A fireman stands before a warehouse after it was destroyed by a fire, December 3, 2016 in Oakland, California.; Credit: AFP/AFP/Getty Images

As the death toll continues to climb, now at 36, in the tragic Oakland fire on Friday night, fire officials have temporarily halted search effort because the building has been deemed too unsafe and unstable for emergency workers.

The 10,000-square-foot warehouse, locally known as “the Ghost Ship,” was filled with artist collectives. Besides serving as a party and concert venue, the space also housed multiple residents. Cramped in a small, crowded area, tenants of this building reflect a larger problem of urbanization in California - a lack of affordable housing.

Guest host Patt Morrison checks in with Ben Metcalf, director of California Department of Housing and Community Development and Maria Poblet, Executive Director at Causa Justa:: Just Cause, on the coding, zoning and affordability issues in our state.  

Guests: 

Ben Metcalf, Director of California Department of Housing and Community Development

María Poblet, Executive Director at Causa Justa:: Just Cause, organization that focuses on assisting low-income Bay area residents

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

Protesters demonstrate against President-elect Donald Trump outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia on Sunday.; Credit: Mark Makela/Getty Images

In 13 days, 538 members of the Electoral College will cast their votes, but there is intense debate over whether electors are either bound to support their respective states' choice for president or can vote their conscience - in an orchestrated way that would sink Donald Trump.

Writing in “The New York Times” yesterday, a Republican elector from Texas says he plans to vote for a to-be-determined Republican leader other than Trump. Similarly, some Democratic electors want to be free from voting for Hillary Clinton so they can coalesce around anyone but Trump. Plus, Politico is reporting that a California law firm is offering legal support to electors who violate any state laws binding Electoral College votes.

What are your thoughts on how electors should cast their votes on December 19th?

Guests:

Kendal Unruh, RNC Rules Committee member and a Republican Delegate from Colorado who attempted a rules change for delegate voters; Seven-time convention delegate; in her professional life, Unruh is a high school teacher of American Government

Trent England, Vice President for Strategic Initiatives, Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs - a think tank focused on limited government and free market policy

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

Professors Jeffrey Sachs and Peter Singer attend Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People celebration May 8, 2006 in New York City.; Credit: Evan Agostini/Getty Images

Philosopher Peter Singer is known for his work on effective altruism, arguing not just for the imperative for people to reduce suffering, but that it should be done in the most cost-effective way.

So he’s argued that it is a moral obligation for those living in wealthy nations to give money to charities that help the poor people in the world. But not just any charity, Singer says, but organizations that he thinks give the most bang for the buck, like GiveWells, as well as the 50% League.

He is also a diehard proponent on veganism and animal liberation, and questions the arbitrary privileging of human beings over animals.

In his newest book, “Ethics in the Real World,” Singer tackles 82 topics – including the price of high art, the idea of in vitro meat, and whether robots should have rights – that have seized the world’s imagination today.

Guest:

Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics at Princeton University. He is the author of many books, including his latest “Ethics in the Real World: 82 Brief Essays on Things That Matter” (Princeton University Press, 2016)

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

A customer tries out a new iPhone at an Apple store in Chicago. ; Credit: Kiichiro Sato/AP

Last December, the San Bernardino shooting opened up a series of investigations into the technologies the attackers used.

Specifically,  the FBI demanded Apple to unlock the assailant’s iPhone in order to access its contacts and history. When Apple resisted the idea of opening a “back door” for investigators, other Silicon Valley companies came to its defense.

Facebook, Yahoo, and Google filed a joint brief in in California’s central district court arguing against undercutting security features.

Fast forward to a year later, what’s the current status of the encryption debate between government agencies and tech giants? How has the tech industry that rely on the collection of personal data evolved since the deadly shooting? How should companies like Apple, Facebook and Google assist terrorism investigation while maintaining privacy of their users?

Guests: 

Ahmed Ghappour,  visiting assistant professor at UC Hastings’ College of the Law

Russell Brandom, Reporter at the Verge. He’s been following the encryption debate since the San Bernardino shooting; he tweets @russellbrandom

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

Shoppers look at meat for sale, November 28, 2016 at a Ralph's Supermarket in Irvine, California.
; Credit: ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images

Amazon.com is launching its first brick and mortar store, which will enable customers to buy groceries without waiting at a checkout line.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, the store is set to open in Seattle, and customers will use their smartphones to check-in at the entrance, while the store will determine what they have picked up, and charge them once they leave. If the store is a success, Amazon plans to open more than 2,000 locations.

But innovation and technology have gained ground in the grocery store biz during recent years, with services ranging from curbside pickup to self-checkouts.

