sentence1
stringlengths 15
1.2k
| sentence2
stringlengths 46
501k
|
|---|---|
It's Day 11 of the partial government shutdown, and there's no end in sight. Russian authorities arrest an American on spying charges. North Korea's leader has given his annual New Year's Day address. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: It is up to a new Congress in this new year to resolve a government shutdown. Roughly 800,000 federal employees are unsure when they'll be paid. President Trump demanded $5 billion to help build a wall on the border with Mexico. Democrats offered less for various border security measures. The president told Fox News last night he's ready to talk.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: So I'm ready to go any time they want. No, we are not giving up. We have to have border security, and the wall is a big part of border security - the biggest part.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The president spoke amid confusion about what he really wants. His outgoing chief of staff, John Kelly, said the administration ditched the idea of an actual wall a long time ago, instead favoring fences, technology and more border guards. NPR's White House reporter Ayesha Rascoe joins us now. Ayesha.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Good morning.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Happy New Year.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Happy New Year. (Laughter).</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I'm assuming you, like me, did not go out and party it up last night 'cause we had to talk about the news this morning. So thanks for making the sacrifice.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: (Laughter). Yeah.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Democrats - let's get right to it. Democrats and Republicans have been stuck in this stalemate for a long time now. Thursday, Democrats take control of the House. What's expected to change?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Well, at this point it doesn't look like much will change. But you will finally have some concrete action where, up until now, we've had a lot of talk. So Democrats plan to put forward legislation that would fund the government. Basically, it will provide, like, a year of funding for most of the departments and agencies that are currently shut down. For the Department of Homeland Security, which is at the center of this wall fight, it would provide this stopgap spending bill. And that would basically just push the issue back to February.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: But this does not include any wall or barrier funding. So it's not clear it's going to go anywhere. Trump is saying you cannot have border security without a wall. And Republicans in the Senate say they won't bring up anything that Trump doesn't support. So it seems like this impasse will remain, even if Democrats pass their bill in the House on Thursday.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I mean, what leverage is even left for either party?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Well, so right now it seems like the White House wants to use the shutdown to pressure the Democrats to come to the table. Basically, you have all of these people out of work. Something has to be done. President Trump is arguing that the government needs to be reopened and that Democrats need to show that they're concerned about border security. But he's making this case at the Democrats with Democrats set to take over the House after they gained all these seats in an election where Trump made immigration a top issue. So his leverage is not what it would have been before the midterm elections.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Democrats, of course, say they're offering money for border security, just not for a wall, and - which they don't see as effective. And they see it as a symbol of what they oppose about President Trump's immigration policies. And Democrats have their own base that they're trying to play to. And basically, they're arguing President Trump said he would own the shutdown. He said that Mexico would pay for the wall. And that - that's their argument that they're making.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: And so they're trying to move ahead without any funding for the barrier - I mean, for a barrier or for a wall. But ultimately, something is going to have to give. The question is who is going to do the giving...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Right.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: ...And what it might look like. They need each other at this point, the president and the Democrats. They're going to have to come together on something.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Right. So I guess if we thought it was tough for the last Congress to get anything done, 2019's going to be a doozy, right?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: It - it will. There won't be - there's no shortage of areas of disagreement. And there's going to be a lot of things that they're just going to bump heads on. And this is an example of the start of it.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: All right, NPR White House reporter Ayesha Rascoe with the latest. Thanks so much, lady, we appreciate it.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Thank you.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Now to Russia, where an American citizen has been detained. The FSB - that's the Russian security service - says that Paul Whelan was taken into custody late last week on suspicion of espionage. Here in Washington, the U.S. State Department put out a short statement saying essentially that they're just aware of the arrest.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This comes weeks after a Russian operative was convicted of conspiracy here in the U.S., trying to influence U.S. policy ahead of the 2016 presidential election. For more, we've got NPR's Lucian Kim on the line with us from Moscow. Lucian, Happy New Year.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Happy New Year. Good morning.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Any new details? Good morning. Any new details come out about this arrest yet?</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Well, not really. All we have is this very terse statement from the FSB that was issued yesterday. And it basically named this American citizen, identified as Paul Whelan, who was arrested, quote, "in the act of spying in Moscow" last Friday. And we know that a criminal investigation for espionage has been opened.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: As you mentioned, there's also the State Department's statement from yesterday - also very terse - saying the U.S. is aware of the detention and expects Russia to follow its obligations under international conventions. What that means is providing access to this individual by U.S. Embassy officials. But we don't know anything about this person except the name given by the FSB. And the State Department is not commenting due to what it calls privacy considerations.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So I mean, it's hard to ignore the fact that this arrest is coming really close after this Russian national, Maria Butina, pled guilty to conspiring to act as a Russian agent and basically infiltrate American political groups. I mean, are these connected? It would seem real weird if they're not.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Well, of course there's a lot of speculation right now that this might be a Russian response to Butina's detention and plea deal and that this American citizen accused of espionage may be used to swap out Butina. President Vladimir Putin has been asked about her. And he's said that she was forced to make a confession to U.S. prosecutors because he maintains she never had any Russian government duties.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: He's also said the charges against her are baseless and that he's not indifferent to her case. What's interesting is at the same time, he said that Russia will not arrest innocent people just to use them as bargaining chips.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So we also remember last year - right? - Russia expelled 60 U.S. diplomats after the Trump administration kicked out 60 Russian diplomats. So this has been going on for a while. As we look down the pike at 2019, what's the state of the relationship between the U.S. and Russia?</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Well, just about those diplomats - at the time, the Trump administration indicated that those Russians it expelled were intelligence officers working under diplomatic cover. And of course, the arrest last week is not the best way to end the year.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Right.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: In February we expect the Trump administration to withdraw from a 1987 arms control treaty that the U.S. says Russia is violating. President Trump also doesn't look like he will meet President Putin anytime soon because it looks like the White House has made that - a future meeting contingent on Russia releasing two dozen - two dozen Ukrainian navy sailors that it's captured.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Of course, in the U.S. we have the Mueller investigation grinding on. We have the Democrats taking over the House. And these are - of course are also factors that will affect U.S.-Russia relations. So unfortunately, not a lot of bright spots looking forward into this new year.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: All right, buckle up. NPR's Lucian Kim from Moscow. Thanks so much, Lucian.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Thank you, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: All right, we're going to turn now to North Korea, where Kim Jong Un, North Korea's leader, has given his annual new year's address. And in this televised speech, Un says he remains committed to complete denuclearization but only if the U.S. keeps its promises. Kim Jong Un also said he'd be willing to meet with President Trump again, anytime. NPR's Anthony Kuhn joins us now from Seoul. Anthony, happy 2019.</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Happy 2019, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So just from that snapshot I gave, it doesn't seem like Kim Jong Un is paving the way for a breakthrough on the nuclear issue, does it?</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: No, not at all. The speech was pretty much what analysts expected - especially those analysts who predict that this stalemate on the nuclear issue is going to drag on well into the new year. What Kim said is that, you know, he's serious about improving relations with the U.S. and denuclearizing.</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: But North Korea's been pointing out for a while that since the Trump-Kim summit in June, they have made gestures such as dismantling nuclear and missile test sites. And so now it's up to the U.S. to reciprocate by easing sanctions or providing some sort of security guarantee. And there is an or-else. Let's hear some tape from Kim's speech here.</s>LEADER KIM JONG UN: (Speaking Korean).</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: "If the U.S. fails to keep the promises it made before the world," he says, "if it misjudges the patience of our people and continues to use sanctions and pressure against our republic, then we'll have no choice except to seek a new path to secure the sovereignty and interests of our country."</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Now, he didn't say what exactly that new path is, Rachel, but it sounds a lot like the old path of hostility and confrontation with the U.S. - except now with a more lethal nuclear arsenal. And also, we might note that the setting for this, the scene for this speech was different. He was sitting in a wood-paneled, bookshelf-lined office, which was apparently intended to look more like a president's office than a dictator's bunker.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Does he have a wood-paneled, bookshelf-lined office? Or is that a stage set? (Laughter).</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: We don't know.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Unclear.</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: I've never been in his office.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: (Laughter). So what's he holding out for?</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Well, you remember the Trump-Kim summit in June. People saw right then that that was the vaguest of deals and that the U.S. and North Korea have completely different understandings of denuclearization. And they have, you know, emphasized this time and again, that when they say denuclearization, that includes getting rid of the U.S. nuclear umbrella that protects South Korea and Japan.</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: And today, Kim added in his speech, you know, no new strategic weapons on the Korean Peninsula and an end to U.S.-South Korean joint military exercises. So it seems that North Korea is holding out for another summit where they're going to try to squeeze more concessions out of President Trump.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Meanwhile, south, in South Korea, the U.S. and the South were supposed to strike this new deal on the U.S. military presence. And this was supposed to happen by New Year's Eve. And it didn't happen, right?</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Right.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So what's going on there?</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Well, the White House wants all allies to pay more. According to South Korean media, they're asking Seoul for a 50 percent increase. And they want to cut their five-year agreements down to just one so that they strike a deal with South Korea, and then they ask all other allies for similar terms. And South Korea has said no.</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Seoul was not happy about the U.S. pullout from Syria. And they're also worried about the resignation of Mattis, who tried to reassure allies, including South Korea, that he wouldn't either - the U.S. wouldn't pull out, and they also wouldn't attack North Korea without consulting with them first.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: All right, NPR's Anthony Kuhn from Seoul, reporting on Kim Jong Un's annual address. Anthony, we appreciate it.</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: No problem. Take care, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Take care. |
When Braxton Moral of Kansas was in third grade, his teacher told his parents that he was "really, really gifted." In May he'll graduate high school and days later pick up his undergraduate degree. | NOEL KING, HOST: Good morning. I'm Noel King. High school can feel overwhelming, and college is hours of hitting the books. So imagine doing both at the same time. When Braxton Moral of Kansas was in third grade, his teacher told his parents that he was really, really gifted. In middle school, he started taking college classes online. Now at 16, he's on track to collect his high school diploma in May and pick up his undergrad degree a few days later from Harvard. It's MORNING EDITION. |
It's been one year since Congress cut business and personal taxes. Noel King checks in with Richard Rubin, tax policy reporter at The Wall Street Journal, to gauge their effect on the economy. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: It has been one year since the Republican-controlled Congress slashed corporate and personal tax rates. The promises and boasts at the time assured years of economic growth.</s>PAUL RYAN: This is the kind of tax reform and tax cuts that get our economy growing to reach its potential. This gets us better wages, bigger paychecks.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: And, ultimately, what does it mean? It means jobs - jobs, jobs, jobs.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That was President Trump, proceeded by outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan. So how are things going today? The economy is still strong, with growth topping 4 percent in one quarter of 2018. And unemployment remains at a near 50-year low. But how much of that has to do with those tax cuts? Noel King put that question to Richard Rubin. He covers tax policy for The Wall Street Journal.</s>NOEL KING, BYLINE: A year after the tax cut took effect, where do we stand?</s>RICHARD RUBIN: We've gotten some of what we would expect and some of what the proponents had hoped for. I think we've seen some increased investment, but it decelerated some in the third quarter. We've seen unemployment continue to drop, but it was already on the way there. We've seen people have more money in their pockets. And so we've seen some economic growth, particularly in the short run, because people had money to spend as their paychecks got bigger in the first part of the year from the individual side of the tax cuts. And now what we're looking for to really see is, is that going to last? Is there going to be not just a one-time bump from people having money in their pockets and spending? But is there going to be the kind of sustained, prolonged economic boom with 3 percent growth year after year after year that the administration says is possible and that - most economists were pretty skeptical of the ability of this tax law and other administration policies to get the U.S. economy there.</s>NOEL KING, BYLINE: So some wait-and-see here.</s>RICHARD RUBIN: Some of the facts are clear. There are bigger budget deficits. It was a large tax cut. And people will feel that on the individual side as they're filing their returns in the coming months. And one other thing I'd add is that companies are still trying to figure this out about what incentives they have. A lot of the pieces of this law are really complicated, particularly on international taxation. And Treasury Department has been putting out tons and tons of regulations over the course of 2018. And companies are still really trying to grapple with that to understand exactly what the new incentives are. And so what you've seen from companies so far is they've really - they've done a lot of share buybacks. We saw that early in the year and continuing throughout the year. Companies had free money, and they bought back their own shares. And we've seen some additional investment but not necessarily as much as the administration had hoped.</s>NOEL KING, BYLINE: You mentioned a trend that we've been seeing in which companies that got the tax break used some of the extra money that they had to buy back their stock. And that raised eyebrows. Why is that?</s>RICHARD RUBIN: Well, it raised eyebrows 'cause it's not a direct investment. It's, you know - it really is trying to prop up the share price. It's trying to help investors. You know, you've seen some companies do dividends, as well. The counterarguments - that would be this - that if you get more money to investors, then companies that might want investment or might have the need for investment can get money from those investors. But the buybacks have become a political football, for sure, because the opponents of the tax law can easily point to them and say, look. The people who are benefiting here are really the shareholders.</s>NOEL KING, BYLINE: It's not the employees, which this was supposed to benefit.</s>RICHARD RUBIN: I would say two things about that. One is that employees, for sure, were supposed to benefit from the corporate tax cuts. But that was going to take time. It was the causal chain that we just talked about of tax cut and then investment and then productivity growth and then hiring - was never going to be a one-year proposition. And then on top of that, of course, employees are getting tax cuts on the individual side, as well.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That was Richard Rubin of The Wall Street Journal talking with our co-host Noel King. |
