchronize lights and that sort of thing," Washington told AirTalk's Larry Mantle. "The overcrowding issue — it was just incredible that we exceeded all ridership expectations on that particular line and the Gold Line as well. Starting Monday [yesterday] we put more cars on the Expo Line and we increased the frequency. We moved from 12 minutes between every train to six minutes between every train, so I think riders will see big relief on the Expo Line."

Also since our last check-in, the Los Angeles Rams have begun playing home games at the Coliseum downtown. So, are people actually taking the train to football Sundays?

"Since the Rams have started playing at the Coliseum, we’re carrying about 20 percent of the people that are at the game," Washington said.  "That is incredible. These trains are crowded and we’re having to put more cars on."

We also talked with Washington about how many people are taking advantage of the bike share program Metro launched back in July, what Metro is doing to address parking issues in areas like Azusa that are seeing a larger influx of passengers now that they are Metro-accessible, and the security improvements riders can expect to see on the Blue Line and elsewhere.

Interview highlights

What kind of security and cleanliness improvements can we expect to see, especially on the Blue Line?

We are doubling down on our security efforts. We took to the L.A. Metro Board last month an action to create a uniformed presence at stations, sort of a fixed-post presence. Ridership will see that presence starting now on the Blue Line and the Green Line. Our riders will see uniformed security presence at those stations and on trains as well, and our board approved that action last month. In terms of safety and state of good repair, over the next 10 years we’re putting $1 billion into the Blue Line to bring that up to a state of good repair. With that being the oldest line, there’s a lot of work we need to do on it. As a matter of fact, in the next week, we’re having an event where we’re putting $30 million into the state of good repair and repairs on the Blue Line. We’re paying a lot of attention to the infrastructure needs on the Blue Line and all our lines.  

As trains pass by on the Expo Line, the arms will not lift sometimes for 40 seconds after the train leaves the intersection, causing a traffic backup. Can that be safely shortened?

We’ll look at it. Safety is our number one priority. We do not want to cause backups. There are regulations out there that require the gate stay down a certain period of time, even after the train has passed. We’ll look at that on all of our crossings to see if those gates are down too long.

What is the current status of the Regional Connector, which would connect Blue and Expo Lines to Gold Line and Union Station?

The Regional Connector is one of three projects we have under construction. We opened up two lines this year: The Gold Line extension to Azusa and the Expo Line all the way out to Santa Monica. We have three more under construction, and that includes the Regional Connector. We are pretty early on in construction, maybe 25-30 percent along. It’s really a game-changer that will allow for a one-seat ride from Azusa down to Long Beach. This is a game-changer for the region. We just lowered a tunnel-boring machine last week to start digging a tunnel under the earth to allow for that particular project and station. 

How are you addressing parking issues created by a larger number of riders taking the train from places like Azusa, where a stop was recently added?

One of the things we’re looking at is trying to partner with the cities out there to purchase more parking areas. The Gold Line at Azusa there are some areas that we’re looking at. Keep in mind that on the Expo and Gold Line, on Metro-owned property, we went with parking as best we could in those areas. To acquire more property for parking, we have to have willing partners (i.e. the cities or property owners). We’re doing the best we can to acquire property for parking.

How successful has the bike share program been so far and where is it in comparison to cities like New York, Chicago, and San Francisco that have similar programs? 

The consultants we brought on board said it’d be about two years before we reach numbers of other cities like New York, Chicago, or San Francisco. We’re about eight months in and the trend is looking good. We believe that we will build up to those cities. We are looking for a brand name sponsor for that. Most of those other cities have premiere sponsors that partner with the agency. We see a bright future for active transportation and the bike share programs. When this started, you had to be a pass-holder, either monthly or annual. We are looking at extending that so all riders can use the bikes, and I do see that as our future.

When will cell service be added to the Red Line above 7th and Metro?

We are working right now with cellular service. We just turned on Union Station to 7th and Metro. We’re working on the next phase right now. I’m thinking that next phase will be completed in the spring or so of next year. It’s a full-court press to get cellular service in that tunnel. Just eight months ago there was no cellular service in there. We challenged the private sector and I challenged my team to get cellular service. We’ve got it in there from Union Station to 7th, and we are moving forward aggressively to get the rest of it done.

What are overall ridership numbers like, including bus and light rail?

On bus, we are slightly down. On rail, we’re increasing because of the new additions. We see this as a cyclical sort of phenomenon. Gas prices are low right now. The trend is not downward now, but leveling off as we see it. We’re in a national trend of bus ridership reducing all over the country.

Note: This interview has been edited for clarity.

Guest:

Phil Washington, chief executive officer, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro)

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Hung-Chieh Chiang of Chinese Taipei shows their engagement ring during press conference on September 21, 2016 in Tokyo, Japan. ; Credit: Ken Ishii/Getty Images

Earlier this month, a Tokyo District Court dismissed a newlywed female teacher’s request to use her maiden name at work.

The context here is a society in which a Meiji-era law, upheld by Japan’s highest court in 2015, dictates that all married couples share a surname. In practice, this translates to 96 percent of brides taking their husband’s last names.

Many Japanese women continue to use maiden names in their professional lives, but the Tokyo District Court’s decision undermines this practice. Some in Japan see the decision as a win for traditional values, while others see it as an obstruction to gender equality.  