So how does this affect you, the customer? And what do you think of all this innovation?

Guest: 

Ernest Baskin, Assistant Professor of Food Marketing at Saint Joseph’s University in Pennsylvania

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

A graffiti made by the graffiti artist Banksy is seen on Israel's highly controversial West Bank barrier in Abu Dis on August 6, 2005.; Credit: Marco Di Lauro/Getty Images

The Israeli parliament gave initial approval to a bill that would legalize settler homes in the occupied West Bank.

Four thousand settlements, formerly deemed illegitimate, would be retroactively legalized under the proposed law. The controversial move, described by critics as a “land grab,"  drew condemnation from United Nations and the US Secretary of State John Kerry. Criticism also echoed within Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s own coalition. Historically, the region has been fraught with tensions that rise and fall. Israel captured the West Bank during the 1967 Middle East war. Since then, it has built about 120 settlements, which the international community has deemed illegal and a challenge to a peace agreement with the Palestinians. This current bill, if passed, would inevitably become a point of contention between Israel and Palestine going forward.

Host Larry Mantle sits down with David Makovsky, Director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process at the Washington Institute, and Yousef Munayyer, Executive Director of the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, on the past, present, and future of West Bank and its impact on Israel-Palestine relations.

Guests:

Yousef Munayyer, executive director of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights and policy analyst at the Arab Center Washington D.C.; he tweets from @YousefMunayyer

Noah Pollak, contributor at the Weekly Standard,  a conservative opinion magazine; He has been a director and spokesperson for the Emergency Committee for Israel

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

Facebook logos are pictured on the screens of a smartphone (R), and a laptop computer, in central London on November 21, 2016.
; Credit: JUSTIN TALLIS/AFP/Getty Images

In grappling with understanding the divided electorate, an experiment conducted by The Guardian newspaper took five left-leaning Facebook users and five right-leaning ones who agreed to take a scroll on the other side during the final month of the election campaign.

From The Guardian: 

We created two Facebook accounts from scratch. “Rusty Smith”, our right-wing avatar, liked a variety of conservative news sources, organizations, and personalities, from the Wall Street Journal and The Hoover Institution to Breitbart News and Bill O’Reilly. “Natasha Smith”, our left-wing persona, preferred The New York Times, Mother Jones, Democracy Now and Think Progress. Rusty liked Tim Tebow and the NRA. Natasha liked Colin Kaepernick and 350.org.

Participants were so disturbed by their experience not all of them could stick with it through November 8.  After being exposed to the right-wing feed, Alphonso Pines said, "You might as well have been waterboarding a brother."

For conservative voter Trent Loos of central Nebraska, he was shocked see good news related to Hillary Clinton for once. "[Previously] twelve people have shared a story with me about the Hillary Clinton bus dumping human waste into the sewer system,” adding, “I never see positive stuff about Hillary Clinton. I didn’t know that existed.”

Many of the participants said details of what each group said about the other wasn't just surprising, but hurtful.

Andra Constantin of New York said, “I’m seeing a lot more hate from the liberal side… It’s all about how much of a horrible, fascist, racist, misogynist Trump is.”

Larry will talk with one of the reporters who conducted the experiment about how people were changed by their experiences. How do you try to expand your awareness beyond your bubble? How does it impact all the Americans who get a majority, if not all, of their news from social media?

Guest: 

Sam Levin, Reporter, The Guardian

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

President-elect Donald Trump speaks to workers at Carrier air conditioning and heating on December 1, 2016 in Indianapolis, Indiana. ; Credit: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

President-elect Donald Trump’s announcement that he and Carrier Corporation, a company that makes heating and air conditioning units and parts, had struck a deal to keep about 1,000 manufacturing jobs at the company’s Indianapolis plant was received with mixed reactions.

Some lauded him for sticking to his campaign promise of keeping manufacturing jobs in the U.S. and for being willing to take on big business directly. Others warn that the deal could set a dangerous precedent that may encourage other companies who are considering shipping jobs overseas to ask the Trump Administration for tax breaks or easing of regulations in exchange for keeping jobs in the country.

And still others say that the deal isn’t representative of the free market principles on which the American economy is run and that the U.S. government shouldn’t be picking winners and losers.

Do you think the Carrier deal will do more good or harm to American job growth in the long term? Do you think this is an accurate depiction of how President-elect Trump will deal with other companies that want to leave the U.S.?