Never before has Congo had a democratic transfer of power, but Congolese finally voted Sunday in a long-delayed presidential election. Voters were choosing a successor to President Joseph Kabila. | NOEL KING, HOST: In the Democratic Republic of Congo, long-delayed elections - presidential, parliamentary and provincial - were finally held yesterday. Now the questions start. Opposition presidential candidates say there were widespread irregularities. The election commission says they were minor.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: NPR's Ofeibea Quist-Arcton covered the vote, and she's been monitoring the count, which went on late into the night. She's with us now from the capital, Kinshasa. Hi, Ofeibea.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: Greetings. Greetings from a rather tense Kinshasa, I have to say, Noel.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah, what is going on in Kinshasa today?</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: People are nervous, nervous because, yes, they have managed to vote finally, but nervous because they don't know what the results will be and whether the true expression of their vote will come out. So there's a ooph (ph), finally we've got there after two years waiting to get to these elections. But will there be peace after the vote? Will everyone accept the result, and they - will they be the true, credible results?</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Well, let's talk about who may not accept. You've reported that the opposition is not happy. They're claiming there were widespread irregularities. What are they saying happened?</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: One of the frontrunners, opposition presidential frontrunners, Martin Fayulu, read out a long list of alleged irregularities at a very late press briefing yesterday. He says there were jammed voting machines. And these are the new voting machines from South Korea that have never been used here before.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: Some jammed. Apparently some didn't work at all. And he also said the late opening of polling stations - they were meant to open at 6 in the morning - some didn't open until 1, 2 in the afternoon, missing voters' registers. So voters who were coming to vote for their president and their lawmakers couldn't find their names or had to wait for hours for these to be delivered.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: Martin Fayulu always said - also said that opposition coalition observers were kicked out of polling stations when it came to the counting of the ballots. And he blames the election commission and the government for that. And then you have another opposition presidential candidate, Felix Tshisekedi, who deplored what he called disorder.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: But he says that this was deliberate manipulation of election day chaos to trigger a court challenge so that President Joseph Kabila, who has been in power for almost 18 years, can extend his rule. Now, analysts say of course any legal recourse to justice by the opposition would be a dead end because they would be ruled against. So you have a lot of uncertainty, a lot of nervousness.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: You mentioned that there were observers and that there are claims that the observers were kicked out. In these types of elections, there often are. Who was observing this election, and what are they saying?</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: Let me tell you first who was not observing. The Carter Center observers who, you know, observe elections all over Africa - they were not invited this time. Also, the European Union, which has imposed sanctions on President Kabila's preferred successor - they were also not invited. But you had tens, 20,000, 40,000 local election observers. And they have been doing incredible work. They reported difficulties in voting.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: The Catholic Church, the influential Catholic Church which has mediated between Kabila and the opposition in the past, said there were at least 1,500 serious problems, a third of them with the controversial new voting machines that I mentioned. So as I say, there is tension in the air because people don't know how this is going to end up. And of course what everybody wants to avoid is violence once the results are proclaimed.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Just briefly, Ofeibea, is this an achievement for Congo? These elections finally did happen. There wasn't that much violence.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: A lot of people are saying it's an achievement for the Congolese because they were motivated. They were patient. They were determined. They were mature. And they were absolutely determined to vote for their new leaders. But lots of questions being asked about the organization by the electoral commission and also the intent of the outgoing government. Do they really want to have credible, transparent elections, or has there been vote rigging and manipulation as the opposition claims?</s>NOEL KING, HOST: NPR's Ofeibea Quist-Arcton from Kinshasa, thank you.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON, BYLINE: Thank you. Always a pleasure. And we'll see what happens here. |
President Trump has invited congressional leaders to meet with him at the White House for a briefing on border security. The partial government shutdown is now in its 12th day. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: President Trump has invited members of Congress over to the White House today for what is being called a briefing on border security. And border security is at the heart of the standoff right now that's led to a partial government shutdown, specifically, the president's push for more than $5 billion for a border wall.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: NPR congressional correspondent Susan Davis is in the studio with us this morning. Hey, Sue.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: Good morning.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So a briefing is sort of a one-way street. We invite you over. Experts talk. It's not really a conversation, not really a negotiation.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: (Laughter).</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So what is exactly supposed to happen today, and what difference is it going to make in the shutdown?</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: It's a really curious decision that the White House made. I think, partly, this is probably for the optics of the shutdown to look like they're working to get the end of a deal. I think that, you know, congressional leaders have been pretty clear about what it's going to take, and it's going to take a compromise. And it still is not clear where the White House is willing to give on this.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: Remember, the White House is the reason we are part - or is essentially the reason we're in this shutdown because the White House has indicated to Congress back in December that they would sign a government funding bill. And the president was the one, after the Senate Republican majority had already passed it, changed his mind and pulled the rug out from Congress and has not yet been able to move that negotiation forward. It's been a weird shutdown. We've been through a couple of these now.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Right.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: So we have something to compare it to. Usually when we're in a shutdown, you know, they stay in D.C., and they keep fighting and it kind of dominates the news. This one happened over the holidays. It's been pretty quiet. And I think the political heat here has been kind of hard to read because people, the public, hasn't been as plugged into this one.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: I think that dynamic might change this week as people are returning back to work from the holidays, as it becomes more and more clear that hundreds of thousands of Americans are going without pay right now because they're federal workers. And we'll see how those changes kind of shift the political calculus.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: But who does have the most to lose? I mean, they've been fighting over who gets the blame, right? At first the president said, I'll take the blame because it's worth it to me. And the Democrats are like, fine, do it. And then the president's like, no, just kidding, it's the Democrats' fault.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: (Laughter). It's a very sophisticated debate. I think it's hard to say. And it's hard - the thing is that shutdowns tend to end with really unsatisfying conclusions. They just reopen the government, and the fight does - it continues. I think the president sees this as having a lot to lose here because the border wall has become a very big symbol of his presidency and his campaign and a core issue to his base.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: Part of the reason why we got here is conservatives in the House were really encouraging the president to fight on this issue because, I think, if he is seen as wavering here that it goes - it could weaken his support among the base, which has really stuck by him through basically everything. And he doesn't - he has shown no interest in giving on this.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: And if he wants border wall money, he's going to have to give Democrats something in exchange. We have seen these negotiations before. Often that comes in the form of immigration legislation, something that would be a bit of a give-and-take to get both parties behind it. He hasn't really offered anything yet. He's still just making a demand.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And, of course, Democrats take control of the House...</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: Yeah.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: ...Tomorrow. How's that going to change this particular dynamic, and then more broadly, life for the president?</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: Sure. House Democrats, expected to be led by Nancy Pelosi, have already made clear their first order of business is going to vote on funding bills to reopen the government. I think that that's going to put a little bit more pressure back on the Republican Party and on the president to say, what are you going to do with these? Especially their bills that have already passed the Senate. So we know these bills can pass Congress.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: You know, I think for the perspective here, in terms of the shutdown, the president has much bigger concerns coming about Democrats taking over the House. They are planning to launch any number of investigations and oversight investigations into his administration, into his business dealings, into the ethical behavior of members of administration. So if the president is looking to Congress for confrontation, he might want to get past this shutdown 'cause he has much bigger problems coming his way in 2019.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: NPR congressional correspondent Susan Davis. Thanks, Sue.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: You're welcome. |
The U.S. stopped paying dues to the U.N. Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization after it recognized a Palestinian state in 2011. The U.S. will be out of the group by the end of the year. | NOEL KING, HOST: At the end of World War II, the United States helped found UNESCO, that's the United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization. It was supposed to promote the flow of ideas to prevent future conflicts. But then, UNESCO granted full membership to the Palestinians, and the U.S. stopped funding it. The Trump administration says it will pull out at the end of this year.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: NPR's Eleanor Beardsley has this story from Paris, where UNESCO is based.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: Richard the Lionheart left on a crusade from this Romanesque church in the Burgundy village of Vezelay. Today, the site is on UNESCO's World Heritage list of places of exceptional cultural value to humanity. France has 44 UNESCO World Heritage sites that draw tourists from across the globe. Brazilian Raquel Chaplot is one of them.</s>RAQUEL CHAPLOT: (Through interpreter) We came to Vezelay because of its UNESCO seal. You know you'll never be disappointed when you visit a UNESCO Heritage site, and France really gives them prominence.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: But UNESCO does more than promote culture and tourism. It also runs scientific and educational programs and initiatives the world over.</s>PETER YEO: Important initiatives that promote human rights, that promote journalist freedoms, that promote Holocaust education.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: That's Peter Yeo, president of the Better World Campaign, an organization that works to strengthen ties between the U.S. and the U.N. Yeo says America's disengagement from UNESCO over the last decade is changing the organization.</s>PETER YEO: The U.S. withdrawal from UNESCO, as well as the decision to defund UNESCO in 2011, absolutely created a vacuum that, at times, has been filled by, you know, members from the Gulf States and other member states that don't necessarily share our commitment to human rights.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: A law that forced President Obama to cut off funding when UNESCO accepted Palestine as a member state in 2011 is still in force.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: Brett Schaefer is a U.N. specialist at The Heritage Foundation, a Washington think tank. He says UNESCO is a perfectly fine organization, but when it voted to recognize the Palestinians as full members, it undermined an important U.S. policy goal.</s>BRETT SCHAEFER: Principally, our interest in trying to establish a lasting peace in the Middle East between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The Palestinians have been pursuing an effort to try and get international recognition absent a negotiated peace with Israel.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: The Trump administration cited anti-Israel bias as one of its reasons for leaving UNESCO, but observers say things have changed at the organization in the last year under its new director, former French Culture Minister Audrey Azoulay, who happens to be Jewish.</s>AUDREY AZOULAY: It is vital today to bring back peace.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: That's Azoulay speaking at a recent UNESCO conference. Israeli and Palestinian delegations jointly supported more than a dozen initiatives at UNESCO this year. And the organization's leaders had hoped the U.S. and Israel, which decided to leave UNESCO alongside the U.S., would reconsider.</s>STEPHEN JORDAN: There's no other organization quite like UNESCO that brings together the world's education, science and cultural networks.</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: That Stephen Jordan, CEO of the Institute for Sustainable Development. Jordan says if the U.S. wants to be competitive in the world, it must remain engaged with the international community.</s>STEPHEN JORDAN: Why should we reinvent the wheel when we have the perfectly good tools to exchange information and to learn more and to benchmark other folks?</s>ELEANOR BEARDSLEY, BYLINE: The United States owes UNESCO $550 million in unpaid dues. The Heritage Foundation's Schaefer says it's better to just stop accumulating that debt. He says the U.S. can always return to UNESCO in the future when the time is right. Eleanor Beardsley, NPR News, Paris. |
Farah Jasmine Griffin, professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies at Columbia University, presents the first of a six-part series spotlighting her favorite black American writers. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm Farai Chideya. And this is NEWS & NOTES.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: As part of our series on The Black Literary Imagination, we ask for your input as listeners, and now we've got someone else ready to have her say.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Farah Jasmine Griffin is a professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies at Columbia University. We've asked her to make a list of the six most influential African-American authors of all-time. That's right, all-time. You will always get the chance to weigh in on what you think about her picks. Recently, I asked Dr. Griffin to step up a name of first of her six top picks.</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): Oh, Farai, you can't imagine how difficult this was. I wake up in the middle of the night rethinking this list on a daily basis it seems.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What were the criteria that you decided were important?</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): Well, they change quite a bit. But I decided that I wanted to pick people who were accomplished as writers, who wrote beautifully and meaningfully and passionately, but also people who had a great deal of influence on other writers and on readers as well. So those were my primary criteria. Consequently, the list ends up being fairly conservative and that they're all well-known writers. But that's because I thought they would have a broader influence on other writers and that they would be familiar.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So when you talk about people who were influential, are we talking about people who were influential on the African-American audience and writers or on all audiences and writers?</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): Well, the people I've chosen were influential certainly on African-American audiences and writers, but they are people who are significant nationally and internationally. I think that each of them influenced people certainly beyond the boundaries of race and nation.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So as we continue to tease our audience, how many of these people are living versus dead? Or just give us a general sense of that.</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): Well, that was also one of the things that I thought about. I thought that I would only allow myself one living writer. So only one of them is living, the rest of them have all died. And with the exception of one, they're all writers of prose, not writers of, say, poetry. So that was a way of helping me narrow down the list.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Uh-oh. Now, we're going to have to take bets on this. But you've got one author that we can talk about right now. Who have you chosen?</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): Well, my first selection is Phillis Wheatley because she was the first. She's the first published African-American writer. And she experienced many of the challenges that would face black writers who followed her.</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): She was born in West Africa, kidnapped from the Senegal-Gambia region of the continent when she was approximately 7 years old. She was purchased in Boston in 1761 by John Wheatley, and she was purchased as a servant for his wife, Susannah.</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): I think what we don't often think of when we talk about Phillis Wheatley is that she was a highly gifted child. She was a prodigy. Within a year of having been purchased, she was fluent in English. Her mistress taught her to read and write. Within 16 months of her arrival in Boston, she was reading passages from the bible. She was reading Greek and Latin classics, astronomy, geography, history, British literature. In fact, she was reading the curriculum - the class school curriculum that was taught to Harvard students at the time.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, we recently had on someone from the Mayme Clayton collection and they have what they described as the only known signed copy of Phillis Wheatley book. How significant is that?</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): Oh, it's very significant. I mean this book was very important not just for African-Americans, it was a very controversial book. She couldn't even have it published in the United States, it was published first in England. And years later, it was published in the United States. And white men, prominent white men, including Thomas Jefferson, engaged in extended debates about the merits of her poetry and her mind, debates which were really about the entire Negro race. So it's actually pretty rare that copies of the book exist at all, and especially to have one signed by Phillis Wheatley is, you know, very rare, indeed.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Dr. Griffin, we are intrigued. Thank you so much.</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Farah Jasmine Griffin is professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University. Here she is reading from one of Phillis Wheatley's most famous and controversial poems called "On Being Brought from Africa to America."</s>Dr. FARAH JASMINE GRIFFIN (Professor of English and Comparative Literature and African-American Studies, Columbia University): (Reading) 'Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land, taught my benighted soul to understand that there's a God, that there's a Saviour too: Once I redemption neither sought nor knew. Some view our sable race with scornful eye, their colour is a diabolic die. Remember, Christians, Negros, black as Cain, May be refined and join the angelic train. |
