Students walk between classes on the California State University, Fullerton campus.; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

America’s largest public university system will overhaul its remedial education system under an executive order signed Wednesday.

California State University Chancellor Timothy P. White’s order mandates that Cal State schools discontinue math and English placement exams and the noncredit remedial courses that more than 25,000 freshmen have been required to take until now. The change will go into effect in fall 2018.

Cal State reasons that the system can more accurately assess placement based on application components, including high school grades and standardized test scores. Meanwhile, the lack of remedial courses could help students graduate faster, thereby increasing the system’s four-year graduation rate, a number Cal State hopes to double to 40% by 2025.

Can remedial education help students succeed or is it more likely to hold them back? Should placement tests be based on performance in high school or in college?

Guest:

James Minor, senior strategist for Academic Success and Inclusive Excellence for The California State University

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

People chat at a cannabis lollipop stand during the Cannabis and Hemp fair.; Credit: GAIZKA IROZ/AFP/Getty Images

The Arizona-based cannabis product maker, American Green Inc., just bought a small town in San Bernardino County for a cool $5 million.

Why, you ask? The company plans to use the 150 acre city of Nipton, California to create a marijuana-friendly tourist site. As reported by Bloomberg News, features for the site will include offering cannabis-infused water, pot product retail stores and edibles for patrons. American Green’s 18 month, $1.5 million development plan is a unique strategy in expanding its recreational pot customer base. And as businesses acclimate California’s new market for recreational pot, this could be the first of many innovative ways to market to potential customers, especially those who don’t usually partake.

In light of an upcoming “pot town,” AirTalk is opening up the phones to hear what you would want in a cannabis tourist site. Super-slow roller coasters? A Northern Lights display? Deep fried everything? We want your ideas. Call us at 866-583-5722.

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

President Donald Trump stands with Vice President Mike Pence on the third day of the Republican National Convention on July 20, 2016.; Credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Sure, the 2020 presidential election is still more than three years away.

But when has it ever been too early for election watchers to start looking at possible candidates for the next presidential election? The New York Times ran a piece on Saturday looking at who might be positioning him or herself for a run, one of whom they say is Vice President Mike Pence. The vice president rebuked the story in a statement he tweeted on Sunday, pledging his loyalty to the president. Still, it raises questions about whether anyone will raise their hand to run against the president in 2020.

In response to North Korea’s most recent missile test, the U.N. Security Council approved a new package of sanctions on the reclusive nation, which responded by threatening retaliation and bolstering its nuclear program if sanctions weren’t lifted. This comes as some are questioning Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s diplomatic tactics and at a time when, back here in the U.S., the State Department is dealing with its own internal issues.

Back stateside, the Department of Justice says it plans to crack down on information leaks by ramping up its internal probes into ones that it feels may have compromised national security. U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions held a press conference Friday condemning the leaks and promising those who were responsible would be held accountable. On Monday, the DOJ got word it was being hit with a lawsuit from the city of Chicago. It argues that DOJ’s threat to withhold federal funds from so-called sanctuary cities is unconstitutional.

We’ll also look into the task ahead for the president’s chief of staff, General John Kelly, as he tries to stabilize a chaotic White House, what special counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury means and whether Nancy Pelosi could be a liability for Democrats in 2018, an idea that California Governor Jerry Brown rejected on Sunday.

Guests:

Matt Rodriguez, Democratic strategist and founder and chief executive officer of Rodriguez Strategies; he is also a former senior Obama advisor in 2008 and tweets @RodStrategies

Sean T. Walsh, Republican political analyst and partner at Wilson Walsh Consulting in San Francisco; he is a former adviser to California Governors Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger and a former White House staffer for Presidents Reagan and H.W. Bush

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

Anti-government activists stand near a barricade burning in flames in Venezuela's third city, Valencia, on August 6, 2017, a day after a new assembly with supreme powers and loyal to President Nicolas Maduro started functioning in the country.; Credit: RONALDO SCHEMIDT/AFP/Getty Images

Unrest in Venezuela continues more than a week after the establishment of a new constitutional assembly to rewrite the country’s constitution.