Meanwhile, in the U.S., an estimated 1 in 5 women keep their maiden names. The reasons why women change or don’t change their surnames are as varied as they are nuanced, and involve negotiating issues of heritage, feminism, identity, convenience, tradition and children, to name just a few.

We want to hear from you. Why did you make the decision to change or not change your surname? What were the subsequent challenges and benefits of your decision? Or did you take an alternate route, like a hyphenated or compound last name, and how did that work for you?

Guest:

Laurie Scheuble, Senior Lecturer of Sociology at Penn State, whose research interests include marital naming and parenting    

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Sun Valley residents vote at the polling station located at Our Lady of The Holy Church on election day at the Sun Valley's Latino district, Los Angeles County, on November 6, 2012 in California.; Credit: JOE KLAMAR/AFP/Getty Images

From the likes of Justin Timberlake to Beyonce, selfies are making their way into polling places.

Voters across the country are sharing their completed ballots with the world via social media. It's currently illegal to do so in California, but a new law signed by Gov. Jerry Brown allowing the practice will go into effect soon after this year’s election. Opponents worry the phenomena could lead to vote buying and election fraud. Supporters say it’s constitutionally protected speech.

Are polling place selfies a good way to promote voting, or a better way to sell your vote?

Guest: 

Josh Douglas, Professor of Law specializing in Election Law and Voting Rights, University of Kentucky

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Tyshuanna Johnson get her blood drawn for HIV/AIDS and STD testing by Ernest Johnson of John Wesley Community Health Institute during a health fair in Los Angeles, California. ; Credit: Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

Sexually transmitted infections are on the rise across the country and here in California. Nationally, gonorrhea is up 13% year-to-year.

Chlamydia up six-percent. But the biggest increase is in syphilis. It's up 19%, to a level we haven't seen in 20 years. Here in California, gonorrhea cases have doubled in five years.

Why the increase? Is it simply the result of the Affordable Care Act and more people going to doctors than in the past? Could it be more people avoiding use of condoms, given HIV's ability to be managed as a chronic condition? Larry talks with a medical expert about what might explain some of the alarming numbers.

Guest:

Richard Seidman, M.D., chief medical officer for Northeast Valley Health Corporation

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Dreadlock artist Ananda Rieber repairs and maintains a man's dread hairstyle in his flat in Berlin on July 9, 2013.; Credit: JOHANNES EISELE/AFP/Getty Images

Every workplace has guidelines on appearance, but what about policies on hair texture?

A recent NPR article notes a 2012 incident where an African-American job candidate, Chastity Jones, was denied employment because she refused to cut off her dreadlocks. This led to a discrimination lawsuit which ended in an appeals court last month, ruling against Jones.

So what are the legalities concerning dreadlocks in the workplace and should they less accepted than rules that let employees wear hijab or yarmulkes? And does the fact that people of any race can wear dreadlocks make a difference?

Larry Mantle speaks to Law Professor Camille Gear Rich and Africana Studies Professor Noliwe Rooks about the nuances and legalities of wearing dreadlocks on the job.

Guests:

Camille Gear Rich, professor of law and sociology provost level diversity liaison for the social sciences  at the USC Gould School of Law

Noliwe Rooks, associate professor of Africana Studies and Feminist, Gender, Sexuality Studies at Cornell University

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The sun sets behind the Cross of Sacrifice at Tyne Cot Commonwealth War Graves Commission Memorial on August 2, 2014 in Passchendaele, Belgium.; Credit: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

What happens and where we may or may not go after we die depends on your faith, but the rules for handling remains are pretty clear from religion to religion.

This week, the Catholic Church is reminding its followers what the rules are when it comes to cremation and the spreading of ashes. The Vatican released guidelines on Tuesday stating that the ashes of loved ones shouldn’t be kept in the home or scattered, but put in a safe place like a cemetery or mausoleum. The announcement comes ahead of All Saints Day on November 2nd and is also in response to the fact that cremation is becoming a more popular practice. But it’s not exactly a new directive from the Vatican. While cremation was expressly banned for centuries, the Catholic Church changed its position in 1963 and said that cremation was allowed, but frowned-upon.

The Church advocates for burial instead of cremation, which is rooted in its belief that the body is resurrected, and said in its document that it could not “condone attitudes or permit rites that involve erroneous ideas about death, such as considering death as the definitive annihilation of the person, or the moment of fusion with Mother Nature or the universe, or as a stage in the cycle of regeneration, or as the definitive liberation from the ‘prison’ of the body.” Yet many other religions encourage or even require cremation or the spreading of ashes after death as a way to reintroduce the body and soul to the Earth.

What do other major world religions say about how the remains of loved ones should be handled?

Guest:

Varun Soni, Ph.D., Dean of Religious Life at the University of Southern California and an assistant professor in USC’s School of Religion

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

California’s Proposition 61, which seeks to provide more affordable prescription drug coverage, has become one of the most highly debated measures this election.

According to a recent KPCC article, under the measure, specific state programs such as Medi-Cal fee-for service plans and CalPers, would not pay more than the Department of Veterans Affairs pays for prescription drugs.

The measure has been endorsed by political superstars including Bernie Sanders, Robert Reich and Dolores Huerta. And the Yes on 61 campaign accuses pharmaceutical companies opposing the proposition of “unconscionable profiteering.”