Noel King talks to Claudia Puig and April Wolfe of the Los Angeles Film Critics Association about their favorite films of 2018. | NOEL KING, HOST: We are heading into movie awards season. 2018 was the year of "Black Panther," "Crazy Rich Asians," Ryan Gosling playing Neil Armstrong in "First Man." I asked the film critics April Wolfe and Claudia Puig of the LA Film Critics Association to try and pick their favorites from this year. Good morning, ladies. It's been a busy year for you both.</s>APRIL WOLFE: Oh, my God, we want to - I've written at least four different top 20 lists because there are...</s>APRIL WOLFE: I'm serious. I'm not even joking. And they're all different.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Top 80.</s>APRIL WOLFE: They're all completely different.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: There's so many lists that can be given to you right now. And I'm sorry to give you...</s>APRIL WOLFE: Yeah, this has been a great year.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: Yeah.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: But I want to talk about your favorites. And I know that, Claudia, one of yours is a 1970s period piece that was set in Mexico City. It's called "Roma." Tell us about that movie.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: This is one of the most beautiful films. It's enthralling. It's - people throw around the word masterpiece a little too lightly, but I'm going to throw it out there.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: OK.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: It's such a powerful and intimate story. It's like cinematic poetry. Moments are allowed to unspool. The pacing is very different from what we normally see in American movies. And it's a portrayal of the middle class in Mexico, which is not something you see hardly ever in American films. You see, you know, of course poor and struggling immigrants, and you see wealthy drug lords leading decadent, violent lives in luxurious haciendas, but you don't see the middle class.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: And it's told from the perspective of an indigenous woman who raised the director and writer, Alfonso Cuaron. And it's about the relationship between this woman and the family. She clearly loves the kids, and they love her. But she's - you know, there's definitely a class struggle here.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: It really resonated for me on a personal level because I lived there in the 1970s in Mexico City. And the production designer, Eugenio Caballero, was just meticulous in his production design, recreating what the streets looked like the '70s.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: OK, I'm putting that one on my list. April Wolfe, one of your top picks of the year is "First Reformed," which starred Ethan Hawke. He played a minister who is going through kind of a crisis of faith and then found purpose in environmentalism. Not to be snarky, but not exactly blockbuster material. You loved it. What did you love?</s>APRIL WOLFE: Well, I think Claudia hits on something that I was going to bring up, which is the idea of poetry. And I think that American cinema embraced the idea of poetry this year, which is a...</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Wow.</s>APRIL WOLFE: ...Slower tone. And it's almost literary in a sense. And it's also a little bit more open. And "First Reformed" for me hits all of those points. It's a very slow film. Paul Schrader - if he doesn't make anything after this, he doesn't need to. This could be the capstone of a really great career. And the way that Ethan Hawke acts in this film is very restrained. And it's a really beautiful thing to behold and just to kind of lean in and feel like you're getting very close to these characters.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Let's take a listen to a clip from "First Reformed."</s>CEDRIC THE ENTERTAINER: (As Pastor Jeffers) Jesus doesn't want our suffering. He suffered for us.</s>ETHAN HAWKE: (As Toller) And what of his creation? The heavens declare the glory of God. God is present everywhere, in every plant, every river, every tiny insect. The whole world is a manifestation of his holy presence. I think this is an issue where the church can lead. But they say nothing.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: So that's the poetry you're talking about.</s>APRIL WOLFE: Yeah, there's almost a literary quality to this. You know, the language of this is a very different film.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: April, I was just wondering. I think it's Ethan Hawke's best performance. What do you think?</s>APRIL WOLFE: Absolutely. And you can see when they talk together, Paul Schrader and Ethan Hawke, the kind of respect that they have for one another. And the way that they talk about process is very philosophical.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Another quiet movie that made both of your lists - it's called "Leave No Trace." And it's about a father and his young daughter who are living in a park outside of Portland. Let's play a clip of that.</s>THOMASIN MCKENZIE: (As Tom) What if the kids at school think I'm strange because of the way we're living?</s>BEN FOSTER: (As Will) How important are their judgments?</s>THOMASIN MCKENZIE: (As Tom) Guess I'll find out.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: What is this movie about?</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: It's exploring people who are living on the margins, people that you might not ordinarily even see or think about. And that's one of the things that the director, Debra Granik, does so well. She made "A Winter's Bone" (ph), which kind of launched the career of Jennifer Lawrence. And she just has a way of drawing fantastic performances. And the two actors here, Ben Foster and Thomasin McKenzie, are just amazing as father-daughter. I completely believed that they were parent and child.</s>APRIL WOLFE: Yeah. They - in fact, Debra Granik - she talks about this. She built into the budget of her movie at least a week for them, these two actors, to get together and to take a survival course. So they were actually living in the woods for a week together and bonded. And you can see that kind of familiarity in that film. And I quite love everything about this movie. And talk about a...</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: I do, too.</s>APRIL WOLFE: ...Literary quality, too, you know? This is...</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: Oh, yeah.</s>APRIL WOLFE: Gosh, this is a poem of a film as well. It makes you really think about things. And ask Debra Granik about her thinking about why she made it, and she'll immediately go into Henry David Thoreau and talk about stillness and the need for stillness right now.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: It's interesting. The three movies that you've highlighted - it sounds like realism is part of the point in many ways. And I don't know. That's interesting to me 'cause I guess I think about movies so much in this day and age as escapism, you know, as movies about superheroes, as "Black Panther," as, you know, movies about wildly wealthy people living lives, you know, most of us can't imagine - "Crazy Rich Asians." But what impressed you this year were the movies that felt like they could really happen to people we know.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: They could really happen. And I think they're also people that we maybe overlook in different ways - you know, a domestic worker, people, you know, living in a tent that we drive by perhaps or a minister who's - who we sort of see going about his business. We don't know what kind of interior life he's having and what struggles he's having. So I think it's, you know, realism and also just delving into lives that we might not be thinking about all the time and that we're fascinated by when, you know, they're presented to us so beautifully and poetically.</s>APRIL WOLFE: Yeah. And, you know, this is a very noisy year...</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah. Yeah.</s>APRIL WOLFE: ...In terms of everything else that's going on. And so to me, there is a bit of escapism in something like "First Reformed," "Roma" and "Leave No Trace" because you get to go into this theater and escape from the noise for just an hour or two.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: Yeah, all of these films are very still. And they're quiet. And you have to listen and watch and - you know, as opposed to - sometimes with those big, noisy films - you know, some of them are great, but some of them you almost are inured to, or you're just - you know, it's just too much. It's like overload, sensory overload. This is a much gentler - these are gentler films.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Quiet down and pay attention to people is kind of a nice message. I'm willing to take it in (laughter) 2018. Film critics April Wolfe and Claudia Puig of the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, thank you both.</s>CLAUDIA PUIG: Thank you.</s>APRIL WOLFE: Thank you. |
For an update on how people in Newark are reacting to the senseless killings of three young college students, Farai Chideya talks with Donna Jackson, president and founder of Taking Back Our Streets, an organization dedicated to bringing peace to Newark's neighborhoods. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, we turn to an on-the-ground perspective Donna Jackson. She's president and founder of Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated. That's a neighborhood organization, dedicated to bringing peace in Newark.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Donna, thanks for joining us.</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): Thank you for having me.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So you just heard Andrew give us a lay of the land. Maybe we can just back into this with the topic of race and illegal immigration. Is this something from your perspective that you hear folks in the neighborhood is talking about?</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): Yes, they are talking about it from a perspective of the mayor and the police director downplaying this as any gang involvement. We in the streets, we in the community know better, and continue to wonder why the mayor and the police director continue to lie to the community that this has no implications of gang activity at all.</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): I don't think there'll be a big immigration issue behind this because it's a touchy situation. You know, you know people, you've work with people. Some folks aren't sure of the status of people that they've known for 10 years. You don't want to, you know, take someone who's been productive in the community for so many years and say okay, let everybody, you know, open the barn door and throw them all out. I don't think anyone at any in the community has that attitude. But I do think that the critical issue is that we're downplaying this gang piece and we don't want to put any racial perspective on it when it's fire storming in places like California. And to say that…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So read(ph) by that you mean the black Latino tensions and the gang-related tensions in places like California?</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): Yes. And as to - for us again to say that this is not - a significant piece of this case is irresponsible of the administration and the police department.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Do you think that it's a case of - from your perspective - them ignoring possible gang-related implications because that would further damage the city's reputation? Why do you think this?</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): Well, yes, it will further damage the police and administrative reputation. However, they're known for downplaying. They're known for not being honest and truthful in any matters that deal with the police department. For example, crime is down 61 percent. What community are they talking about? They're not talking about Newark, New Jersey. They maybe talking about Newark, Delaware, but they are not talking about Newark, New Jersey. I live here. I go to sleep every night. I wake up every morning. And if Mr. McCarthy slept here, maybe he would know that crime is not down in this city and also…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Tell us who Mr. McCarthy is.</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): Mr. McCarthy is the Newark police director. And yes, there are…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: One of the two officials?</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): Yes, one of the two officials as well as our mayor. I do understand them wanting to keep a sense of calm in the city, but guess what, we're not calm now. We just had another murder last night. A young man shot coming down Clinton Avenue. We had 17 shootings this past weekend resulting in seven murders. No reports of that at all. I am tired of them wanting to pretend like and act like there are no crimes, no murders, no shootings, no stabbings, no domestic violence going on in Newark. It's not a bad thing to say we have problems. Mayor Booker, you did not shoot anyone. Police director McCarthy, you did not shoot anyone. So why can't we say these things are happening and then deal with them and go forward?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Donna, let's take a turn to the whole idea of what makes things happen in terms of ending crime. You've got these gunshot detection cameras. Is that really what Newark needs or what would you suggest if you were to, for example, take the role of being the police chief?</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): Well, first of all, we first need to increase the morale in the Newark Police Department. It is at a all-time low. The performance of the Newark Police Department is - I've been in this city over 40 years and I've never seen it this low. The morale is low. That's the first thing to fight crimes - to get people to buy into that you have to deal with. There needs to be increased police in community relations. We don't have that. That does not exist in the Newark Police Department.</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): You do have in the lower rankings of the police department maybe 50 to 100 officers who do interact with people, who do know the kids in the community and - by they're peers that is frowned upon. And what I mean by that is, for example, there were some children in one of our housing projects playing basketball and a white officer took off his hat, unbuttoned his shirt and went to play basketball with these young men. The three counterparts that were with him say, what are you doing? You're crazy. Don't go over there talking to those kids. And see, that kind of attitude is what we do not need in Newark.</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): We need officers that come here to work - first of all, they should live here. But if they don't live here, if you're not about rebuilding and helping the community build, then you need to pack your bags and go work on the police department where you live at. You need to look at our children like they're your children. And if you can't deal with all kids like that, then this is where the tensions become and this is where the tensions are getting tighter.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Donna, one last question before we let you go. Are you hopeful? Are you hopeful things will change?</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): I'm very hopeful. We are in the middle of a campaign now with the organization called Stop the Shooting. To get people to take a pledge to stop shooting, start living and building our communities. We have joined on with that organization and are having other organizations, like the New Black Panther Party, Street Warriors, Enough Is Enough Coalition, getting out here now, asking children and adults to sign this pledge to build our community. We are having a rally on Wednesday, the 29th at 12:00 on the steps of city hall. And we are going to leave from the steps of city hall and march up to the county prosecutors office because what we also need to understand particularly in light of the case that we're talking about today is the county dropped the ball on this.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Donna…</s>Ms. DONNA JACKSON (President, Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated): And they have dropped the ball on many cases.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Donna, we have to end it here, but we'd love to get in touch with you in the future. And we also want to say that we did invite the Mayor Cory Booker and the heads of the police department to come on the show. We hope to talk to them as well. Donna, thanks. And Donna Jackson is president and founder of Newark's Taking Back Our Streets Incorporated. She joined us from member station WBGO in Newark, New Jersey. |
Some good news on the health front: The National Center for Health Statistics reports that the pregnancy rate among black teens has dropped to its lowest rate ever. Stephanie Ventura, who heads the center's Natality Division, explains the latest numbers. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: There's no shortage of bad health headlines these days, so we thought we'd give you some good news. The National Center for Health Statistics reports that the pregnancy rate among black teens has dropped to its lowest rate ever.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: For more, we have Stephanie Ventura. She's chief of the Natality Division at the National Center for Health Statistics. Welcome.</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): Thank you very much for having me.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So when we say that the teen pregnancy rate has dropped, do we mean pregnancy or talking about a drop in babies born to teens?</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): Well, we can actually be talking about both on this case. Pregnancy rates would include both medical(ph) births, abortions and miscarriages. And for those rates - the rates for blacks have dropped to their lowest levels ever. And just looking at teen birth rates, just - you know, live birth outcome, those rates have also dropped very, very steeply in the last 10 or 15 years.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So give us a comparison between the last decade and this one.</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): Okay. Well, looking at the birth rates because those are the most current that we have like, we have data through 2005, the birth rate has dropped to both 48 percent for African-American teenagers, and that's the steepest decline of any group. It's down to about 61 births per thousand. That could translate to about six births - six percent of all black teenagers having a baby in 2005.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So do we have any idea why this drop has happened?</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): Well, the rates had - actually for all groups, black, white, Hispanic and so forth, those rates have actually been increasing pretty steeply in the late 1980s. It's hard to remember, that seems so long ago. But about the early 1990s, people got very energized about that. There were - there was a lot of concern about the direction of the rates were heading.</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): And so a lot of programs were in, you know, installed kind of public, private governmental, all kinds of programs not on - no federal mandate here. Just programs around the country that were targeted to address, you know, the issues that were affecting teen birth rates. And, not just sexual activity or contraception, but more like a positive youth development model with trying to address improvements in educational attainment and inspire teenagers to complete their education, get good jobs, and then think about having families, so that all started in the early 1990s, and it has had a tremendous impact on all groups but especially on black teenagers.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Finally, just one bit of not so great news. Can you tell us about the low birth weight of black infants?</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): Yes, that's a low birth weight in the pre-term birth. Those are two different measures. One is, you know, how the gestational - how long the pregnancy lasted and the other is actually the birth weight when the child is born. Those measures are both - have not been good for black infants of, you know, regardless of the age of the mother.</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): And in fact, those measures have been increasing for all groups, which is very troubling in the last few years. But in general, the rates for blacks tend to be, you know, close to twice the rates for whites, which is, you know, way too high. And it's certainly a very serious matter because pre-term birth and low birth weight are very - are both very important risk factors for, you know, poor infant development and, you know, lifelong health issues.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So Stephanie, thank you so much for joining us.</s>Ms. STEPHANIE VENTURA (Natality Division Chief, National Center for Health Statistics): Okay. Thank you very much.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Stephanie Ventura is chief of the Natality Division at the National Center for Health Statistics. |