Guests:

Liz Peek, financial columnist for The Fiscal Times and columnist for FoxNews.com; her op-ed is ‘Carrier deal is proof that Trump is already making America great again’; she tweets @lizpeek

Ben Casselman, senior editor and chief economics writer for the data journalism site FiveThirtyEight; his latest article for his economics column ‘In Real Terms’ is  ‘Why Trump’s Carrier Deal Isn’t the Way To Save U.S. Jobs’; he tweets @bencasselman

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

Screenshot of Trump's Twitter account; Credit: Screenshot of Trump's Twitter account

Donald Trump's tweets have once again made headlines. As reported by CNBC, the president-elect criticized the cost of Boeing's 747 Air Force One, the plane being built for his term.

According to Trump, costs for the aircraft would total to more than $4 billion. About 10 seconds after the tweet was published, Boeing's stock went down as much as 1 percent, recovering later in the day.

But Boeing is just one of a long string of news items originating on Twitter. From cabinet picks to feuds with the cast of Hamilton, Trump is gearing up to use Twitter in a way that no other president has. And that means the media has to find new ways to cover his dealings on social media.

So how should news outlets and journalists report on Trump's Tweets? And what do citizens want to see from the president-elect on social media?

NPR correspondent David Folkenflik speaks with Larry today on the public's demand for Trump's Twitter coverage, and how news organizations are adapting.

Guest:

David Folkenflik, Media Correspondent, NPR (National Public Radio); he tweets from @davidfolkenflik

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

Aerial photo of the Pentagon in Arlington, Virgina on September 26, 2003. (Photo by Andy Dunaway/USAF via Getty Images) ; Credit: U.S. Air Force/Getty Images

According to an investigation by The Washington Post, the Pentagon has buried evidence of $125 billion in administrative waste.

These numbers were revealed with an internal 2015 study by the Defense Business Board, an internal group of federal advisors for the secretary and deputy secretary of defense.

The study showed that nearly a quarter of the Pentagon’s $580 billion dollar budget had been spent on back-office bureaucracy, employing over a million military personnel, civilians and contractors, which adds up to almost the same amount of people as active duty troops.

The Post’s investigation showed that spending was suppressed due to fears that Congress would curtail the defense budget. Cuts would have included early retirement, improved use of information technology and less expenses for contractors.

Craig Whitlock of the Washington Post weighs in on these findings, and goes in-depth on the investigation, while Jerry Nickelsburg of the UCLA Anderson forecast discusses the implications of Trump’s national defense spending on California’s economy.

Guests:

Craig Whitlock, investigative reporter, The Washington Post

Jerry Nickelsburg, adjunct full professor at the UCLA Anderson Forecast, which released its projections for the economy under Trump’s administration

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

A Safeway customer browses in the fruit and vegetable section at Safeway's new "Lifestyle" store July 18, 2007 in Livermore, California.; Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The old adage "You are what you eat" was coined long before consumers knew whether their chicken was organic and woodland-raised versus caged and factory-farmed, and before simple white sugar competed with Sweet'N Low, Stevia, raw sugar, agave syrup and high fructose corn syrup.

A new survey by Pew Research Center illustrates that with changing trends in product choices, eating habits, plus more science linking diet to disease comes divided personal food philosophies.

The researchers explain:

The new survey finds that 55% of Americans believe organically grown produce is healthier than conventionally grown varieties, while 41% say there is no difference between organic and conventionally grown produce and 3% say that conventionally grown produce is better. Four-in-ten Americans (40%) say that most (6%) or some (34%) of the foods they eat are organic. Fully three-quarters of these Americans (75%) are convinced that organic foods are healthier than conventionally grown foods.

On AirTalk, we'll talk about what happens when these competing food philosophies come to your family's grocery cart and dinner table. How do you handle food politics with your loved ones?

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

April 1981: American statesman Ronald Reagan, 40th president of the United States, at a cabinet meeting in the family quarters of the White House, Washington DC. ; Credit: Keystone/Getty Images

As we learn more about President-Elect Donald Trump’s cabinet picks, we look back at former Republican President Ronald Reagan’s early days in the White House.

Today, Reagan is one of our nation's most revered public figures, but when the former Hollywood actor came into the White House in 1981, he brought with him potentially controversial conservative agenda to cut social programs and reduce government oversight. To do so, Reagan appointed officials that disapproved of the agencies they were ultimately going to lead. Notably, Anne Anne Gorsuch Burford, known for her strong opposition to federal energy and environmental policies, was named the head of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Reagan also ran on a platform to eliminate the Department of Education, created just years ago by his predecessor Jimmy Carter. William Bennett, Reagan’s Education Secretary, launched the most sustained verbal attack ever made by a high official on the federal student-aid program, according to the New York Times.