"Drug companies are raising prices exponentially now," says Garry South, chief strategist and spokesperson for the 'Yes' campaign on 61. "Think about the EpiPen. They’re doing it at-will, exponentially, and putting these drugs out of the reach of not just average people but government healthcare programs at federal and state levels. They will continue to raise prices willy-nilly if nothing happens."

But the No on Prop. 61 campaign claims the measure would increase prescription drug costs for veterans and reduce patient access to medications.

"It’s very easy right now for people in California, and everywhere, to be upset with the drug companies and concerned about drug prices," says campaign spokesperson Kathy Fairbanks. "There even may be an instinct to stick it to the drug companies, and I think that’s what the proponents are hoping for in passing Prop 61. It’s not going to stick it to the drug companies, it’s actually going to boomerang and backfire on patients and California taxpayers.

Highlights: 3 things to know

What will the overall impact on drug prices be if Prop 61 passes?

Garry South (Yes on 61): This is a measure that deals only with state purchases of drugs. In other words, drugs purchased directly by the state of California with taxpayer dollars. Our estimation is that if the state of California achieves the ability to buy drugs at the same rate that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs pays, the taxpayers could save up to $1 billion a year. In addition, this is a measure that the drug companies have already put $109 million into trying to beat it. This breaks all records for any ballot measure in the history of California back to 1912 when we adopted the initiative system. Opponents are going to tell you that this is something that would actually raise drug prices for veterans and others and not lower them. This measure would not do any of the things that the opponents of it tell you would do. It would be only the drug industry itself that would try to punish taxpayers and consumers in California. 

Kathy Fairbanks (No on 61): I can’t say for sure what will happen if Prop 61 passes. What I can point to is similar policy. Back in 1990, Congress passed the Omnibus Budget Act of 1990 which extended VA pricing to other federal agencies, meaning that other federal agencies could buy drugs at the same price that the VA got. At the time, the prices that the VA was paying went up because the small program that was supposed to be for the VA was extended to federal agencies. That’s what we’re looking at today. The VA pricing would be extended to California, and I don’t know that there’s any reason to think that history wouldn’t repeat itself. Nothing in Prop 61 prevents drug prices to the VA from going up and those costs being passed on, and then that will have a ripple effect across the entire state. If Prop 61 goes into effect, and the 12 percent of people covered by Prop 61 experience some lower drug prices, the 88 percent of people in California who are not covered by Prop 61 could see an offsetting price increase. 

So should voters be concerned that Prop 61 will have a similar ripple effect?

GS: The federal legislation Kathy refers to did apply the discounts that the VA was enjoying to other federal government programs. It is true that the avaricious drug companies, in their greed, did raise the prices to the VA. What she didn’t mention is what happened in 1992 as a result of that act of greed by the drug companies. Congress put in place a law that mandates the drug discounts to the VA, and the drug companies cannot overcome that of their own volition. It also put in place a law that limits price increases to the VA to no more than the consumer price index. It is utterly disingenuous to assert that if Prop 61 passes, drug companies can go to the VA, rip up their contracts, and raise prices to the VA. Federal law doesn’t allow that to happen. 

KF: Garry is right about that 1992 law and he’s right that the VA automatically gets a discount of 24 percent off the list price of drugs. What he didn’t tell you is that the VA doesn’t always pay that price. The VA actually negotiates steeper discounts for the drugs that it purchases, and estimates are that it could pay 40 percent less than Medicare and get a much steeper discount than that 24 percent.

What will the overall impact be on veterans?

GS: I really respect and honor our veterans' service to our country, but there are Prop 60 ads all over the air with vets talking about how this is going to increase prices to not just the VA, but veterans as well. That also is not possible under the law. Most veterans don’t pay anything for VA care or drugs if they have a service-related injury. Those vets get their care for free. Other vets who have non service-related maladies or illnesses or problems pay a very low co-pay per month -- $8 per drug is the highest it can go – and there’s a $960 limit annually on what a veteran can pay out of pocket. So a typical veteran isn’t affected by drug prices that the VA pays, even if they go higher.

KF: The concern of the VA, and this is where they come up with the $3.8 billion I mentioned earlier, is the difference between the prices that they’re paying now and the 24 percent is that $3.8 billion. If the VA is faced with such a big budget hole, even if it doesn’t get to that $3.8 billion figure, they will have to fill that hole somehow. There’s only two ways to address a budget deficit: either you cut costs, which could mean cutting services to veterans, or you pass the cost along. Nothing in Prop 61 says that the federal government couldn’t someday increase co-pays for veterans or charge them more for healthcare. Prop 61 can’t dictate what a federal government does. If VA is faced with massive budget hole, they’ll have to do something and from a veteran’s perspective, they don’t like what they see.

How much is being spent on the campaigns?

Guests:

Garry South, chief strategist and spokesperson for the Yes on 61 campaign

Kathy Fairbanks, spokesperson for the No on Prop 61 coalition

Voting has begun in California. KPCC is here for you and will help you develop your Voter Game Plan. Use our election guide to find your personalized ballot.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Ahead of the November presidential election, tension run high. A polls show Americans say the election is a causing stress.; Credit: PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images

Addicted to watching presidential election news? Have you lost sleep over your country's divisiveness? Are you desperate for it to end? 

Fear not.