News & Notes sports commentator Bill Rhoden talks about legal troubles for football player Michael Vick, basketball star Kevin Garnett's new home with the Boston Celtics, and the controversy surrounding baseball slugger Barry Bonds. New Boston Celtic Kevin Garnett points to David Ortiz to see if he is ready to catch. | AUDIE CORNISH, host: I'm Audie Cornish, sitting in for Farai Chideya. And this is NEWS & NOTES.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: Time now for sports with NEWS & NOTES regular, William Rhoden. When he's not helping us out, Bill writes a sports column for the New York Times. Bill, welcome.</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): Hi, Audie. How are you doing?</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: Well, let's start with basketball because, at least, there is some good news there. The big story is the big trade. That's Kevin Garnett -superstar for the NBA - he's 31. And he's labored with the Minnesota Timberwolves, forever without a ring. And now, he's going to the Celtics, a team that hasn't really been in the winner circle since the mid-80s. So what does this do for the Celtics?</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): Oh, well, it's - you're right when you said great news. This is the best news that Boston has had maybe since they drafted Larry Bird. I mean - and it's really kind of at that level. You know, now with Garnett, the big ticket, Ray Allen and Pierce - boy, this puts Boston on paper, Audie, on paper. This is Boston, remember. It puts Boston right in there. I mean, in the East, they've got to be the team to beat. So this is huge news. This is really, really big news.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: And you made a point there to point out Boston. What is going to be the difference in fanbase here coming from Minnesota?</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): Minnesota, I think the fans were grateful. And I think in Boston, the fans are demanding. And frankly, that's going to be very interesting to see how Garnett does in an atmosphere where the fans are really demanding. They're demanding championships. They're used to championships.</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): And Garnett, for all of the money and for all of the acclaims, has never won a championship, has never really gotten close to a championship. And part of the knack on Kevin was that he was kind of okay with that, you know, that he was getting paid very handsomely. He was a solid citizen. And everything was just cool and mellow. But Boston is not about cool and mellow, they want a championship.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: Well, one thing about the Garnett story, it's taking attention away from the scandal over the NBA referee who's, you know, accused of doing possible game fixing and gambling. How is the NBA dealing with this in a year when TV ratings and interest in the game have been pretty low?</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): You know, this was a huge blow. And I think it was a blind side to David Stern, who - the NBA commissioner, who prize himself on kind of knowing everything, knowing everything that's going on and all of that. And this just hit him in the stomach.</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): And how are they dealing with it? Well, I think they're trying to do as much damage control as possible. But the latest story was a gambler. A gambler was saying that he knew Donaghy and has suspicions that Donaghy was tipping off a couple of gamblers. So, you know, this is one story that's not going to go away. And I think that what the NBA is praying for is that this doesn't get any larger, any wider.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: And I know another league that's probably praying that this issue doesn't get any wider is NFL dealing with the Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick. What's going on all with that? Is that the end of Vick's career?</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): Well, yeah, yes. I mean, the NFL was just - the NFL was so happy when the NBA got pulled(ph) with this referee scandal, and the NBA was, like, hoping that the Michael Vick's scandal just keeps getting bigger.</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): The Vick thing is just - this is bad news all the way around. And I think it's safe to say Michael's career, in the short-term, is over at least for the season. He's got a court case to deal with. He's got just awful public relations to deal with. And it's really sad because I don't know if the dog lovers - what do you mean it's sad? Well, it is sad because you had a young man who was on top of the world. He could have been building libraries and schools instead of, you know, apparently, you know, building dog kennels for dog fighting. So it's about wasted potential.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: Well, another black athlete who might fall into that category is Barry Bonds. He was here last night where the Giants lost to the Dodgers. Didn't get any homeruns last night. But my question to you is even if Barry Bonds' pursuit of the homerun record wasn't haunted by accusations of steroid use, would African-Americans care about the record?</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): I think so. And, by the way, I wouldn't characterize Bonds, you know, like with Vick. I would love him there. But, yeah, I think people care. I think African-Americans care. I think this is an American story, and it's an American dilemma. And has become a polarizing issue as well. Yeah, I think African-Americans are really, really, really tuned into this simply because I think many African Americans see Bonds as this persecuted figure. Here you see this great homerun hitter, a guy who was about to hit - break one of the great, all-time records in sports, who's being demonized, who's being singled out a terrible.</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): You know, and it's funny you mentioned Michael Vick and it's kind of the same thing. The Michael Vick issue should be about how we're going to eliminate dog fighting and animal fighting in the United States. It's become how are we going to get rid of Michael Vick? And I think Barry Bonds should become, hey, we want to find out who, over the period of decades, has been using steroids. But I think it's become, we want to claw Barry Bonds. I think this is a huge story for African -Americans, who are into sports and who are into, you know, justice, basically.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: Well, Bill, it's been a rough few weeks for sports. But thank you so much for joining us.</s>Mr. WILLIAM RHODEN (Columnist, New York Times): Thank you very much, Audie. Sports will prevail.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, host: William C. Rhoden regularly joins us to talk sports. He's also a sports columnist for The New York Times and author of "Forty Million Dollar Slaves: The Rise and Fall of Redemption of the Black Athlete," just released in paperback. |
Commentator Patrice Gaines left her reporting job at The Washington Post — and Washington, D.C. altogether — looking for a little peace and quiet in South Carolina. For this week's "Snapshot," Gaines says she's not the only one who needed the fresh air and rolling hills. Her sister's pet, Fred, is a changed dog. A birthday party for Fred, the pet dog of Gaines' sister. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So it's time for our weekly Snapshot.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Today, we check in with Patrice Gaines, a former award-winning reporter with The Washington Post. A few years back, she quit her job and moved to Lake Wylie, South Carolina, for a little piece and quiet. But she got a whole lot more, like a pontoon boat, a dip into water, which she hates, and neighbors who she has little in common with but a street name. Patrice has made peace in some unlikely but lasting friendships. As it happens, she's not the only one.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): This is a story about a dog. Not just any dog, but my sister Carol's(ph) tiny, black Pomeranian Fred(ph) and what has happened to Fred since my sister moved to Lake Wylie to live with me. Fred and Carol used to live in a suburban Maryland apartment complex. We can admit this now. We couldn't speak of it a year ago.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): Back then, Fred was a stowaway. See, Carol's one of those well-intentioned rule breakers who lives in an apartment where she isn't supposed to have a dog but she does. Every morning before she left for work, my sister did two things. She turned up the TV real loud - partially to keep Fred company and partially to muffle his little bark. Then she turned to Fred and said, mommy is going to work. She'll be home soon. You be a good dog and don't bark.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): At night, when it was good and dark, Carol and Fred slipped out for his usual walk. And that's the way it went except for the one time he managed to sneak away. A frantic Carol found him across the highway, on the grounds of the American Legion Hall as frightened by his excursion as she was.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): Except for that one lapse of judgment, Fred played by the rules for 10 years. That's 70 years of dog life. I've seen his obedience firsthand. Rarely did I hear so much of an arf out of the little fellow. Generally, he is like a quiet friend who doesn't say much, but when he does, people listen.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): Then a year ago, Carol and Fred moved to my development of River Hills in Lake Wylie. Since then, Fred's changed a little. The rap on Fred before his move was that he didn't like other dogs or kids. The kids' bit is still true. They like to pick him up and treating like he's a baby. But my goodness, the poor guy is a senior citizen.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): On the other count, the bit about not liking other dogs, Fred's softened. My neighbor Martha has a doe-eyed, white-and-brown cocker spaniel named Buddy(ph). He's half Fred's age and twice his size, but the two of them chase each other around the backyard and through the house like they were both puppies again.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): When they get tired, they plop down on my concrete patio together and rest, and then they run again. On June 22nd, Carol, Martha and Buddy helped Fred celebrate his 77th birthday, 11th if you're counting in human years. To look festive, the birthday boy and Buddy wore black and silver bows with streamers on their collars.</s>Ms. PATRICIA GAINES (Journalist): Carol served each of them half a cupcake with Shrek's face on it. She thought it appropriate, given Fred and Shrek have had similar life journeys - from quiet loners to contented companions. Fred and Buddy eagerly licked their pet ice cream. Then Fred did something he couldn't have done when he was 70 and living back in Maryland. He ran beside Buddy, up and down the lawn, back and forth from the patio to the edge of the woods. And then as the wind whipped through his black hair, we heard a grateful yelp of freedom. Arf.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That was author and journalist Patrice Gaines with this week's Snapshot. She told her story from member station WFAE in Charlotte, North Carolina.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: To see pictures of Fred and Buddy living it up in Lake Wylie, go to our Web site nprnewsandnotes.org. |
The government shutdown is expected to stretch into 2019. The secretary of Homeland Security visits El Paso, Texas, Friday. Stocks end higher after spending much of Thursday in negative territory. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: Republican leaders announced yesterday that there will not be any votes in the House of Representatives this week.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah. That is basically Washington speak meaning this partial government shutdown is almost certainly - is almost certain to continue into the new year. There's been not a lot of progress in President Trump's standoff with Democrats. He's demanding money to build a wall along the border with Mexico. Democrats are saying no.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And one person who's been covering this lack of progress is NPR congressional reporter Kelsey Snell, who's with us. Good morning, Kelsey.</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: Good morning.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So what often gets lost in the whole political back and forth about a government shutdown - a partial government shutdown is how it really is impacting people. So can we talk about who's paying the price here for this fight in D.C.?</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: Yeah. Another thing that seems to get lost in this is that this is not really a local D.C. area problem. There are some 800,000 employees who are either working without pay or are just not working right now. And about 85 percent of them are outside the D.C. area. There's also been some impacts in places people might not think about. The Violence Against Women Act also lapsed along with the spending bill. And that 1994 law cut off new funding for victims of sexual assault and abuse.</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: And there's been a lapse in flood insurance being sent out. The Smithsonian museums are being closed. And people like contractors, who include, you know, janitors and security guards for federal buildings, they may not get paid at all because they aren't eligible for the backpay that, you know, regular federal workers are eligible for.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Yeah. And we'd been reporting that there are a good number of federal workers impacted...</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: Yeah.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: ...Who, you know, struggle to make ends meet, even when the paychecks are coming. And so that tells you what these moments could be like. Is this putting pressure at all on lawmakers? Like, are they feeling the heat to get something done, knowing that people are going through this?</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: They absolutely feel the heat to get things done. But I think it's important to remember that we've seen several shutdowns recently. And neither political party seems to have paid a real price for this. And in part, that's because approval ratings for Congress really are just in the dumps right now. So there - it's one of these situations where they absolutely don't want it to continue. But it's hard to see how they resolve it.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So why aren't lawmakers rushing in, you know, to Washington to deal with this?</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: Well, they say that both the House and the Senate passed bills. They just passed different bills. And they don't want to go through this process of continuing to pass things the other one can't get through, things that can't become law. They said the plan all along was to stop passing things so that they could negotiate. But the thing is we haven't seen those negotiations happen. The capital's essentially been a ghost town for the past few days.</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: And everybody I talked to says it comes down to what the president will or will not sign. And there seems to be a lack of trust on both sides when it comes to actually cutting a deal. Plus, it doesn't seem like people are really all that interested in giving up the political ground on something that is as divisive as the border wall and as divisive as immigration.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And does that political dynamic change at all when Democrats take control of the House in January?</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: Well, Democrats do say it does. They are really dug in. But they'll have more leverage. They can pass the bill in the House, maybe something just like what already passed in the Senate. And then the political burden would be on President Trump and Republican leaders to decide if they can accept what gets through the House. So it does increase the pressure, but it doesn't necessarily mean that things will be easy to resolve because again, the president gets to make the final decision about what he will sign.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Kelsey Snell covers Congress for us at NPR. Kelsey, thanks a lot.</s>KELSEY SNELL, BYLINE: Thank you.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. We're going to move now from Washington to Wall Street, where investors have been trying to ride out some pretty turbulent stock market swings.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah, it's been a rough month for the markets. Yesterday, stock prices were down across the board. And then as the afternoon wore on, everything suddenly changed.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And let's talk that through with NPR business reporter Jim Zarroli. Good morning, Jim.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: Good morning, David.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. So what happened with the markets yesterday?</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: You know, it doesn't get much crazier than this. You had stocks opening higher than they plunged. And the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down as much as 600 points at one point. And then about 90 minutes before the end of trading, stocks suddenly rebounded. And the Dow actually finished up about 260 points. And this comes after a really big drop on Monday and then a really, really big increase on Wednesday.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: We have - we've now had six straight days in which the markets swung up or down by more than 1 percent. And this is unusual. This is really the kind of volatility - we haven't seen this in the markets since 2011, which was, you know, as you'll remember when the economy was recovering from the Great Recession.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Sure. And it seems now, though, that the economy, I mean, is doing pretty well, right? I mean, there's a pretty strong job market. Other numbers have been going in the right direction. So how do we explain this turmoil in the markets?</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: Well, the thing about the market is it's always looking ahead. I mean, it's not about what's happening today. It's what's - it's about what's happening, you know, six months from now in the future. And one thing that's happened is the Federal Reserve just raised interest rates. And federal - and Fed officials said - indicated that right now, at least, they're going to keep raising them in the new year. And they do this - they're raising rates because they're worried that the economy is running too hot. They're worried about inflation getting out of control. That's one of their mandates - to worry about inflation.