The controversial new assembly, which was created in a nationwide vote that critics slammed as illegitimate, has powers above all other branches of government. Over the weekend, the assembly removed the country’s chief prosecutor -- an outspoken critic of President Nicolas Maduro, fulfilling one of its promise to weed out opposition against President Nicolas Maduro.

A strike against a group of anti-government fighters at a military base in Venezuela also took place over the weekend. About 20 people broke into the based in the city of Valencia on Sunday morning, with an intent to start a military uprising, according to President Maduro.

Guests:

Daniel Pardo, BBC correspondent in Caracas, Venezuela who’s been following the story; he tweets @pardodaniel

Jennifer McCoy, a professor of Political Science at Georgia State University, where one of her areas of focus is Latin American politics; she is also co-author of the book,  “International Mediation in Venezuela” (United States Institute of Peace, 2011)

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

A member of the Ku Klux Klan holds a Confederate flag over his face during a rally, calling for the protection of Southern Confederate monument.; Credit: ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

HBO has a new show called “Confederate,” which gives the audience a look at what life would be like if the Confederacy had won the Civil War, and slavery was never abolished.

While the show is still in the early stages of production, protests have already started. The showrunners, David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, who are also showrunner “Game of Thrones,” have taken criticism from the public over their lack of diverse casting for GOT. Nichelle Tramble Spellman and Malcolm Spellman have been recruited to write “Confederate,” but how they handle the delicate subject matter remains to be seen. How do you feel about the idea behind “Confederate”? Is slavery a topic that should be off limits in this context? Where do you draw the line as an audience member when choosing controversial shows?

Guest:

Debra Birnbaum, executive editor for TV at Variety Magazine; she wrote the Variety article, “HBO on #NoConfederate Campaign: ‘We Hope People Will Reserve Judgment’”

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

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) walks to a Senate joint caucus meeting, on Capitol Hill, July 15, 2013 in Washington, DC. ; Credit: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Jeff Flake, the junior Senator from Arizona, is an original member of the “Never Trump” camp.

And unlike some of his compatriots in that movement, the Republican lawmaker has remained a so-called “Never Trumper” after the presidential election.

In his new book, “Conscience of a Conservative,” Flake sounds off on the Trump presidency, and laments what he sees as the core values of conservatism being coopted by xenophobia and populism.

Larry speaks with Senator Flake on his new book, and on ways he thinks conservatism could be rehabilitated.

Guest:

Jeff Flake, Republican senator from Arizona and author of the new book, “Conscience of a Conservative: A Rejection of Destructive Politics and a Return to Principle” (Random House, 2017); he tweets @JeffFlake

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

The sun rises over an oil field over the Monterey Shale formation where gas and oil extraction using hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is on the verge of a boom near Lost Hills, California. ; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

Global temperature has steadily risen since the 1980s, and human activities are definitely to blame for it, according to a leaked report on climate change obtained by the New York Times and Washington Post.

The report, prepared by scientists from 13 federal agencies, provides findings that contradict the Trump administration’s stance on climate change and is official release is pending the administration’s approval. And the report was leaked to the media last night by one of the scientists involved in fear of its suppression by the administration.

How would the Trump administration handle the leaked report? Would it embrace its findings?

Guests:

Christy Goldfuss; Vice President of Energy and Environment Policy at Center for American Progress; former managing director of the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) under President Obama (2014-2016) 

Nicholas Loris; an energy economist at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank based in Washington D.C.

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

The Google logo is reflected in the eye of a girl surfing the internet.; Credit: Chris Jackson/Getty Images

Google announced Monday that the company fired an engineer over news of a memo displaying gender bias.

The internal memo, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” what the subject of much anger in Silicon Valley because it cited gender stereotypes as causes for the low number of tech positions for women. As reported by the New York Times, the engineer, James Damore, had worked with Google since 2013. Damore defended the memo, saying he hoped it would encourage an “honest discussion” and open the door to ideologies that were not left-leaning. He also claimed to take legal action against the company. Recode reported that the tech giant had been struggling about how to deal with the controversial memo.

Questions about free speech and the culture of discourse within Google were a big part of the hesitation to fire Damore. So should the company have fired Damore? Does Damore have grounds for legal action? And what does this mean for free speech in the workplace?