There are ways to survive this election season despite the endless campaign scandals and divisive rhetoric exasperating our media screens. Steven Stosny, a therapist based in Washington, D.C., coined the term “Election Stress Disorder” and says that most of this stress comes from the “toddler part” of our brain.

“You're not capable of seeing any perspective but your own,” says Stosny. “Now the election has really reinforced that — partially on purpose and partially inadvertently. The easiest way to switch into [the] adult brain is [to] try to see another perspective.”

Stosny adds that anger and resentment are the most contagious of all emotions. This election cycle in particular, he said, has been fueled by negativity that contributes to a majority of burnt-out voters.

“Whenever we're against something, we have to be motivated by adrenaline,” Stosny says. “Adrenaline gives you a surge of energy and confidence, but then you crash, self-doubt comes in, and you feel depressed. The antidote is to be really clear of what you're for. Not what the candidates are saying so much, but your own analysis of the issues and what you think is best for the country. The more you're against something, the more you say ‘No,’ the less sure of yourself you get. You don’t know who you are; you just know who you’re not.”

Tips for avoiding election anxiety

We've collected a few tips from Airtalk listeners below on managing election stress. How are you coping during the last weeks of the presidential race? Let us know in the comments below, or on Facebook. 

1. PUT YOUR ANXIETY INTO ACTION

“...if I stopped lying on the couch yelling at the television, and I went out and volunteered for my candidate (who’s Hillary), I feel much, much better.” - Jill in Mar Vista

2. SEEK QUIET IN THE CHAOS

"There’s so many issues today that we’re having to take a position on, and it’s just very confusing — Black Lives Matter, police violence, we have candidates that are shouting at each other [...] I'm losing a sense of myself as an American... I've been having a difficult time finding a center, so meditating has been really helpful.” - Patrick in Mar Vista

3. FAUX POLITICS CAN BE THERAPEUTIC

“Having found myself not really too thrilled about either of the candidates, or really any of the candidates, I found myself turning to Netflix and watching the joys of The West Wing. I might even write in Jed Bartlet on my ballot in hopeful thinking, and it’s actually nice to see some sophisticated dialogue and kinda learn a thing or two about the political system, as opposed to just hearing about their personal lives. I’m Bartlet all the way, ‘Team Bartlet’ all the way." - Matt in Glendale

4. POSITIVE SELF-TALK

“My way of dealing with the stress and the ugliness of the election is to try and hang onto my conviction that America is full of decent people who are good people of common sense, and I generally believe that come Election Day, the vast majority of people are gonna come out to cast their vote, and we are gonna be hearing from people who are good, who are thinking, who are decent, and who have the best interest of our country at heart. And when those people speak, we will have a good president, and I generally believe that — and that kind of helps get me through the stress." — Renee in Pasadena

5. HAVE SOME FUN

"After I sent in my ballot, I'm spending a lot of time at the L.A. Zoo. The animals make way more sense than the politicians." — Ron in Inglewood

6. SWITCH BETWEEN STRESSES!

“Well I'm going through a child-custody divorce and when I get sick and tired of listening to all the hyperbole on the radio and television, I focus on my paperwork…[and] honestly I think the opposite is true, too. When I get sick and tired of reading pleading paperwork and stuff, I go, ‘You know what, I’m gonna turn the television on and listen to Trump.’ I go back and forth, it’s amazing.” - Steve in Ontario

Guest:

Steven Stosny, Couples Therapist based in the suburbs of Washington D.C.; Stosny’s most recent book is “"Soar Above: How to use the most profound part of your brain under any kind of stress" [Health Communications (HCI) 2016]

This story has been updated.

Pssst. Here's another tip: Let KPCC help you develop your Voter Game Plan. Use our election guide to find your personalized ballot.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

An anti-government protester wrapped in a Gasden flag stands outside the Harney County Courthouse on February 1, 2016 in Burns, Oregon. ; Credit: Matt Mills McKnight/Getty Images

To the shock of even the defendants, a Portland jury on Thursday acquitted all seven defendants involved in the occupation of Malheur national wildlife refuge in southeast Oregon earlier this year.

Despite the defendants’ guilty pleas and direction from the judge on the letter of the law, the jury found leaders Ammon and Ryan Bundy not guilty of the government’s charge: conspiracy to impede federal officers by force, threat or intimidation. Bundy’s other co-defendants — Jeff Banta, Shawna Cox, David Fry, Kenneth Medenbach and Neil Wampler — have been found not guilty as well.

Larry sits down with Ryan Hass, News Content Manager at Oregon Public Broadcasting, and Tung Yin, professor of law at Lewis & Clark Law School, to discuss the past and future of the Malheur Refuge case.

Professor Tung Yin explains the concept of jury nullification, which occurs when a jury returns a verdict of “Not Guilty” despite its belief that the defendant is guilty of the violation charged. Throughout history, jury nullification appears when the government has tried to enforce unpopular laws, examples include violation of fugitive slave laws and alcohol control laws.

Guests: 

Ryan Hass, News Content Manager at Oregon Public Broadcasting and was in court for yesterday’s verdict

Tung Yin, professor of law at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland, Oregon

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton holds a rally with US Vice President Joe Biden at Riverfront Sports athletic facility on August 15, 2016 in Scranton, Pennsylvania.; Credit: Mark Makela/Getty Images

The FBI informed Congress Friday it is investigating whether additional emails that have emerged in its probe of Hillary Clinton's private server may contain classified information.