What happened to these agencies under Reagan once these leaders joined the cabinet? Did the officials achieve what they set out to do? Host Larry Mantle re-visits the policies and politics from the Reagan era and dissects what they say about the future under a Trump presidency.

Guests:

Sean T. Walsh, Republican political analyst and partner at Wilson Walsh Consulting in San Francisco. He has served on the White House staff of Presidents Ronald Reagan.

Craig Shirley, author of  three books on former U.S. president Ronald Reagan, including Last Act: The Final Years and emerging Legacy of Ronald Reagan (2015).

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

In this handout image supplied by the Israeli Government Press Office (GPO), Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (R) meets with U.S envoy George Mitchell.; Credit: GPO/Getty Images

George J. Mitchell’s specialty is bringing peace to troubled regions, which is exactly why he was sent to the Middle East as a U.S. Special Envoy in 2009.

But he soon discovered that his trusted negotiating tactics didn’t work to ease the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That’s not surprising, given the many failures to do just that over the course of modern history. In his new book, “A Path to Peace,” Mitchell gives an insider account of what we can learn from history’s failures--and what both sides must do to reach a lasting solution.

The result is what Mitchell calls “a realistic approach” to peace, a counter to some of the unrealistic expectations that he says prevents Israeli and Palestinian leaders from finding common ground. Among other concrete ideas, the book presents a pressing call for President Obama to outline a plan for peace before he leaves office.

Guests:

George J. Mitchell, co-author of “A Path to Peace: A Brief History of Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations and a Way Forward in the Middle East” (Simon & Schuster, 2016) and former U.S. Special Envoy for Middle East Peace

Alon Sachar, co-author of “A Path to Peace: A Brief History of Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations and a Way Forward in the Middle East” (Simon & Schuster, 2016). He served as an advisor to the US ambassador to Israel from 2011 to 2012

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

The staph bacterium is resistant to most common antibiotics and has been responsible for more than nearly 19,000 deaths each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.; Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

A bill was introduced this week to make it mandatory to track antibiotic resistant or “superbug” related deaths and infections in California.

As reported in Reuters, SB 43 was proposed by State Senator Jerry Hill, and would require doctors to report superbug-related deaths on death certificates. Superbug related infections currently lack tracking of any kind in the state, which prevents the federal government from allocating funds for research on this growing medical threat. A recent Reuters investigation found that over an 11 year period, California identified more deaths related to antibiotic resistant infections than any other state--a whopping 20,000. That number is likely only a fraction of actual deaths related to these infections, as it only indicates recorded fatalities connected to superbugs. SB 43 would also make California a leader in superbug tracking, as the federal government does not currently tract these infections and deaths due to antibiotic resistant infections.

But without mandated tracking, hospitals that do their due diligence reporting these infections and infection related deaths could be faced with liability issues, and a damaged reputation.

Larry speaks to Reuters reporter, Yasmeen Abutaleb, today to find out more about SB 43 and what it could mean for the future of “superbug” tracking.

Guest:

Yasmeen Abutaleb, Reuters reporter who’s been following the story on SB 43 and co-author of the article, “The Uncounted: The deadly epidemic America is ignoring;” she tweets @yabutaleb7

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

Pope Francis waves to the crowd as he drives around St Peter's Square ahead of his first weekly general audience as pope on March 27, 2013 in Vatican City, Vatican.; Credit: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

Before becoming His Holiness, Pope Francis was Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

In Mark Shriver’s latest book, “Pilgrimage: My Search for the Real Pope Francis,” the author journeys to discover the life of a leader who – through renowned humility, grace and unpretentious style – has invigorated the Catholic Church, and the world.

Visiting a number of sites native to the Pope’s beginnings in Argentina, Shriver details his travels and conversations with the people who knew the Jesuit priest during much younger stages of faith. Shriver also shares his personal path back to Catholicism that was found through Pope Francis.

Host Larry Mantle speaks to Shriver about the book’s pilgrimage, his current life and more.

Guest:

Mark Shriver, author of the book “Pilgrimage: My Search for the Real Pope Francis” (Random House, 2016), and president of the charity Save the Children Action Network

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

A shopper waits inside a Macy's store during Black Friday events on November 25, 2016 in New York City. ; Credit: Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Getty Images

Does a washer discounted from $1,179.99 to $999.99 sound like a good deal? What if it never actually sold at $1,179.99?

This marketing strategy, known as false reference pricing, is targeted by a suit expected to be filed today by the Los Angeles city attorney’s office, against retailers Macy’s, Sears, Kohl’s and J.C. Penney.

According to the lawsuits, “retailers employ false pricing because it misleads consumers into believing they are ‘getting a good deal,’ thereby increasing sales.”