Guest:

Meghna Virick, director at the school of management at San Jose State University; her research focus includes gender and race related issues in human resource practices such as talent and succession planning

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

Children at Scripps Ranch KinderCare in San Diego play in their classroom with teacher LuAnn Cline who was surprised with the Early Childhood Educator Award and a $10,000 check from Knowledge Universe. ; Credit: Robert Benson/Getty Images for Knowledge Unive

The start of school this year coincides with the perfect opportunity to show kids science live — a solar eclipse on August 21.

Teachers across California are stocking up on eclipse-viewing equipment to teach their students about the relationship between the earth, sun, and moon. But when nature does not present such opportunities, how do teachers innovate in the classroom? What pedagogical experiments have proved successful? What aspects of classroom life do they wish were different?

As the new school year approaches, AirTalk invites K-12 teachers in Los Angeles to tell us what changes they’d like to see. How can teacher and student experience in classrooms, schools, and school districts improve?

Guest:

Kyle Stokes, KPCC’s K-12 reporter; he tweets @kystokes

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

A pilotless MiG-35 aircraft flies under a propeller plane while taking part in the International Aviation and Space Salon "MAKS-2007" at Zhukovsky airfield, outside Moscow.; Credit: VIKTOR KOROTAYEV/AFP/Getty Images

A new report from Swiss Bank UBS found the aviation industry would potentially save $35 billion per year by switching to pilotless planes.

As reported by CNN, remote-controlled planes could be available by 2025 and after 2030, business jets, helicopters and eventually, commercial planes would be autonomous. But according to the survey, only 17 percent of people would agree to be a passenger on a pilotless plane, even with cheaper tickets. That number may change as technology advances. After all, driverless cars are no longer a futuristic fantasy.

However, the industry may be in for a hit from pilots unions if tech takes over the cockpit. Pilots already spend only minutes manually flying an aircraft, with the rest of the time spent monitoring the flight. Safety concerns for passengers will inevitably be a big part of how this develop. And how would this all work? Drones and the military are already using pilotless technology, so what’s the next step for civilians?

Guests:

Captain Ross Aimer, CEO of Aero Consulting and a former United Airlines Pilot

Alan Levin, reporter covering aviation in Washington D.C. for Bloomberg News; he covers air traffic and aviation policy;he tweets @AlanLevin1

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

Several top democrats have said that abortion issues should not be a litmus test for democratic candidates.; Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images

After losing both the White House and Congress in the 2016 election, the Democratic Party is working to rebuild and reunify itself before the 2018 midterms, where many see opportunities for Democrats to snatch districts that might typically vote Republican but are unhappy with their representatives’ support of the current administration.

But recently, different wings of the party have found themselves at odds over an issue you might not expect to be divisive.

Recently, the head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee raised eyebrows among some party colleagues when he said that the party would not withhold campaign money from candidates who are against or have personal or moral reservations about abortion. Former Vice President Joe Biden, for example, said in the 2012 vice presidential debate that he believed life begins at conception but refused to force that view on someone else through government rule. Others, like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and California Governor Jerry Brown, have said that they are strongly in favor of a woman’s right to choose but feel there is room in the party for those who may feel differently. Abortion rights activists have come back and argued that Democrats should not be abandoning one of its core values just to win some extra seats in Congress.

The debate raises a larger question about how big an ideological and philosophical tent Democrats are willing to put up. The issue is a difficult one, pitting inclusion of all wings of the party for the greater good, even if they may disagree with a core value or two, versus the view that some policy positions just can't be compromised. The debate has come up in another issue within the Democratic Party: single-payer health insurance.

Do you think Democrats should help fund candidates who are pro-life or do you see this as abandoning party values for the sake of winning? Is there room for pro-life Democrats within the party? Political parties need flexibility, but do you think there are some issues that are or should be non-negotiable? How would pro-life Democrats from the past fit into today’s party?

Guests:

Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life of America

Ed Espinoza, director of Progress Texas, a political communications firm based in Austin, Texas; he's the former Western States Director for the Democratic National Committee and a superdelegate in 2008

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

One person waves to the camera on a drone as people pose for a photo, July 3, 2016, at the Rose Bowl stadium in Pasadena, California.
; Credit: ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images

On Tuesday, the LAPD announced a plan for a pilot drone program to the Board of Police Commissioners, amid protests from organizations Stop LAPD Spying Coalition and the Drone-Free LAPD/No Drones, LA! Campaign.