The FBI said in July its investigation was finished. The disclosure raises the possibility of the FBI going back to the criminal investigation involving the Democratic presidential nominee just days before the election, although it is not clear if that will happen. Clinton's campaign didn't immediately respond to request for comment.

In a letter sent to congressional leaders, FBI Director James Comey says that new emails have come to light recently that have prompted investigators to take another look at the sensitive government information that flowed through the private email server Clinton used while serving as secretary of state.

With AP files. 

Guest:

Dave Weigel, reporter covering politics for the Washington Post; he tweets @daveweigel

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Elephants roam through trees and low bush on Septemebr 19, 2016 at the Pilanesberg National Park in the North West province, South Africa. They are among the animals mentioned in the report.
; Credit: GIANLUIGI GUERCIA/AFP/Getty Images

A recent report from the World Wildlife Fund has found that two-thirds of vertebrate animals could be extinct by 2020.

Habitat loss, climate change and pollution are just a few reasons cited by the report as major contributors. Unlike previous mass extinctions where asteroids and meteors were to blame, the WWF says humans are responsible for the current state of the environment.

But some researchers are skeptical about these numbers.

Larry Mantle sat down with Robin Freeman, research fellow and Head of Indicators and Assessments Unit at the Zoological Society of London and Stuart Pimm, professor of conservation ecology at Duke University, to break down the report and assess its implications.

Click on the blue playhead above to hear the full discussion, or read highlights below.  

Interview Highlights

On the legitimacy of the statistic

Pimm: I think this survey is horribly misleading... It's basically designed to promote WWF's fundraising activities. And so they're interested in a large, single, alarming statistic. And the problem is much more complicated than that. There are places where species are doing quite well thanks to very energetic conservation efforts, there are places where we just don’t know [...] To come up with a single number leads people to think we have much better data than we do.

Freeman: This statistic is about how much populations of wild species have declined... It's not that these populations are going extinct - they're still here, they're just smaller [...] While the headline number of 58 percent has a lot of variability around it, I think the really important details come when you begin to break that number down.... How can we use this large data set to look at how things like habitat loss are impacting these species?... I still think this number can be a useful tool.

So what does this mean about the takeaways of the report?

Pimm: There's no question that Robin [Freeman]'s overall conclusion is right. That species are declining ...The problem is severe but if you come up with a number like this, it suggests we'll have no wildlife left in 25 years time and then people are going to come back and say, ‘look you're being alarmist.’

Is there a downside to this kind of statistic?

Pimm: We don’t want people to simply be discouraged and think there's nothing we can do [...] Once a species gets put on that endangered species list, it has a really good chance of surviving. Moreover, there are spectacular success stories. There's gray whales, off the California coast... The gray whale, like many other whales, was driven to the very edge of extinction - it's now coming back... That's a remarkable success story of what we can do in the ocean if we want to put our minds to it.

What can we do moving forward?

Pimm: There are so many things we can do, so many individual choices — do I eat fish? Yes, I go to the Monterey Bay Aquarium website and find out what fish I can eat....  Let's be encouraged when we should be, let's be worried when we should be and let's get better data when we don't know.

This interview has been edited for clarity.

Guests:

Robin Freeman, research fellow and Head of Indicators and Assessments Unit at the Zoological Society of London

Stuart Pimm, professor of conservation ecology at Duke University and president of Saving Species, a non profit organization working to prevent animal extinction and restoring nature

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A clown remains on the stage during the second day of the XXI Convention of Clowns, at the Jimenez Rueda Theatre, in Mexico City on October 18, 2016.
; Credit: PEDRO PARDO/AFP/Getty Images

Once most closely associated with children’s birthday parties and the circus, most recently clowns have been tied to some unsettling sightings in over 20 states. Why?

Because these aren’t your typical pie-in-the-face, pin-juggling, slapstick clowns. These clowns are legitimately scaring people, and some reports suggest they’ve even tried to lure people into the woods. It’s gotten so bad that schools in several states have even banned clown costumes this Halloween.

The specific origin of the ‘creepy clown’ is difficult to pinpoint, but the persona became etched into the minds of many Americans after the capture of serial killer John Wayne Gacy, who dressed up as a clown for kids’ birthday parties and was eventually found to have killed 33 people. From there, clowns like Pennywise from like Stephen King’s movie “It,” the killer clown at the end of “Zombieland,” and the clown under the bed in “Poltergeist” have only pushed people’s coulrophobia (that’s the irrational fear of clowns) further, and it has been heightened even more by the recent outbreak of ‘creepy clown’ sightings across the U.S.

So, what is it that creeps people out so much about clowns? Psychologist Frank McAndrew, who conducted the first empirical study of creepiness, hypothesizes that the unpredictability of clowns is a large factor fueling the fear of them. You never really know if the clown is just going to juggle for you or if it might try to prank you with a pie in the face or an unexpected zap of your hand during a handshake. There’s also the makeup, which McAndrew says could contribute to people’s fear of clowns because the makeup and disguises clowns wear could hide their true intentions.

Today on AirTalk, Larry speaks with Professor McAndrew, who has written recently about what fuels people’s fear of clowns and being ‘creeped out’ in general and the history of the ‘creepy clown.’