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: But there's also a lot of evidence that economic growth may be slowing in the United States but also in Europe and Asia. We got a report yesterday that showed there was a big drop in consumer confidence in the United States. So, you know, is the economy running too hot or is it slowing? And there's evidence for either scenario. And meanwhile, investors just don't know where the economy's headed. There's a lot of uncertainty, and that's made for a lot of volatility.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So I know we always see these famous images of people on Wall Street, like, looking deer in the headlights sometimes when the market's swinging. Like, you know, what is going on with my investments? But if we look out in the country, you know, Americans who might have their long-term retirement savings invested or don't have any money at all in the stock market, is - does this kind of volatility affect them?</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: Well, it may not affect them directly. You know, I think overall, most people shouldn't worry about this too much at all. It does have an indirect effect in several ways. I mean, one is your pension fund may be invested in the stock market. It probably is. And then also, you know, when stocks go up or down it affects the rate at which companies hire and invest. So yeah, that does have an impact.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. That's NPR's business reporter Jim Zarroli joining us this morning to talk about what sounds like a wild day on the markets yesterday. It's been a pretty volatile time. Jim, thanks.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: You're welcome.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is going to El Paso, Texas today.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah. DHS says it's working to improve conditions for detained migrants. The agency has been under a lot of scrutiny. Two migrant children died in U.S. custody this month. The autopsy for an 8-year-old boy who died just this week shows that he tested positive for influenza. Now, meanwhile, Immigration and Customs Enforcement also released more than 500 migrants from custody this week in El Paso, Texas. And local shelters there are scrambling.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And we're joined by Monica Ortiz Uribe, who is in El Paso and has been covering migration for NPR. Good morning, Monica.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Hi. Good morning.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Let's start with these large - this large-scale release of migrants that's causing shelters to really scramble that Noel mentioned. What exactly prompted this?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Well, it's a number of things. The migration flow into the U.S. is changing. We're seeing more children and families. According to CBP figures of the nearly 140,000 apprehensions they've made in the last two months, more than half of them were children and families.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: And also, the backlog of asylum seekers at official ports of entry due to Trump - the Trump administration's so-called metering policy is pushing people to more remote and less resourced border crossings. Finally, the Guatemalan Consulate and migrants themselves have told me that smugglers are encouraging families to make this journey.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And so that has been filling shelters up and causing the Trump administration to figure out a way to deal with the overcrowded shelters, and that's what's leading to this release. Is that what we're hearing?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Yeah. So it's worth highlighting that as the federal government reaches its limit, it's been handing off these families to community organizations like the Annunciation House in El Paso. And these organizations rely on the goodwill of volunteers and online donations. Annunciation House currently has 20 shelters, and that includes churches and hotels. And it's been taking in roughly 2,300 migrants per week.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: And it also gets help from ordinary El Pasoans. A group of volunteer health care professionals set up a pop-up clinic to do checkups. An LGBT community center helped prepare meals. And if it wasn't for this community mobilization, these community - these families would be left on the streets.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: And Ruben Garcia, the shelter director, is calling on federal authorities to communicate with shelter networks so that this doesn't happen. And he's also asking for more transparency from ICE. That's Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Frankly, when reporters reach out to ICE, we rarely get an answer. And there are important, unanswered questions, like why the agency is holding families in processing facilities longer than their own 72-hour limit.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Well - and, of course, one of the other important, unanswered questions is about the deaths of these two migrant children recently in U.S. custody. I mean, has that led these agencies to try and improve conditions to avoid that?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Yes. Well, the processing facilities for migrants, they're designed to hold single adult males, not families. And any changes to the infrastructure will take time and money. But in the meantime, CBP says it'll take medical screenings more seriously. It plans to work with neighboring health care facilities, contract EMTs and its own medically trained staff to monitor the health of migrants, particularly children under 10. And Secretary Nielsen has said - she's asked other agencies like the Centers for Disease Control, the Coast Guard and the Department of Defense for more help on this front.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And then you have Kirstjen Nielsen coming to El Paso today. What's her plan?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Yeah. Well, she plans to inspect these processing facilities herself. She also wants to observe the medical screenings there. A congressional delegation who made a similar visit recently said they were appalled by the conditions. At a Border Patrol station in New Mexico, they described a garage-like space crowded with families that lacked potable running water and private toilets.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Monica Ortiz Uribe reporting for us from El Paso, Texas, this morning. Monica, thank you.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: You're welcome. |
In some parts of America, as much as 50 percent of adults can't read. Rochelle Ford lives in a section of Washington, D.C., where half the adults are illiterate. Peter Waite, director of Pro Literacy America, explains the special challenges in educating adults. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And for every success story like his, there are thousands of Americans still struggling. Some choose to keep battling illiteracy rather than risk the shame of asking for help. Just ask Rochelle Ford. She's a married mother of three, living in southeast Washington, D.C. where she lives in the Eight Ward, 50 percent of adults are functionally illiterate. Nine months ago, she was too. But then she got help, she's been participating in a program put out by the Washington Literacy Council since last November. We've also got with us Peter Waite, executive director of ProLiteracy America.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Rochelle and Peter, welcome.</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): Thank you. Glad to be here.</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): Glad to be here.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So Rochelle, when and how did you decide to get help with your reading?</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): Well, I always wanted to learn how to read. It was just a matter of finding somewhere to be taught. I've always asked for help. No one ever me the help. I told my teachers in school that I couldn't read and instead of helping me, they've put me in the back of the classroom and give me work for a first grader.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what about your family, could your parents read? Could your siblings read well?</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): My mother - she read pretty well. My father did also. My brother did. When I couldn't read with - I couldn't read, my sister couldn't read because in school we were in the same classroom, so what I didn't get, she didn't get and I never told anyone else that I couldn't read because I was just - I didn't know I couldn't read. I was waiting to learn how to read.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, when did your mother find out that you couldn't read?</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): My mother found out when I was 17. And she found out because I have a brother, he was incarcerated and I asked her to help me write a letter to him. And I've said, mom, I need your help. Could you help me with this letter? And she said, yes. But I asked her for every other word, how you spell every other word. And finally, she said what's the - you can't read? And I looked to her and I said, no, ma, I can't read and that's how she found out.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Peter, let me turn to you. Rochelle obviously has walked a really rough road and bravely to get where she is today. How common is this kind of a story?</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): Why, it's just phenomenally common and it's one that is, you know, particularly sad. You know, we're looking at a circumstance where nearly 20 percent of the adult population is in the similar situation where they're reading at very substandard level. They're at what we consider up a little basic level. And as you talked about in Washington D.C. alone, a recent study showed that numbers approaching 50 percent falling in that category.</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): And so, it's a serious, critical American problem both from a workforce perspective but also from a family and individual perspective where you hear the stories of Rochelle and you realized the kind of difficulties and challenges that she's had and many individual's like her. So it's an enormous problem, often a hidden problem because it's something that people just don't see unless you're really experiencing it.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, how deeply is this linked to poverty?</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): You know, there's obviously an enormous correlation that you might expect. Folks aren't going to contend that literacy, illiteracy or low levels are going to cause poverty. There are lots of causes, but the correlation is enormous.</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): If you look at the incomes of people at the lowest levels, they are, by far, below the poverty level nationwide. And it's really a key, as you heard earlier today, a key to success and a key to a better job and a better life. It enabled to increase that educational level and certainly getting beyond what you'd consider a basic literacy skill.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Rochelle, take me through the time between you were essentially outed(ph) as being illiterate when you were 17 and the moment when you decided to make a change in your life. What - that was years. What made you really step up and take control of your destiny?</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): When I was 18, I became pregnant. And I just couldn't see myself having a child not being able to read a bedtime story to him, or help him with his homework. I didn't want to be a parent and wasn't able to do anything to help my child. So that's what made me decide to go out and seek help.</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): Now, I just get - I just really got this help about nine months ago, but I've been always looking. And I'm really happy to have this program - that this program is out there, because I read it and know a lot about it. I didn't know there was adults out there who couldn't read. I really thought that I was in a place by myself. I didn't know it was so huge that a lot of grown-ups cannot read.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And when you think, Peter, about the fact that there are people who are looking for help, what would you say to anyone who's listening right now who might be looking for help, who may not know where to turn?</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): Oh, boy, you know, it's just the point that Rochelle made so well is that they're not alone. This is what's really critical to get this message out. and shows and programs like this will help enormously. If the individuals often feel isolated all by themselves and that the only person out there who is experiencing this problem, and they're not. And there are programs in every community across the country. There are opportunities for people to be able to get in touch virtually every local library will be able to give you a referral point to find a program that's going to be able to help individuals at any age at any circumstances begin to help improve their reading and writing skills.</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): Not alone and as hard as it is sometimes to make that first step. And what a courageous one Rochelle did to go and come and say I need some help. And that's always the most difficult first step for any of the prospective students. And we're going to encourage them to realize that they're not alone, and in taking that first step that will give them an opportunity for empowerment.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Rochelle, you've said that you were looking for a long time for help. How did you finally find it? Was it someone who said, hey, you should check out this program? How did you find out?</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): Actually I'd seen a commercial. It was saying the 1-800 - I kept on dialing 1-800-READ-OUT, but it was 1-866. But - what I did was I went to a library and I walked up to this young lady and I said, do you have any information about any reading classes for adults. And I told her about the program I heard but I never could find it, and she looked in the computer and she pulled the Washington D.C. council. And I gave it a call and they set me up with Mr. David. I spoke with him and he told me where he was located. And I went in, and that's how I began.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's great. And how has your life changed since you have opened up the world of reading?</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): It has changed tremendously. I have a lot of goals. I - my self-esteem has really raised - has really rise. I - it's just so many things that's possible for me now. I can go get my GED. I don't know want to stop here. I want to get my GED, get a good job. I even - I'm even looking into taking up different languages. Now that I could read them, I want to do more.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's fantastic, and there's no reason that you can't achieve all of it. Peter, how does that make you feel to - in your capacity - work with people like Rochelle who really are making some courageous decisions to change their lives?</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): Oh, boy. You know, it's just as inspirational as anything you could imagine. We have hundreds of thousands of volunteers and teachers and other engage and effective. This in time and time again, we hear from the teacher or the tutor out there that this experience working with an individual was more important to me than what it was to them. I gained more out of it even them -the individual or the student. And it's that kind of engagement, seeing the kind of growth that individuals can have by increasing these skills, that is an enormously rewarding and critically important element of the kind of service that we want to provide and need to provide nationwide.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Rochelle and Peter, I want to thank you so much. And, Rochelle, good luck with everything.</s>Ms. ROCHELLE FORD (Resident, Washington, D.C.): Thank you.</s>Mr. PETER WAITE (Executive Director, ProLiteracy America): Thank you very much.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Rochelle Ford is a mother of three, living in Washington D.C. Nine months ago, she was functionally illiterate. She spoke with us from NPR's Washington D.C. headquarters. We also had Peter Waite, executive director of Pro Literacy America. |
News & Notes pays tribute to pioneering jazz drummer Max Roach, one of the fathers of the bebop jazz style. Roach's biographer, Amiri Baraka, discusses the drummer's career as a musician and an unflinching civil rights activist. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: One of the architects of modern jazz has passed away. Drummer Max Roach helped develop the revolutionary style of music known as bebop. Like Charlie Parker with the saxophone and Dizzy Gillespie with the trumpet, Max Roach is credited with influencing generations of drummers.</s>Mr. AMIRI BARAKA (Music Historian; Max Roach's Biographer): I can't think of a drummer of any stature that wasn't influenced by Max Roach.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Amiri Baraka is a music historian and Roach biographer.</s>Mr. AMIRI BARAKA (Music Historian; Max Roach's Biographer): Max made the drums a solo instrument truly. You know, that wasn't just part of the rhythm section or the ensemble, that it had, you know, an independent and a musical voice.</s>Mr. AMIRI BARAKA (Music Historian; Max Roach's Biographer): Max was a very profound and intelligent brother. You know, he wasn't just beating the drums, like he'd say, you don't beat the drums you'd play them. And so you know, he was the proponent of playing the drums, of using the drums as a musical voice.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Maxwell Roach was born in Newland, North Carolina, in 1924. His parents moved to Brooklyn when he was a child. He started his drumming career playing gospel music in the churches where his mother sang.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: At age 17, Roach got a call for one of the biggest gigs a musician could get. Duke Ellington's drummer had suddenly fallen ill. Max would take his place.</s>Mr. AMIRI BARAKA (Music Historian; Max Roach's Biographer): Duke had heard of Max Roach at 17 and he called him, say, you know, I want you to sit in for Sonny Greer. He didn't know what to do. You know, because Duke can't (unintelligible) about the music.</s>Mr. AMIRI BARAKA (Music Historian; Max Roach's Biographer): So just before the music started, Duke pointed at him, at Max, and then pointed at his eye, and then pointed at Max. You know, in order words, keep your eye on me. And that was it. And that was his debut.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And what a debut it was. Roach became known as one of the greatest percussionists of his time. He rewrote the rules on swing drumming by picking up the pace. And his hands were famous for their agility and autonomy. One would keep frantic, dizzying time on cymbals, while the other accented notes with a snare and toms.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: He was the beat of a jazz new movement called bebop.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: As he grew more popular, Roach used his celebrity to promote the black freedom struggle. His timing was impeccable. As the bebop era wound down, the civil rights era was just heating up.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In the early '60s, Max Roach married singer and dramatist Abbey Lincoln. Together, they created some of the searing protest music on record.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Again, Amiri Baraka.</s>Mr. AMIRI BARAKA (Music Historian; Max Roach's Biographer): Well, what Max did was bring the music squarely into the struggle. You know, like his records like "We Insist," drive a man, where he talked about, you know, the slavery life, you know. And the music that he and Abbey Lincoln made in the '60s is magnificent and wholly relevant to black liberation movements. You know, like "Tears for Johannesburg," where, you know, Abbey really starts screaming. She's not just singing, she starts screaming like somebody, you know. And then this side we're she calls out all the different tribes that she knew in Africa. You know, Ashanti, Urhobo(ph), Igbo, you know. He was always in the forefront of musicians dealing with the black liberation movement, civil rights movement, always. He was the most outspoken. He was the most activist. So I mean, it's not that we - it's not only that we've lost a very great musician, a very great musician, but we've lost a major figure in the whole rights struggle.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Max Roach was 83 years old.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's NEWS & NOTES.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: To join the conversation online or sign up for our newsletter, visit our blog at nprnewsandviews.org. NEWS & NOTES was created by NPR News and the African American Public Radio Consortium.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm Farai Chideya. This is NEWS & NOTES. |