The LAPD says it will hold public meetings to get feedback before drafting guidelines for the use of drones. If approved, LAPD would pilot small drones into dangerous situations, such as bomb scares, active shootings and hostage standoffs in order to gather information, as reported by the LA Times.

But privacy advocates and critics are fearful of what they see as the militarization of law enforcement, as well as the potential for overreach, i.e. the expansion of drones beyond their stated use. We debate the potential use of drones by police.

Should the LAPD be allowed to use drones? What limitations and regulations should be placed on their use? What are your concerns over such a program?

Guests:

Craig Lally, lieutenant at the LAPD and president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the labor union representing LAPD officers

Melanie Ochoa, staff attorney on police practices at the ACLU of Southern California

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

U.S. Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) and South Korea's missile system firing Hyunmu-2 firing a missile into the East Sea during a South Korea-U.S. joint missile drill aimed to counter North Korea's ICBM test on July 29, 2017 in East Coast, South Korea. ; Credit: Handout/Getty Images

Things are heating up between the U.S. and North Korea.

The Washington Post reported yesterday that U.S. intelligence believes North Korea has developed a nuclear warhead that can fit atop a missile. And President Trump threatened North Korea with “fire and fury like the world has never seen.” North Korea’s state-run news followed with threats of a missile strike against U.S. facilities around Guam, including Anderson Air Force Base.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is trying to lower the temperature. This morning, Tillerson tried to calm things by saying there’s no sign the threat level from North Korea was greater than before. He said Americans can sleep well at night. Given the President’s late night hours of tweeting it doesn’t appear he’s sleeping much.

So what options are realistically available to President Trump? Larry speaks to two security experts today about what to expects as tensions rise between the U.S. and North Korea.

Guests:

Jim Walsh, Ph.D., international security expert and a Research Associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Security Studies Program; he tweets @DrJimWalshMIT

Clare Lopez, vice president of research and analysis at Center for Security Policy, a conservative think tank in Washington D.C.; she was also former operations officer for the Central Intelligence Agency (1980-2000); she tweets @ClareMLopez

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

A logo featuring Mickey Mouse is seen on the "Disney Fantasy" cruise ship at the Meyer Werft shipyards before the ship's departure on January 20, 2012 in Papenburg, Germany. ; Credit: Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Trying to pave its own way in a highly-competitive market of on-demand and streaming video services, Disney says it plans to end its deal with Netflix and launch its own streaming service in 2019.  

The announcement came the same day Disney reported less-than-desirable third quarter earnings, and is trying to make a big splash in a market that is already highly saturated with streaming services and original content. Fear not, though. Your kids can still watch Moana on Netflix for the time being -- Disney isn’t pulling its content from Netflix immediately. Instead, it’ll cut Netflix off starting with 2019 Disney titles. Disney has an enormous library of movies, TV shows and other original content, not to mention the rights to both the Star Wars and Marvel Comics franchises.

Disney also announced it would be launching a new streaming service for ESPN next year that will carry live sporting events from a number of professional sports leagues like the MLB, NHL and MLS. It is still unclear whether the service will also offer ESPN original content like SportsCenter or their popular ‘30 for 30’ documentary series.

Would you pay for a Disney streaming service? Do you think they will be able to wedge themselves into a highly-competitive market like streaming services? Will Netflix ultimately suffer in terms of subscribers as a result of this?

Guests:

Christopher Palmeri, Los Angeles bureau chief for Bloomberg news who’s been following the story; he tweets @chrispalmeri

Alan L. Wolk, co-founder and lead analyst of TV[R]EV, a consultant firm for the TV industry; author of the book, “Over The Top. How The Internet Is (Slowly But Surely) Changing The Television Industry” (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2015)

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

Newlyweds walk along the promenade after getting married.; Credit: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

Prenuptial agreements are often associated with wealth.

When the 1% marry, they draw up contracts to protect the significant assets they have going into the marriage.