Guest:

Frank McAndrew, professor of psychology at Knox College (Galesburg, IL); his piece in the Washington Post is “Why clowns creep us out”

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A man listens to an iPod MP3 player through earphones August 17, 2005 in Sydney, Australia. ; Credit: Ian Waldie/Getty Images

NPR has launched a new podcast about...drumroll....podcasts!

"The Big Listen" with host Lauren Ober wades through a vast volume of new "pods" - from small-town true crime to government agency pods to grammar shows hosted by heavy drinkers - so she can recommend something for everyone. A growing minority of Americans are listening to podcasts, according to 2016 survey data from Edison research. It shows 21 percent of Americans age 12 or older have listened to a podcast in the past month - that's almost 100 percent growth since 2013.

What are your most beloved podcasts and why?

AirTalk producers' lists include "Keepin' It 1600" and "Radio Free GOP" hosted by incisive and funny political strategists; "The Read" for its blend of hip hop, pop culture and comedy; and "I am Rapaport" in which actor/director Michael Rapaport waxes offensive about life, sports and culture.

If you need a refresher on how to listen to a podcast, check in here. 

Guest:

Lauren Ober, Host of NPR’s The Big Listen, a weekly podcast all about podcasts

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey speaks at the 2016 Intelligence and National Security Summit in Washington, DC, September 8, 2016.; Credit: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

Seemingly everyone's got an opinion on FBI Director James Comey's Friday  letter to Congress.

He alerted committees to items found that appear to pertain to the earlier probe of Hillary Clinton's email setup. Critics say he should've stayed quiet about the finding, given the impending election. Defenders say he had an impossible choice - stay quiet and risk leaks or get in front of it and tell Congress, as he'd promised he would.

We begin with the search warrant issued yesterday to read the relevant material on former Congressman Anthony Weiner's laptop. Weiner's reportedly being investigated to determine if he had sexually-oriented communication with a minor. He's the estranged husband of Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Sources have told multiple news organizations emails of Abedin's were found on Weiner's laptop.

One of the questions is whether some are duplicates of previously unrecovered messages from Clinton's old server. Hillary Clinton’s campaign is asking the FBI to explain Comey’s letter in more detail while Donald Trump’s campaign took the opportunity to say that momentum was swinging in their favor. Furthermore, reactions to Comey’s decision to make the news of the new emails public is raising questions about whether he made the right call in going public with the newly-found emails.

Guests: 

Bre Payton, reporter for The Federalist, a conservative online news magazine

Lawrence (Larry) Rosenthal, Professor of Law, Chapman University and a former federal prosecutor

Ange-Marie Hancock, associate professor of political science and gender studies at USC; she tweets @AngeMarieH

Zachary Courser, Research Director of the Dreier Roundtable and visiting Assistant Professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College; he tweets @zcourser

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

; Credit: John Labbe/Getty Images

Real estate is huge business in the city, and developers are eager to cash in on a tight housing inventory and the seemingly insatiable desire of people who want to live here.

Over the weekend, the Los Angeles Times published an investigation looking at how one particular developing project got the green light from the city to break ground, casting questions at whether corruption played a part in the approval process.

The project in question is a 352-unit, $72-million apartment complex project called Sea Breeze, which is currently being built in the Harbor Gateway neighborhood. 

“Lots of apartments get building permits, lots of apartments get building zoning changes, but this one was an outlier on a number of levels,” says David Zahniser, an LA Times reporter and a co-author of the investigation. “The Planning Department’s staffs actually opposed it. Another was that Mayor Eric Garcetti’s own planning commissioners unanimously opposed it. The neighborhood council across the street had actually sent a letter opposing it.”

Despite the strong opposition from different sides, the project got the city’s blessing. And that's what tipped Zahniser and his colleague Emily Alpert Reyes off to the fact that something might be amiss. Zahniser and Reyes went on to discover that a number of people connected to the developer behind Sea Breeze donated over $600,000 to local lawmakers -- including L.A. County Supervisor candidate Janice Hahn -- during the project's review process. More importantly, 11 of those donors told Zahniser and Reyes that they had never cut those checks.

"I am looking at these donors, and some of them looked odd to me. They’re folks who are working class and yet giving quite a big number of money. As we keep knocking on doors, my colleague Emily Alpert Reyes and I, we found some of them who said they don’t remember giving, or they denied giving," says Zahniser.

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles City Council is scheduled tomorrow to vote on a billion-dollar luxury housing project, The Reef, that could change the face of South Los Angeles. 

At issue is how best to accommodate the needs of local South L.A. residents who could well be displaced once the project is built. One sticking point is how many affordable housing units The Reef should include in the estimated 1,500-unit development.

The developer of The Reef is not interested in having on-site affordable housing, despite pressure from the city's planning commission to do so.

“It’s a $1.3-billion project going up on the edge of the most overcrowded neighborhood in the country. And it was all about creating community and place-making with a lot of the language that was used around [the project],” says Sahra Sulaiman, an editor at Streets Blog Los Angeles who’s been following the development. “But what the commissioners had said outright to the developers, 'by saying that you were inviting the community in, but not allowing them to live on-site, you are essentially saying that it’s not for you.'”