Army Pfc. Alexia Cain has just returned from a one-year tour in Iraq. She talks with Farai Chideya and her cousin, Allison Samuels, about her experience at war, her reasons for joining the military, and her future plans. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, now, Allison, I want to move away from show business to something a little more personal.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Your cousin, Alexia Cain, is an army specialist who just returned last week from Iraq. Right now, she's stationed at Fort Hood, near Austin Texas. And we've got her on the phone to get or to tell us about her tour and her plans for the near future.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, Allison, thank you for staying with us and introducing us to Alexia. And, Alexia, thank you so much for coming on.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): Thank you for having me.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what is the very first thing that happened when you knew that you were going to go back to the States? How did you feel?</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): Very excited, anxious get back to see families, see friends, get back to the normal way of life.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So you've got a situation where you were in one of the most troubled parts of the world. Tell me what was the scariest moment for you.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): The scariest moment really is not knowing if you're going to wake up the next day. You hear gunshots. You hear things around you. You're constantly being warned to be careful and, you know, not to do certain things and not to say certain things. So it was just coming home in one piece, and that was my goal, was to make sure I came back in one piece. But other than that, that was basically it.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, you were stationed in a town not too far from Baghdad. What was it like? Was - and specifically, one thing I'm very curious about is did you interact at all with the Iraqi citizens?</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): Yes. We had duties where we would interact with the local nationals - we call them LNs - where they would clean up buildings, that we would have to interact with them. They were very nice people, very humble people. And they would always tell us, you know, how grateful that they are that we were there, and how much they like for us to stay.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): So they were just very - you wouldn't expect them to be nice and you wouldn't expect them to be curious about who you are and where you come from but they want to know. They want to know more about you. And they want to know, you know, things about you. And they just want to know just the general things about you, the person, not you being in the military.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, Allison told me that working in the hospital and the morgue - one of your duties - was your nightmare. What did you think of that?</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): It was scary because you don't know what you're going to see. You don't know, you know, what actually happened to these people, what's the story behind their injuries. But once you see it and once you hear the story, it makes you mad that, yes, okay, this particular person was making an IED and it blew up in their face. But you hear that part and you're like, oh, you know, I'm sorry that happened. But then when you hear, okay, it was meant for a soldier, it just makes you mad. But then again, you have that humanitarian side of you that's like, you know what? Even though it was meant for a soldier, you still want that person to get better.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, Allison, to you, there has been this precipitous drop in black military enrollment and retention. Did your family tell Alexia, get the heck out of there? What are you doing? Are you crazy? And what about, you know, the general dialogue in your family?</s>Ms. SAMUELS: You know what? Because a lot of our family has been in military so it wasn't a situation where we said get out of there. But I think once she was assigned there, the reality hit that this is a dangerous situation. Something could really happen. And I think it was just a lot of concern and worry for the entire time that she was there. And when we got the news that she was coming back, it was just like the happiest day of, you know, that I can remember, because we just wanted her back home.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And Alexia, did you ever feel pressured by your family to take a different path in life? And you entered really when this was imminent. So did you ever feel like, uh-oh, this is bad timing to be in the military.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): Actually, no. I was up for the challenge. It's like when you sign up for the military, you never really think that you're going to Iraq. You never really - you're just like, oh, this can't happen to me. I'm not going anytime soon. But when it happened, it was like, wow. It's really happening. And it really doesn't hit you until you actually land. It's like, wow, I'm actually here.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): My family was very supportive. I got letters. I got e-mails, care packages, everything under the sun. And I talk to them as much as I could. But they were always, always very supportive, always there if I needed them no matter what time of day I called.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So why, specifically, did you enlist?</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): Honestly, to pay (unintelligible) loan.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Like a lot of folks.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): So (unintelligible). You know, to pay most of your loans, and the curiosity. My mother was enlisted. My father was enlisted as well. So you now, just to see the world, just to see, you know, what the war actually has to offer before I could say, you know, I'll just try a civilian job.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: When you talk to your friends in the military, do they ever say, as their contract expires, I'm never going to do anything like this again in my life or do some of them say I'm going to reenlist?</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): A lot of them reenlisted. Believe it or not. A lot of them reenlisted. So no one's ever been like, oh, I'm not going to do this anymore. Oh, I can't handle this. Everyone has always reenlisted.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, Allison, turning to you, you cover entertainment, generally. But you're also, you know, reporting for Newsweek. You get to see the broad picture of American life and even international life. Has there been anything in your opinion that's changed in the past couple of years about how Americans view the war or even how celebrities view the war?</s>Ms. SAMUELS: Well, I think Americans have become very disenchanted with the war. I think that's definitely happened over the last couple of years, and particularly in the last year, and definitely since the last election. I think celebrities have always been - the majority of celebrities, like the Dixie Chicks, and people like that, have always had this sort of anti-war, you know, mentality. And I think that's only increased with the lack of the perceived success of the war at this point.</s>Ms. SAMUELS: I think that, you know, there's no visible change from the American perspective. If you're an average American, you don't really see where the progress has been made, but you see all these soldiers that have been injured and hurt. And I think as long as you see those soldiers being injured and hurt - and I think there was just a study that's saying that the suicides are going up for men in military, officers.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Absolutely.</s>Ms. SAMUELS: All those things just, you know, I think it's very hard to embrace and support something when you see the damage that it's doing to so many, sort of, young people. And that's the thing, you know, in seeing Alexia come home and seeing all the young people that, you know, that were over there with her -it's like these people - they're changed forever, you know?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Yeah. And Alexia, we just talked earlier today that so many of the people who have committed suicide through, you know, or during military service, they're under 25, half of them are 25 or under. And it makes me wonder, coming back to the U.S., do you feel the need to decompress, to talk through what you're doing, you know, or what you've done, to talk about what you've seen, and who do you talk to?</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): I talk to family. Talk to family. Talk to friends. They also provide counseling sessions just in case we need it. There are also chaplaincy that are always say, you know, we're here for you. We're here for you. If you don't reach out to someone else, well, if you don't reach out to them, reach out to someone else. If - you just really need to have someone listen. You know, you have people that you talk to and say, okay, well, I did this. I did that. You just really just need to say to someone out there, look, I just need you to listen. I just needed to vent.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): So when I needed to vent, I would call my mom. I'd also called Allison and say, hey, look, this is what's going on and this was how I feel. And nine times out of ten that really, really helps. That really, really helps. And then, if not, you know, write it down or as long as you get those thoughts out, and as long as you, you know, express how your feeling, it's really no need to take the ultimate, the ultimate decision for the suicide.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, Allison, before we let you go, final question. Do you think that your family is going - with your long history of military service - is going to continue that tradition?</s>Ms. SAMUELS: I think that, you know, it depends on how this war shapes up because I think the military has changed a great deal even, you know, since the '70s and the '80s, I think it's a different military. And I think a lot of it, you know, depends on how this war turns out and basically, how the military handles it as the soldiers continue to come home and how they're taken care of.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: All right. Well, Alexia, we're hoping you can stay with us a little bit longer. Allison, thank you so much for, you know, bringing Alexia on. Thank you both so much.</s>Ms. SAMUELS: Thank you.</s>Private First Class ALEXIA CAIN (U.S. Army): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: We're been talking to U.S. Army Specialist Alexia Cain, who just returned from a year in Iraq, currently stationed at Fort Hood near Austin, Texas. And her cousin, Allison Samuels, is an entertainment writer for Newsweek. |
It was something of a banner year for the economy. The U.S. enjoyed healthy growth and very low unemployment, but the stock market is on track to finish the year with its worst performance since 2008. | STEVE INSKEEP, HOST: 2018 was something of a banner year for the economy. The United States enjoyed healthy growth and very, very low unemployment. But the stock market is on track to finish the year with its worst performance since 2008 at the height of the Great Recession. What is happening? NPR's Jim Zarroli reports.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: After her parents died, Barb Egler-Bailey spent a lot of time fixing up their house in Michigan. She sold it for a good price. And in September, she put some of the proceeds in a moderate-risk stock fund. The money was supposed to help fund her own retirement. But the investment has been a huge disappointment.</s>BARBARA EGLER-BAILEY: After the stock market here started going up and down like a rollercoaster, I saw that my fund had just dropped, like, 20 percent, dramatically, just since this fall.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: A lot of stock market investors have spent the past few weeks licking their wounds. The long bull market in stocks is ending the year more vulnerable than ever before. Quincy Krosby, chief market strategist at Prudential, says the mood in the market started to shift early in the year after a particularly strong jobs report.</s>QUINCY KROSBY: It was a very good report, in fact. And - but we saw wages moving higher, much more than the market had expected.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: That was good news for a lot of people, she said. But on Wall Street, rising wages also generated fears that corporate profits would soon be squeezed. Companies would have to pay more for workers. And Crosby says higher wages also raised the specter of inflation.</s>QUINCY KROSBY: The market soon learned that any hint of inflation was going to be something that the Federal Reserve saw and that the Federal Reserve would act upon.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: The Fed had already been raising interest rates for more than two years. Now it appeared likely it would keep doing so. The only question is, by how much? In October, Fed chairman Jerome Powell said rates were far from neutral, which is Fed speak for, lots more rate increases are coming. Since then, stocks have fallen more than 20 percent. Then President Trump weighed in, criticizing Powell in an interview with Lesley Stahl on "60 Minutes."</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Our Federal Reserve is...</s>LESLEY STAHL: But also China.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: ...Raising rates too fast because they think our economy's too good. And I say, I don't want you to - every time we announce a good quarter, you have to raise interest rates. I don't want that. I'm very unhappy with the Federal Reserve.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: The president seemed to suggest he might try to replace Powell. While investors didn't much like what the Fed was doing, they hate uncertainty even more. And Trump's words sometimes seem to be driving the market even lower. Lawrence White is a finance professor at NYU's Stern School of Business.</s>LAWRENCE WHITE: I think the administration has become even more erratic in both its statements and its actions.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: White says the ongoing fallout from the Trump administration's aggressive trade policies have been especially harmful. The U.S. and China have been slapping tariffs on each other's imports. And there's no hint of a truce anytime soon. White says that with Democrats taking control of Congress, the dysfunction in Washington is only going to get worse.</s>LAWRENCE WHITE: I think a lot of the uneasiness in the markets currently is this concern about future turbulence. I don't think it goes away for at least the next two years or so.</s>JIM ZARROLI, BYLINE: White says stocks have been doing so well for so long that a lot of people are too young to remember what a real bear market is like. For them, this is a valuable if painful reminder that markets can go down as well as up. Jim Zarroli, NPR News. |
Twelve years ago, Georgia had the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the country, and African Americans accounted for a lot of it. That's when Michelle Ozumba joined the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention. Today, she's their CEO and president. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And turning to Georgia 12 years ago, that state had the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the country. African Americans accounted for a lot of it.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's when Michelle Ozumba joined the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention. And she's their CEO and president today. Michelle, welcome.</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): Thank you very much.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So when you started this in Georgia, how bad was the teen pregnancy rate?</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): Well, we were at a rate of about 107 per 1,000 girls ages 15 to 19, having - becoming pregnant here in Georgia.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: How did you go about trying to change that, bring the rate down?</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): Well, the state, like other states at the same time, as Stephanie was saying earlier, in 1996, when welfare reform happened, there was, for the first time, a provision that linked public dependency, long-term public dependency to teen pregnancy. And it was researched at the time that said 50 percent of women on public assistance had, at one time, been teenage mothers.</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): So there was an opportunity for states to have funding that allowed us to mobilize and do programs that could reach large enough populations to begin to affect the race and to begin to have a statistic trend going in the right direction for the first time in a very long time.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So let's tick through a few of the different things that people have suggested will help decrease pregnancy. Tell me what you think of them empowering young women, teaching them to just say no.</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): Well, I think just saying no sounds very good but, really, it's a very complex issue. So I think empowerment certainly is one of the things that we seek to do but it's not about just saying no. It's really empowering young people to have a sense of a future that they are motivated to avoid anything that will distract them from achieving their goals.</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): And we believe that a goal for a successful - getting to successful adulthood is having an aspiration - that that's going to keep you focused.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What about in light of what you were just saying, anti-poverty? Will lowering the poverty rate overall help give people a different perspective on their life opportunity.</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): Certainly, poverty is - poverty reduction is a goal and there is such a link between poverty and teenage pregnancy. Sixty percent of teenage girls who give birth are, in fact, living in poverty. And there's a recent data from the national campaign that really further suggests how interlinked poverty is to young people becoming pregnant and becoming parents too soon. So anything we can do to address poverty is really going have a positive consequence on our issue of pregnancy prevention.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Quick hit. What about contraception? Important?</s>Ms. MICHELLE OZUMBA (President and Chief Executive Officer, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention): Very important. A large reason for the decline has been increased defective use of contraceptives by young girls as well as young men. So that's definitely a contributing factor to the positive trend we're seeing.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: All right. Thank you, Michelle. And Michelle Ozumba is CEO and president of the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention. She spoke with us from Georgia Public Radio in Atlanta. |