But in recent years, prenups have become more common, extending far beyond the super rich. In a 2016 survey, 62% of American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers members said they had seen an increase in prenups. 51% of members observed an increase in millennials seeking prenups.

Explanations vary. Some attribute the increase to the people getting married older, and therefore having more to protect. Others cite spiking divorce rates, arguing that these lead people to enter into marriage expecting divorce.

KPCC listeners joined Kelly Chang Rickert, a certified family law specialist at Purpose Driven Lawyers in Pasadena, on AirTalk to discuss the modern-day prenup. Here are some of their stories:

Maria in Cypress still harbors resentment over a last-minute prenup

I got married in September just this last year. And three days before the wedding he pulled me aside and just kind of put [a prenup] on the table. I wanted to marry this man and I did. But it's still in the back of my mind. It really irritates me. I think it put a scratch on the relationship. I don't call it my house, I call it his house. Because he clearly put it that I could never take the house. 

I think if he would have more gently led up to it [it would have been easier], because it was very traumatizing. ... I was crying so much I couldn't read it. I signed it, and to this day I haven't read it. Because my expectation was never that I was going to take anything, I've always been self-sufficient. 

Jennifer in Costa Mesa said the prenup discussion can be a marker of character

I'm a single woman and I own my own home, so when a relationship becomes serious I make sure to have the conversation and tell my guy that I would want a prenup to protect my asset. And what's interesting is how he reacts is pretty revealing of his character and his feelings for me and his understanding for me and our relationship. 

The first person was upset and didn't handle it very well, and in my current relationship he's actually really proud of me. He knows that it makes sense on my end to do that and he doesn't feel at all defensive about it. I also showed him that the prenup will also state that I'm going to be responsible for finishing the paying of my student loans, so it's a two-way street. It's a beneficial thing for him too.

Emma in Laguna Beach didn't sign a prenup — to devastating consequences

I married back in 1974, and that was not a popular thing, to have prenups. [My husband] ran up enormous debt and he forged my signature through massive mortgages in the millions. Even though I won in U.S. federal court and proved everything, the money was off-shore. And yet the children and I lost absolutely everything. I ended up homeless with three children. 

In Jewish history and law they had the ketubah. And I think this is very similar to the ketubah. It makes sense. This is a legal matter, and no one should end up poor. 

Nanette in Northridge is happily married, and glad there's no prenup involved

I was shocked three months before the wedding that his father was pressuring him to get a prenup, because he had been through a disastrous divorce before. When my father found out about that he went through the roof and drafted a six-page prenup of his own of what a good husband does in a marriage to support a wife. My dad was just absolutely adamant that no way, which is how I felt.

My ground was knocked out from under me when he announced this prenup after we'd talked about it many times that we did not want one, feeling it was saying 'the marriage will likely fail.' And it has worked out fine for us, it actually made us communicate a little bit more upfront beforehand.

Click the blue button above to listen to the whole conversation. 

Answers have been edited for clarity. 

Guest:

Kelly Chang Rickert, certified family law specialist at Purpose Driven Lawyers in Pasadena

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

Volunteers look over the US-Mexico border fence to see how illegal border crossers may jump the fence before going on the nightly patrol by citizen volunteers searching for people crossing into the US illegally from Mexico near Campo, California in eastern San Diego County. ; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

On Tuesday, the City Council voted 13-0 to request the city attorney to prepare an ordinance that would make Los Angeles city contractors disclose whether they have business ties to Trump’s border wall project.

Councilmember Gil Cedillo, who proposed the motion, condemned the border wall as racist and counter to the values of Los Angeles. He said the proposed rules would deter businesses from working on the project and also create transparency so he could vote against contracts with those businesses.

Opponents include the Associated General Contractors of America, who said this political litmus test would punish businesses and be damaging to workers. It might also create a slippery slope of discrimination against contractors that work on other politicized projects.

After the ordinance language is drafted, it will go back to the City Council for a vote.

Should LA City contractors reveal whether they have business ties to Trump’s border wall project? Is it fair for the city to create a political litmus test? Or is it a reflection of the city’s values?