Guests:

David Zahniser, Los Angeles Times reporter who co-wrote this weekend’s investigation into the Sea Breeze project

Sahra Sulaiman, communities editor for Streetsblog Los Angeles, who covers South Los Angeles and has been following The Reef development. Her piece on the project is slated to come out later today

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Carlos Hyde #28 of the San Francisco 49ers rushes with the ball against the Los Angeles Rams during their NFL game at Levi's Stadium on September 12, 2016.; Credit: Thearon W. Henderson/Getty Images

Over the last several years, the NFL has dealt with its share of problems, from concussions to domestic violence to trying to define what a catch really is.

But this year, the NFL’s biggest problem is that people just plain aren’t watching, and if they are watching, it’s not for very long. It’s difficult to pinpoint a single reason why this is happening, and since the problem became apparent, many have put forward ideas as to why. At the surface level, some say this year’s presidential election may be one of the leading culprits, as two of the presidential debates fell on the same night as primetime NFL games and likely divided viewership. Others, like this poll, point to the on-field protests of the national anthem that San Francisco 49ers player Colin Kaepernick started and that have spread among other players and teams within the league.

Over the last month, the NFL has also had to compete with Major League Baseball’s postseason, and with the Chicago Cubs and Cleveland Indians both trying to end decades-long championship droughts, it’s not crazy to think that fans might be more interested in playoff baseball than regular season football. And still others point to the ho-hum primetime matchups to which fans have been subjected. Last night’s Thursday Night Football game featured the lowly Jacksonville Jaguars against a lackluster Tennessee Titans team in a game where little to no defense was played. Furthermore, marquee players like Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton who are perennial stars have struggled on the field. But beneath the surface, there are other factors at play. The NFL’s zero-tolerance policy for celebrations and its ongoing struggles with domestic violence are a couple of other reasons that some point to for the slump.

So why aren’t people watching football this year? Larry and Take Two host/KPCC sports guru A Martinez share their ideas.

Guest:

A Martinez, host of KPCC’s Take Two; he tweets @amartinezla

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

In this handout photo released by the South Korean Presidential Blue House, South Korea's President Park Geun-Hye speaks as she offers a public apology at the at the presidential blue house on October 25, 2016 in Seoul, South Korea.; Credit: Handout/Getty Images

South Korean President Park Geun-hye has replaced her prime minister and two other top officials in a bid to restore public confidence amid a political scandal that has sunk her approval ratings to an all-top low.

The scandal involves Park’s friendship with Choi Soon-sil, the daughter of a cult leader in South Korea. Park admitted last week that she had given drafts of her speeches to Choi to edit. The news media also speculates that Choi, who holds no government title, has meddled in government affairs for personal gain.

Choi has been placed under detention. Park issued an apology last week, but pressure continues to mount for her to resign.

With AP files

Guests:

Sung Yoon Lee, an expert on the Koreas, and a professor in Korean Studies at Tufts University

Katharine H.S. Moon, a professor of Political Science at Wellesley college, and an expert on the Koreas; she tweets @KathyHSMoon

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Voters line up to vote early at the Supervisor of Elections office on October 24, 2016 in Bradenton, Florida. Early general election voting started in the state of Florida on October 24 and ends on either November 5 or Nov 6.; Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Predicting the horse race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton is getting even more frantic thanks to early voting "results" pouring in from the states.

A handful of states, including battleground Nevada, release the party registration information of voters, making it easier to guess how many voted Democrat versus Republican. Other states release demographic data such as gender, age, and district leaving it to pollsters and politics to draw conclusions. 

How accurate is the data and how could it influence whether and how people vote in the coming days?

Guest:

Christopher J. Galdieri, Assistant Professor of Politics at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A Metro map shows major highway and transit projects that would be built if Measure M passes.; Credit: LA MTA

Earlier this year, L.A. County Metro CEO Phil Washington unveiled a $120 billion plan to revamp the city’s public transit system.

Among many expansions to light rail and buses and improvements to several key freeways, some of the most talked-about improvements so far are connecting Metro rail to Los Angeles International Airport, bringing the Purple Line into Westwood, and creating an underground corridor through the Sepulveda Pass to connect the Orange Line in the San Fernando Valley to that Purple Line extension in Westwood. But Metro is going to need some help from the taxpayers in making this plan a reality, so Metro’s board approved a ballot measure to raise the sale tax by half a cent in Los Angeles County in the hopes that voters will approve it to help fund the project. The sales tax would last until voters decide to end it.

Measure M supporters like Mayor Eric Garcetti say the sales tax hike is modest, passing the plan would create hundreds of thousands of jobs, and it would help fast-track improvements to L.A.’s public transit system, which despite recent improvements like the Gold Line extension and opening the Expo Line to Santa Monica, still leaves much to be desired when compared to public transit in cities like New York, Chicago, Boston, and even San Francisco.

Among their arguments, opponents say that the sales tax hike could continue on forever if there's no countywide vote held to repeal it and that many of the projects financed by Measure M favor Los Angeles and not riders who live in other cities in L.A. County. They add that Metro has passed sales tax increases in past years and many of the projects they claimed would be built with the revenue have yet to be completed.

We talked with 'Yes on M' spokesman Yusef Robb and No on M' spokesman Damien Goodmon about what they say voters should know before going to vote.

Why should voters support half cent sales tax?