It's been a turbulent year for USA Gymnastics. Noel King talks to former gymnast Trinea Gonczar, about how the organization has dealt with the Larry Nassar abuse scandal, CEO issues and bankruptcy. | NOEL KING, HOST: It's been a turbulent year for USA Gymnastics. Back in January, dozens of women testified in a Michigan courtroom. They talked about years of sexual abuse they suffered at the hands of a prominent doctor, Larry Nassar. Trinea Gonczar was one of those women.</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: This latest year has traumatized me in ways you cannot even begin to imagine, as I've had to realize I was abused for many years of my life. And this, my old friend, is because of you.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Nassar was sentenced to decades in prison and a succession of USA Gymnastics CEOs have since stepped down. Then, this month, the organization filed for bankruptcy. I talked to Trinea Gonczar and I asked her how she thinks USA Gymnastics is handling all of this.</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: I mean, I think that they've completely crumbled to their feet. I don't think that they've done anything but make one bad decision after another and completely ruin the name of the sport and the organization. It looks worse and worse every time that they make these kind of decisions.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: If someone from the organization was to call you and say, Trinea, what should we do? - what would you tell them to do?</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: Meet me. Talk to me. Meet with us. Talk to us. Learn about us. You know, I think that there is something to be said about character when you actually just say, we were wrong. How do we make this better?</s>NOEL KING, HOST: You're saying, essentially, an apology would go a long way toward starting to heal this thing.</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: Truly, that is all we have ever wanted from anyone, ever.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Despite all of this, the U.S. women's team did really well at the world championships in Qatar a couple months ago in October. Simone Biles, the top gymnast in the world, keeps on dominating the sport. When you see the U.S. team compete and do well, how do you feel about that?</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: So proud. So, so proud. I mean, they've gone through the trenches at this stage. And to continue to fight? You know, I think there's one thing about being a gymnast. Like, we're trained to face fear. So he picked on, essentially, the worst group of athletes to do something like this, too, because we're so focused, and we're so taught how to overcome fear.</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: And I think USAG and United States Gymnastics being the powerhouse that we are, I think, just, I mean, speaks so loudly of the survivors of this case and the sport. I mean, we're little, but we're mighty. But it's when they go out of competition and that door closes, unfortunately, is when you actually see the heartbreak. And that's truly the reality for all survivors.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Let's talk about you as an individual for a moment because I know that you've taken on sort of a role in the past year as an advocate, as an activist. But you suffered very greatly as a young woman and as a girl. Your testimony at Larry Nassar's trial was powerful. It was also agonizing. You talked for about 17 minutes. You said that, for many years, you had defended him. And you said that he was your friend. We're going to play a little bit of that tape, Trinea.</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: I never doubted you. I never felt scared of you. We loved you like family. We believed you looked out for us and protected us from harm. We literally loved you like family.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: What did it mean for you to have the chance to talk directly to him in open court?</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: Well, that moment, for me, was 1000 percent between he and I. It was a moment that the world saw that was extremely heartbreaking for me and, to be honest, heartbreaking for him. I never understood that this person could be the same person as the person that did this to all these girls and did so much harm. But now, as I go forward, I can understand, for these other amazing ladies and athletes and women, how this ruined a part of their life because they didn't know him the same fashion that I knew him.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Your last words to Larry Nassar in court were, goodbye, Larry. May God bless your dark, broken soul. When he went to prison, did you find closure?</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: For me, no. For a lot of the other girls, it was a closure. For me, it was an opener. I had really not been able to start the healing process because I was still - I was very pregnant and really trying to understand what was happening. So for me, those words were the beginning of my journey, and it's been a long one.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Trinea Gonczar, thank you so much for joining us.</s>TRINEA GONCZAR: Thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it so much.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Trinea Gonczar works for Wayne County SAFE. They work with sexual assault survivors in and around Detroit. |
David Greene talks to Jaime Contreras of the Service Employees International Union about how the shutdown is affecting security guards and custodians, who are contractors working in federal buildings. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: The federal government remains partially shut down this morning, and it does not look like the White House and Congress are any closer to an agreement over President Trump's demand for a border wall.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Now, this is affecting federal employees in different ways. In the agencies affected, some people are working and will likely get paid for the time later. Some are furloughed. And in the past, they have gotten backpay later on as well.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: But for contract workers, it is grim. Many are out of work indefinitely and might not get paychecks at all. That includes 71-year-old Lila Johnson. She does cleaning work overnight at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.</s>LILA JOHNSON: We have floor men that are keeping the floors clean, you know, other ladies cleaning bathrooms. You got people cleaning the area, making it safe for the people to walk when they come back to work</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: But not right now. The Agriculture Department is partially shut down, and Lila Johnson's supervisor told her not to come in, which has been really difficult because she's the breadwinner in her family and also takes care of two great-grandchildren.</s>LILA JOHNSON: It's hard on me right now because I got everything, you know, hitting me. I got car notes, insurance, life insurance, rent. I have food to put on the table for the children myself. And it's just hard. I have other bills to pay.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And I want to bring in another voice now. It's Jaime Contreras. He is vice president of the SEIU 32BJ service workers union, which represents federal contract workers, including Lila Johnson. They put us in contact with her as well. He is in our studios here in Washington. Welcome.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: Pleasure to be here.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So how typical is Lila Johnson's situation?</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: I mean, Lila Johnson is one story of 71 at the Department of Agriculture. You have similar stories at State Department, where people were let go. They were told not to come to work. And those people are not sure if they're going to get paid or not.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: How many do you think, in total, are we talking about in all the agencies that are affected?</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: Well, in this area, we - our union represents around 2,000 contracted out workers at federal agencies. In this particular cycle of government shutdown, it's close to 800 workers.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Eight hundred or so.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: You know, we have 400 security officers that keep the Smithsonian Institution safe. Their funding runs out next Tuesday. They have no idea what's going to happen after that. And that's just not - it's not fair. It's not right. It's not what we should be doing for the people who keep our buildings - our federal buildings safe and clean.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And it sounds like Lila Johnson - I mean, she really relies on these paychecks to help her great-grandchildren, to put food on the table, I mean, to pay the rent. How long can a lot of these workers go without money coming in and without the prospect of knowing when they'll get money?</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: Well, these are workers who already work two jobs in order to be able to maintain their households. These are people who live paycheck to paycheck. They have, for the most part, no savings 'cause they spend all their money.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: One day that you don't get paid, it has an effect on their livelihood. Some people have to borrow money from other relatives. Some people have to call their bank and say, hey, I'm going to be late because I'm not getting paid. And some of these corporations work with you, some of them won't. And so they start accumulating late fees, and they have to deal with that mess.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: So it's just wrong. It's wrong to do that to people - working families. Whether you're black, brown, white, I mean, we want a government that works. We want people who are going to be able to make deals and put people and country in front of politics. And that's not what we have in this country at this moment.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Well, President Trump, as you know, has said - he's made this claim that the people who have been impacted by this understand the need for the shutdown. He says that they understand that he needs to fight for border security. What are you hearing from the workers who you represent?</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: I absolutely disagree with that. I mean, if you talk to any of the workers, workers understand that this president, this administration is playing games with their livelihoods.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: And for him to continue to push an issue that he knows is not going to get support in the Senate - and even though he has his friends of the Freedom Caucus in the House, you know, why don't you sign the bipartisan compromise that was done a week or so ago and not put the country and people through this mess that we're in right now?</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Some have blamed Democrats as well, I mean, saying they have really dug in on this issue and there are things that they could do to compromise - figure out some sort of barrier to give President Trump a little bit of what he wants - actually negotiate.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: I mean, are some of your workers actually pointing the finger at both sides and saying, come on, Washington? Like, just come up with something so we can get back to work here.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: There's always finger-pointing to both sides, but we know who's in charge. The fact of the matter is Republicans control the House, they control the Senate, they're in charge in the White House. They don't want to compromise. I mean, the president said it on national TV - I'll be proud to shut down the government over the border wall.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Has your union been able to do anything to help some of these workers as they've been going through this?</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: We're working with some of our, you know, allies in the community. Through the labor council here in D.C., we had the Community Services Agency, who is taking collections for our members to try to help them cope through this mess until they, you know - our wonderful politicians figure out what to do with opening up the government, which, right now, is completely uncertain.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: Until we have a new Congress, these workers are living in limbo.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: What kind of work did you do before taking over a leadership job at the union?</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: Well, you know, one of the things that makes it a little more personal for me is because, you know, I'm an immigrant. I came to this country in 1988 during the civil war in El Salvador. I came here undocumented. My parents had no choice but to bring me undocumented.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: Since then, I became a citizen. I served in the United States Navy, and I've been working for the union for over 23 years now. But I started as a rank-and-file cleaner at 1800 M St. many, many years ago. And so...</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: That's a building in Washington, D.C.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: It's a building in Washington, D.C. So I was a cleaner. This, to me, is personal because it's - when I served this country in the U.S. military, as a veteran, to me, it's offensive what this president is doing, you know, vilifying immigrants, made this wall the top priority of his administration when immigrants, everybody knows, have and continue to contribute in so many ways to this economy, to this country, to the culture.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: It's not a reason to shut down the government. It's not a reason to put regular, working people like Lila Johnson and others at risk of losing their homes, paying their bills or feeding their families.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Jaime Contreras is the vice president of the SEIU 32BJ service workers union that represents many of the federal contract workers who are put out of work right now as part of the partial government shutdown. Thank you very much for your time.</s>JAIME CONTRERAS: Thank you for having me. |
CBS correspondent Byron Pitts — now an award-winning journalist — did not start learning to read until he was 12 years old. Our black literary imagination series resumes with a discussion of blacks and illiteracy. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: This is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In this day and age, it's hard to imagine anyone can make it through the day without being able to read. From filling out a job application or reading a notice from your landlord to navigating road signs in an unfamiliar city, illiteracy can be crippling. Yet in 2007, there are still some parts of the U.S. where half of the adult population is functionally illiterate. That's right, half.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Continuing our series on The Black Literary Imagination, we take a look at folks who have never picked up a good book because they can't read the cover. Byron Pitts is a correspondent for CBS News, but we didn't ask him to file a report for us. He's with us because before Pitts became a journalist, he was functionally illiterate.</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): No one noticed that I couldn't read. In fact, the issue became - I finally got tested when I was having a hard time with math. So the assumption was I couldn't do math. And when we took this test, it was discovered I couldn't read the directions. It wasn't math, I couldn't read. Then people started to get involved. But, you know, it's a story you hear countless times when you talk to kids who grow up in urban America, in crowded schools. Teachers are overwhelmed, parents are overwhelmed and kids fall through the cracks. So every time I do a story about an at risk child that does something they shouldn't do, I always say to myself they're before the grace of God.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What did you do to hide the fact of what you were struggling with from your teachers, from your mother, folks like that?</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): Well, in many ways, it was easy to hide in plain sight. I've always had the ability to memorize things pretty well. So when I was at home, it was always myself, my brother and sister and doing our homework at the kitchen table. My mother supervising as she cooked dinner and saw the clothes and did four other jobs. And so, when I would have an assignment, I would harass my brother and sister to help me with it. And then finally, out of frustration, they would say, well, this is what it says and they would kind of read it out loud, and I pretend that I was dumb and - I mean, they only thought I was, you know, I was a spoiled brat, geek so they were annoyed to do that to begin with. And then they would say it over and over again and finally, I would memorize -let's say if the assignment the next day was to read, we're going to read a chapter out loud. I would find a paragraph that I felt comfortable reading that my brother and sister and mom would read back to me. I'd memorized that graph(ph).</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: It seems to me that that must have been an awful lot of work.</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): Yeah. And what happened with me - I remember, you know, my mother who was, you know, the classic southern woman, I've only seen my mother cry twice in my life. The first time, when it came on the radio that Martin Luther King, Jr. had been assassinated. And the second time was when the therapist told my mother - I've never forgotten his words - I'm sorry Mrs. Pitts, your son is functionally illiterate. I wasn't sure what the words meant but I know what my mother's tears meant and that it broke her heart. That was my lowest moment in my inability to read, to know that I had brought not just pain but I brought shame to my mother.</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): And I mean, it was never made clear what my issue was. I mean, there was the argument that because, you know, I was attending an overcrowded school that I missed out some of the basics. There's then some indication later in life that I might be dyslexic. I remember one therapist suggested early on to my mother that perhaps I was mentally retarded. And so I would give the bulk of the credits to my mother who wouldn't accept no and kept pushing. And, you know, my faith always told me as a child that, you know, as the old saying goes, God didn't make no junk. And so I knew that there was - even when I was struggling, I knew that there was a value to my life.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: When you first read a book all the way through, what was that like for you emotionally?</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): Even before I read my first book, I remember the first thing I ever read out loud that wasn't memorized. I brought home a note from school from a teacher. And historically for me, that the drill was always the teacher will write a note, I'd put it at my bag, I'd bring it home, I'd hand it to my mother and she'd read it. And I would sort of go by her facial expression if it was a good note or bad note. But I remember and she finally tells the story to this day that when I brought that note home twelve and a half, twelve and three-quarters years old. I brought the note home and said, mom, I got a note from the school. Let me read it to you. And she started crying even before I started reading it. And I remember the note says, Mrs. Pitts, good news, Byron is doing better. And I mean, it gives me chills to this day. And I remember the first thing my mother said, I've read her the note, she wiped her eyes and she said glory, hallelujah. Glory, hallelujah. That was like being set free for me. And the first book I read from cover to cover was "The Old Man and the Sea."</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Which most people don't get to until college.</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): Right, right. And it came alive for me. And one of the primary reasons I'm a journalist today is that I love words. I mean, for me - for many people, reading is like second nature. It's like tying your shoes. But for me, words and reading are like breathing. And so every day, I get to breathe.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You certainly have influenced a lot of people with your words being a journalist of such high caliber, how did you fight your way - we already have heard how you fought your way through illiteracy to literacy. How did you fight your way from being someone who didn't have an easy time with reading to the place that you are in your profession now?</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): I was also raised to believe that to those whom much is given, much is required; that there are no stumbling blocks in life just stepping stone. And certainly, throughout my career, there've always been people who've told me I couldn't. Whether that was in the beginning of my career or quite frankly at this stage of my career, there are still people who say you're not ready for that yet, you can't do that yet. I mean, I had that experience a number of years ago at CBS News that I had a - God bless him - a manager who told me I wasn't good enough to be on his show, and that it was his plan to keep me off of his show because I wasn't good enough. And he said I hope it doesn't hurt your feelings. And I looked him in the eye and said as politely as I could, I said never at once when I'm at home alone on my knees in the dark do I call your name that I am respectful of you and your position, but you don't control my destiny. I may not be the smartest, I may not be the most traveled but I am - I have certainty that I am as mentally tough as anyone in the room because my journey made me mentally tough.</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): So whenever I talk to kids who come from - who have learning issues, who come from tough environments, I say, you know, embrace the gift that you are mentally tough, that you have gotten to this point in your life in part because you're mentally tough. And you can take that mental toughness and translate it into anything to be anybody that you want to be.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, on that note, a perfect note, Byron, thank you.</s>Mr. BYRON PITTS (Correspondent, CBS): My pleasure.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Byron Pitts is a correspondent for CBS News. |