Host Larry Mantle talks with City Attorney Mike Feuer about the details and the reasoning behind the lawsuits, as well as consumer psychologist Kit Yarrow about the reason bargains, even imagined ones, are so enticing to shoppers.

What do you think about false reference pricing? How do bargains motivate your shopping decisions, especially now that the holiday shopping season is upon us?

Guests: 

Mike Feuer, Los Angeles City Attorney

Kit Yarrow, is consumer psychologist and author of Decoding the New Consumer Mind: How and Why We Shop and Buy; She tweets @GenBuy

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

With black ribbons across their badge and holding a gun, police recruits attend their graduation ceremony at LAPD Headquarters.; Credit: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

In response to a spike in attacks targeting law enforcement, one California Republican wants to make doing so a hate crime.

Assemblyman Jay Obernolte is proposing a bill that would put attacking a police officer under the purview of California’s hate crime statute, and therefore allow for the addition of one to three years onto an offender’s sentence.

This story is being updated.

Guests:

Sgt. Jerretta Sandoz, vice president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League

Jody David Armour, Roy P. Crocker Professor of Law at the USC Gould School of Law

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

California has added BPA to its list of Prop 65 harmful chemicals, but the state agency in charge of enforcing the law says it needs more time before it will be ready to require manufacturers to add warning labels to their products, or to require stores to post notices on their shelves.; Credit: Tim Boyle/Getty Images

In California, the passage of “The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986” -- also popularly known as Prop 65 -- ushered in an era of product warning labelling for chemicals that could cause cancer or birth defects.

Critics have argued that the law, passed in the form of a ballot measure, too loose and general, but proponents argue that the law ensures transparency and empower consumers.

A recent study conducted by researchers at Harvard and Vanderbilt University argues that warning labels aren’t effective because of how ubiquitous they have become. They go on to say that consumers simply skip over them.

Thirty years after its passage, AirTalk debates the efficacy of Prop 65.

What do you think? Have you changed your purchasing decision because of a product warning label?  

Guests:

David Roe, a former attorney at the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund who helped wrote the The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, also known as Prop 65

Kevin Haroff, San Francisco Managing Partner of Marten Law, LLC, a law firm specializing in environmental laws. He has represented companies in Prop 65 compliance and enforcement since the law went into effect

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 attends the emergency cabinet meeting at the presidential office on December 9, 2016 in Seoul, South Korea.; Credit: Handout/Getty Images

After months of corruption scandals, South Korea’s President Park Geun-hye has been impeached Friday, with a final vote of 234-56 in the National Assembly, as reported by the Wall Street Journal.

Prime minister Hwang Kyo-ahn will replace her, and has called a meeting of security officials Friday, promising to stand strong on any potential threat from their northern neighbors. We dive into the impeachment and discuss what’s next for South Korea, with Tufts Professor of Korean Studies, Sung Yoon Lee.

Meanwhile, Trump tapped Iowa governor Terry Branstad as ambassador to China. According to the New York Times, Branstad has called China’s president Xi Jinping an “old friend” – and Branstad’s new role may signal a friendlier U.S.-China relationship. Host Larry Mantle explores the possibilities with Clayton Dube, director of the USC U.S.-China Institute.

Guests:

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

Clayton Dube, director of the USC U.S.-China Institute

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

Russia's Sports Minister Vitaly Mutko meets with Paralympians as part of the country's two-day competition for its athletes banned from the Rio 2016 Paralympic Games over evidence of state-run doping.; Credit: KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP/Getty Images

The Russian state government conspired with thousands of athletes and coaches to undertake a doping program in the Olympic games, according to a latest report.

The research, commissioned by the World Anti-Doping Agency, is an update to the initial discovery of doping in July earlier this year. What the latest round of investigation found is abuse of performance enhancing drugs on an unprecedented scale. “A systematic and centralized cover-up” served over a 1000 athletes, stated Canadian investigator Richard McLaren. Over 30 sports, including football, were affected.

What will happen to the gold medals now if the athletes are found guilty of doping? What mechanism is really in place for international anti-doping agencies to police individual states? How did the institutional agenda assist the sportsmen and vice versa?

Host Larry Mantle checks in with Ed Hula, editor in chief of Around the Rings, and Dr. John Gleaves, professor in Kinesiology at Cal State Fullerton, on the latest with regard to the doping scandal in the Olympic games.

Guests:

Ed Hula, editor in chief of Around the Rings, a publication devoted to covering the Olympics

John Gleaves, assistant professor in Kinesiology  at California State University, Fullerton.  He specializes in the history and sociology of  performance enhancing drugs in sports.

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