Yusef Robb: The Los Angeles County population is growing by 2.3 million. Measure M would add transit, improve our freeways, fix our local roads, and create jobs to deal with that growth. The alternative is 2.3 million people on our buses, on our trains, on our freeways, and on our roads, and we can watch all of that grind to a halt, along with our economy. We have to be prepared, we have to ease our congestion, we need more jobs, and Measure M is the only way to do it. It delivers a comprehensive traffic improvement plan whether it’s our freeways, whether it’s light rail, whether it’s subway, whether it’s buses, we need this and we need it now.

What are some of the first decade projects to expect if M passes?

YR: A new LAX station that ties three lines directly to the airport will make a big difference in the South Bay, the Westside, and along the breadth of the 105 and the 10. There are I-5 improvements, improvements to the 14, a Gold Line extension in Claremont, improvements to the Orange Line in San Fernando Valley, a new 20 mile rail line linking downtown L.A.to Artesia and connecting all of the southeast cities that Damien is talking about. That is delivered by Measure M. Improvements to the 71, to the 57 and the 60, to the 710, not to mention bike path and L.A. River plans that extend 50 miles. This is a countywide, comprehensive approach, and if you want to talk about politics, no one has an incentive to add to the gridlock in Los Angeles County. Metro delivers 1.4 million rides a day in Los Angeles County. Imagine what traffic would be like without those 1.4 million rides. 

What are the biggest negatives on Measure M?

Damien Goodmon: We know what the very expensive, paid-for-by-mega-contractors ads on TV are saying, and it’s just not the case. The reality is that Measure M would be a permanent half cent sales tax increase until 2039, increasing to once cent from 2039 until forever, and the promises made by Metro and the Yes on M campaign are false. Let’s disabuse ourselves of this belief that Metro is this unbiased transportation agency that takes a look at transportation problems and proposes solutions. Metro has proposed in Measure M, and this is largely the reason why low-income communities and communities south of the 10 Freeway are opposed to it, a plan that is heavily-weighted on the Westside and the Valley, a plan that’s not predicated on traffic or transportation needs, but a plan that’s based upon politics. Metro has compiled, just since Measure R was passed in 2008, over $1 billion in cost overruns. That’s a product of them making poor decisions. When you look at the fact that we’ve spent billions of dollars on expanding our transportation system and yet ridership is down 47 percent relative to before we began building them, you begin to understand why our traffic [problem] remains the same in Los Angeles County. Measure M is not a proposed solution to that. We are not a transportation agency, but we are a group of people who can recognize the bad nature of a blank check, which is what a forever tax is.

So what's the alternative?

DG: The bottom line is that the first rule is you don't reward bad behavior. They're already getting 1.5 percent of our sales tax. Let's first have them make a fair assessment about why, after receiving so much of our sales tax, including state and federal revenue, traffic is worse. 

TV commercials supporting M say it would decrease traffic by 15 percent. Is that 15 percent over projected traffic in future or 15 percent vs. today?

YR: That number applies to what we’re looking at when the projects in this measure are completed. This was a study done by Metro, not by the campaign. This is the most conservative estimate possible. It leaves out a full 20 percent of the measure. It actually only looked at selected number of projects from the measure. The fact that we put it in our ads means it’s a very meaningful number to people. When the most conservative estimate is a 15 percent reduction in the traffic we’ll see here in Los Angeles County, that’s a very meaningful thing for people. It’s more time for your families, it gets you to work faster, it gives you time back. 

DG: KPCC, the L.A. Times, and other people have completely debunked this number. But what Yusef isn’t talking about are these start dates. That 15 percent number is a projected number in the year 2057. I’m a young man, but in 2057 I’ll be lucky to still be alive. Most of our listeners won’t be alive. It’s a projected number. It projects on the basis of all the projects that are promised within Measure M being built. We know that every number of years, and now it’s been every four years – 2008, 2012, 2016 – Metro comes up with a plan and comes to voters to ask for more money. They keep asking for money for the same plans. If you look at half cent sales tax Metro is getting right now from 1980 and/or the map to the half cent Measure C which was passed in 1990. If you look at the projects on those maps, you see something familiar: the same projects being proposed today. So my question to voters is: we’ve given them half cent sales tax increases several times and still, several of the projects are not built. How much will be enough? Will it be a sales tax at 11 percent? At 12? At 15 or 20? How much will be enough before they can actually begin delivering the projects they promise?

Guests:

Yusef Robb, spokesman for ‘Yes on M’ campaign

Damien Goodmon, spokesman for ‘No on M’ Coalition and executive director of the Crenshaw Subway Coalition

Voting has begun in California. KPCC is here for you and will help you develop your Voter Game Plan. Use our election guide to find your personalized ballot.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown addresses guests on the issues surrounding Brexit at a Fabian Society event on November 3, 2016. ; Credit: Leon Neal/Getty Images

A British court has ruled that England cannot leave the European Union without first getting Parliament's approval.

The decision has derailed plans by Prime Minister Theresa May to invoke Article 50, the formal mechanism for England to leave the EU, by the end of March.

The UK government said it would challenge Thursday's court decision.

In a June referendum, 52 percent of British voters voted to exit the EU. The result shocked both the UK and the world.

Guest: 

Iain Watson, political correspondent at the BBC in London, and the author of the book, “Five Million Conversations: How Labour lost an election and rediscovered its roots” (Luath Press Ltd., 2015). He tweets @IainJWatson

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.