Guests: 

Gil Cedillo, Los Angeles City Councilmember for District 1, which includes sections of Northeast Los Angeles and the greater Downtown area

Joseph Villela, policy director at the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights Los Angeles (CHIRLA)

Tom Holsman, CEO of the Associated General Contractors of California, an advocacy group for contractors

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

Electrical Construction Crew completes installation of one of 4,322 ground-mounted solar panels.; Credit: LADWP

The City of Industry has been working to bring the undeveloped hills that border Los Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino counties a gigantic solar farm.

The project is the subject of an investigation by the Southern California News Group, which finds that the city has spent more than $1 million on the proposed public-private solar farm, mainly without public input.

Larry speaks with the co-author of the investigative pieces about the project.

Guests:

Steve Scauzillo, environment and transportation writer for Southern California News Group and co-author of the article “How Industry could lose a $9M bet on solar farm at Tres Hermanos Ranch;” he has been covering Tres Hermanos for three years

Becky Warren, communications liaison on behalf of the City of Industry

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

People, many who have been there for days, wait in line with dozens of others for tickets for the popular Broadway show Hamilton on June 21, 2016 in New York City.; Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

The Hollywood Pantages Theater has been home to some of the greatest performances, from “Wicked,” and “The Lion King” to “The Book of Mormon.”

This month, the Tony Award-winning performance by the 30-plus cast of Lin-Manuel Miranda’s original hip-hop musical “Hamilton” has finally made its way to Hollywood. Since its opening two years ago in New York City, the history-making tour based on the founding fathers and American revolution, has obsessed fans with the show’s unconventional way of telling history with its non-white actors rapping about historical figures as George Washington. Hamilton is expected to make an even longer stay in Los Angeles, to the delight of thousands of Angeleno “Ham” fans, some who have no qualms sitting in line for 24 hours.

Opening night is August 16, 2017.

Guest:

Lisa Fung, arts writer and former arts and entertainment editor at the Los Angeles Times; she tweets @lfung

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

Rocky shores are exposed by the low waters of Morris Reservoir on the San Gabriel River in the Angeles National Forest on January 22, 2014 in near Azusa, California. ; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

A California Congressman has written the Trump administration a letter asking it to lop off a segment of the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument, saying that many local public officials were against designating it a monument from the start and that the Obama administration, which made the designation, didn’t do its due diligence in talking to local leaders about concerns.

Rep. Paul Cook (R-Yucca Valley) wants to remove a finger of the monument designation that spans just shy of 5,000 acres and stretches into the San Bernardino National Forest. He argues that this portion of the monument was heavily opposed by local leaders concerned it would move in on local economic activity. He specifically mentioned the Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts, which lie right outside the monument border. Supporters of the monument argue that’s not the case, and that years of meetings took place before the Obama administration moved forward with the designation.

Do you agree with the proposal to shrink the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument? What about the status of California’s other national monuments in the wake of the Trump administration’s review of monument designations under President Obama?

AirTalk invited Congressman Paul Cook to participate in our discussion but his office did not respond to our requests.

Guests:

Amy Granat, managing director of the California Off-Road Vehicle association

Judy Chu (D-Pasadena), Congresswoman representing California’s 27th District, which includes Pasadena, Alhambra, Monrovia and much of the Western San Gabriel Valley

Daniel Rossman, senior regional director in California for The Wilderness Society, a conservation organization working to protect America’s shared wildlands, and a member of San Gabriel Mountains Forever

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

A propaganda poster is diplsyed during a rally in support of North Korea's stance against the US, on Kim Il-Sung square in Pyongyang on August 9, 2017. ; Credit: KIM WON-JIN/AFP/Getty Images

North Korea’s government-run news claims the country will quickly release a plan to target four medium-range missiles at the ocean near Guam.

The missiles would supposedly be fired over Japan and land within around 20 miles of the U.S. territory of Guam. It’s North Korea’s latest response to the threats President Trump made two days ago. He said “North Korea best not make any more threats to the U.S. They will be met with fire, fury, and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before.”

If North Korea takes the step threatened this morning, how will the U.S. respond?

Guests:

Phil Ewing, national security editor for NPR; he tweets @philewing

Robert Litwak, director of international security studies and international security studies at the Wilson Center; he is the author of the new book, “Preventing North Korea's Nuclear Breakout” (Wilson Center, 2017)  

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