Police in Newark, N.J. have arrested two suspects — 28-year-old Jose Carranza and an unidentified 15-year-old — in connection with the execution-style killing of three college-bound teens over the weekend. Reporter Nancy Solomon discusses the latest details from the Newark case. | CHERYL CORLEY, host: From NPR News, this is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Cheryl Corley. Farai Chideya is away.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Police in Newark, New Jersey, have arrested two suspects - 28-year-old Jose Carranza and an unidentified 15-year-old - in connection with the execution-style killing of three college-bound teens over the weekend. A fourth teen, who was seriously wounded in the attack but survived, is helping police with their investigation.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: For an update on the story, we've got NPR's Nancy Solomon on the line.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Thanks for joining us again, Nancy.</s>NANCY SOLOMON: You're welcome.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Well, the adult charged in this murder case, Jose Carranza, appeared in court today. This was an arraignment, correct? So tell me how he pled.</s>NANCY SOLOMON: He's pleading not guilty to all the charges. And it's kind of an interesting story in that, so far, the information coming out about him is quite conflicting. He's originally from Peru. He apparently is undocumented -that's not conflicting - but family, friends, neighbors, all talk about how he is a good family man, he was a steady worker, he helps people in the neighborhood, yet he's got pending charges against him of molesting - sexually molesting a young girl and a brawl that happened in a bar. These were pending court cases. He was out on bail. So it's hard to get a feel for who this guy is.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: What do we know about the 15-year-old? Anything more at all?</s>NANCY SOLOMON: Very little. They're being very tight with information about him, obviously, because he's a juvenile. He apparently lives with both parents and at least one or two siblings in an apartment. There's a large apartment tower complex that's just a block down from the elementary school where the shootings took place and, apparently, he lives in one of those apartment-block towers.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Mm-hmm. Have police learned anything more about a motive in this case?</s>NANCY SOLOMON: They're sticking with the robbery-gone-bad motive, which still, you know, marching three young kids up against the wall, making them kneel and shooting them in the back of the head, that, you know, doesn't sound like a robbery to me. But they're sticking with it. They insist that this was not gang-related.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: And is it clear yet whether or not either of these suspects is cooperating with police?</s>NANCY SOLOMON: Yeah. There's been - I call them intimations or sort of, if you read between the lines, it sounds like the 15-year-old is providing information. The police say they have three other suspects that they're looking for, a combination of juveniles and adults, and that information has come from the 15-year-old that broke this wide open.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: All right. Well, Nancy, thank you so much for joining us.</s>NANCY SOLOMON: You're welcome.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: NPR's Nancy Solomon reporting from South Orange. |
Dick and Silvia Glover were asked this summer to keep their HIV-positive foster son Caleb from using the public pool and showers at an Alabama RV resort, for fear that he might spread the virus to others. AIDS activists cried discrimination, and one group is planning a Labor Day protest at the resort. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Moving on to something very different. The fight against racial discrimination has raged in America for centuries. But our next story is about a new struggle - discrimination against people with HIV and AIDS at the Wales West Light Railway, an RV resort in Silverhill, Alabama.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In July, a couple was asked to keep their HIV positive foster son out of the public pool and shower. The property owner said he was worried that the toddler might pose a health risk to other patrons. The incident made national news. And now, a group of AIDS awareness activists is planning what it calls a swim in.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: About 150 people, many of them HIV positive, will descend on the resort's pools and showers this labor day to protest the owner's decision.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In a few minutes, we're going to speak with the property owner. But first, I'm joined by Silvia Glover. She's the foster mother of 2-year-old Caleb, the boy who was kept from using several parts of the resort. Ms. Glover, welcome.</s>Ms. SILVIA GLOVER (Foster Mother of Caleb): Thank you. It's good to be here.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, I want to know more about what exactly happened at the resort.</s>Ms. SILVIA GLOVER (Foster Mother of Caleb): Well, basically, I mentioned that my son, Caleb, was HIV when we checked in. And then, later, one of the staff or workers there in the office come down and told us that, you know, that he wasn't to be allowed to use the shower or the swimming pool because they were scared that his HIV would be of danger to the other guests.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, the owner, Ken Zadnichek, says he told the Mobile Press-Register that he wanted you to temporarily keep your foster child out of the common areas until he receive documentation from the physician or the health department saying it was safe. Now, do you fault him for asking?</s>Ms. SILVIA GLOVER (Foster Mother of Caleb): Yes, because that's, of course, breaking Caleb's civil rights and you're also offending a lot of other HIV individuals, thousands and thousands for that fact. And so he had no right under the laws of this land to ask anything of us concerning Caleb.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, you also think that there are may be other reasons on the HIV status that this became an issue. What other reasons?</s>Ms. SILVIA GLOVER (Foster Mother of Caleb): I had wondered at the time when they came down, the very first thing they said it's not because his black. But me and my husband both felt that it might have been coming from that because he is black and, of course, there were no other black children in there at the park. And he would have realized right of the bat, you couldn't discriminate against blacks. But I don't think that he realized that he could discriminate against HIV. But I (audio gap) that with all the education he has been receiving and all, that from now that all HIV and AIDS people (audio gap) come.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, you know, your family is interracial by design. You have three biological sons, a daughter you adopted when she was 5, and 60 foster children who've come into your home over the last 25 years. With your daughter now being a paraplegic and your husband having cancer, you've got so much on your plate. Why do you add this to the many fights that you have, no doubt, fought over your life?</s>Ms. SILVIA GLOVER (Foster Mother of Caleb): Well, you now, I didn't plan it. We picked up Caleb at the hospital and fell in love with him, and learned that he was HIV. And we're the only parents he's ever known. And I would never back away. The biggest thing Caleb needs is love. And I don't have a lot of things in this life but I can love a child.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Mrs. Glover, thank you so much for sharing your story.</s>Ms. SILVIA GLOVER (Foster Mother of Caleb): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Silvia Glover is the foster mother of 2-year-old Caleb Glover. |
The annual convention of the National Association of Black Journalists meets this week in Las Vegas. Hillary Clinton has spoken to the delegates and Barack Obama is scheduled to appear at the conference today. Farai Chideya gives an update from the convention. | CHERYL CORLEY, host: This is NEWS AND NOTES. I'm Cheryl Corley. Farai Chideya is away.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: The National Association of Black Journalists is holding its 32nd annual convention in Las Vegas. That event kicked off on Wednesday. And in Sunday, presidential hopeful Senator Hillary Clinton spoke to delegates and was asked the question whether she was black enough to represent the issues of African-Americans, a question often put to a rival, Barack Obama. He's scheduled to speak at the conference today.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: and joining us now is Farai Chideya, the regular host to this program. And Farai has been attending the convention, can give us a sense of what's happening there.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Welcome, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA: Hey, Cheryl. I love being on the other side of the mic.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Well, of course, the question Hillary Clinton was specifically asked yesterday was what made her a better candidate over a black man in representing the issues African-Americans, quote, "confront." So how did she handle that question?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA: Well, she sort of turned it around. She said, I have to earn everyone's vote. I take no one for granted. She put herself in the position of being someone who was willing to work for the community. She talked about jobs for journalists. She talked about in reference to the Newark tragedy that you were just discussing earlier. She talked about creating a youth-focused program. And so she was really trying to sell herself on her public policy.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: All right. Well, Barack Obama is, of course, speaking today at the convention. I was just wondering are the delegates there really excited that they have these two presidential candidates participating?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA: Very excited. And it is unusual only in one sense. Next year is Unity. Every four years, there's the Unity Convention of the Black, Native American, Latino and Asian American Journalists associations. And that is the summer before the presidential election. And, you know, a lot of big guns come out to recruit the votes or to speak to the journalists who will then discuss the vote.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA: This is somewhat early in the campaign season, but as you know, the campaign season is early. This time around, we've just had so much discussions, so many debates already that really, the NABJ conference, the Black Journalists Conference has benefited from the early campaign season, and it's getting two of the Democrats out here. Now, it should be said that the invitation was extended to other candidates, and these were the two who came.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Well, you moderated an event. And real quickly, can you tell us about is and how did that go?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA: It went great. It was an annual lecture, the W.E.B. Du Bois lecture on Africa. We turned it into a bit of a round table with actress Alfre Woodard, one of the founders of Artists for New South Africa, and the executive director, Sharon Gelman, just talking about how Americans can engage on Africa policy. And the best part, as usual, is when you have a group of journalists, the question-and-answer session is the best.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: All right. Well, Thank you so much, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA: Thank you and you, too.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: All right. See you soon.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: NPR's Farai Chideya joined me from Las Vegas, where she is attending the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention. And she'll be back in the driver's seat here on Monday. |
News & Notes Web producer Geoffrey Bennett talks to Farai Chideya about response on our blog, "News & Views," to our coverage of the death penalty and a new kind of tourism in Kenya. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: This is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In just a minute we've got our weekly Blogger's Roundtable. But first, a look at what's happening on our blog News and Views.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Here with me is NEWS & NOTES Web producer Geoff Bennett. Hey.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Hey, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what is popping online?</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Well, Karl Rove's announced resignation was a gift to the blogosphere. All sorts of folks had opinions about that. A reader on our site said Rove's legacy will be tied to have he, quote, "strategized the Christian right on winning the 2004 presidential election based on abortion and gay marriage."</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: And Don Imus' potential return to the airwaves is another hot topic. One reader wrote Imus already suffered a public shame for his irresponsible words, maybe he could start over and chalk it up as a lesson learned.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: And there's talk about the '08 election as usual and some kudos for you and the NEWS & NOTES staff who won two awards at the recent National Association of Black Journalists Convention.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's great. And today, I just posted something that will be very controversial, popping off of something that John McWater about legalizing drugs, so be sure and weigh in on that.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And we've also been doing this month long series on African-American literature. We asked folks to tell us their favorite book. How's that going?</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Well that post about our listeners' favorite books is actually the most popular one in the site right now. Folks listed some of the classics like Tony Morrison's "Song of Solomon," Richard Wright's "Black Boy," and "Their Eyes are Watching God," and some newer books like "Caucasia" by Danzy Senna and Olympia Vernon's "Eden and Logic." So it really shows a cross-section of our listener's interest.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You know, what's interesting is how people are really starting to interact online. How is that going for - from your perspective?</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Well, it's going well. I mean, that's what we sought to do when we launched the blog a few months ago so we welcome feedback about the show and reaction to news so we can really spur conversation and make News & Views a daily destination for talk about news and culture.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And we also have our lovely newsletter, which, of course, I went online and subscribed to. Tell us about that.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: All right. The newsletter has a highlight from each day show and links to the news that we care about, and folks can find out how to sign up for it on our blog.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: All right, well, it's all very exciting, at least for me, and I know for all the folks who have participated. And we want to thank everybody again, just your blog post are really what drive us. And Geoff, thank you.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Geoff Bennett is the Web producer for NEWS & NOTES. |
Oakland Post editor Chauncey Bailey was laid to rest Wednesday after he was gunned down on his way to work last week. Police have a teen suspect in custody and believe Bailey's death may be related to a story he was pursuing. Youth Radio reporter King Anyi Howell sends this remembrance. | CHERYL CORLEY, host: And now, from one coast to the other, Oakland Post editor Chauncey Bailey was laid to rest Wednesday. He was gunned down last week on his way to work. Police have a teen suspect in custody and believe Bailey's death may be related to a story he happened working on about a local business.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: As the city heals from a burst of recent tragedies involving young perpetrators and young victims, Youth Radio reporter King Anyi Howell send us this remembrance.</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: Some people in Oakland are upset that Chauncey Bailey's murder investigation is giving so much media coverage while other numerous acts of violence here fall in to obscurity. But I'm not one of them. Chauncey Bailey dedicated his life to covering the news in his city and he did it with passion and conviction. When he became a headline himself, the least we could do was to return the favor.</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: Youth Outlook publisher Kevin Weston has worked in San Francisco Bay Area media since he was a teenager. He says Bailey was tenacious, prolific, and one of a fading generation - investigative journalist plugging away for an underfunded black press.</s>Mr. KEVIN WESTON (Publisher, Youth Outlook): Because it is so cash-strapped, you know, a lot of times, what you read in the black press is the stuff that's the good news. You only talk about, you know, the political class or the business class or, you know, the middle class. But then, if you're talking about the real problems that are in Oakland, especially if you're going to be talking about poverty, violence, drugs, police brutality, you know, those are more gritty. That's what I think he did so well, and I think it cost him his life.</s>Mr. JAMES EARL-ROCKEFELLER (Television Producer): Any time I seen Chauncey, he had a camera and a microphone, he had a tape recorder, or he had a pen and a pad. That was always Chauncey. He was always working on something.</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: TV producer James Earl-Rockefeller once engineered Bailey's news talk show on Soul Beat, the local cable network. That's how many young people in Oakland knew Bailey best. It was kind of a call-in town hall forum, where Bailey would weigh in on all manner of political and social issues in Oakland. Again, James Earl-Rockefeller.</s>Mr. JAMES EARL-ROCKEFELLER (Television Producer): You know, going back to "The Chauncey Bailey Show," I remember when the insurance thing first came out, when he said that you have to have insurance for your car. And this one cat called in, and he was like, well, man, that's just another reason for them to take black people car and this and that. And Chauncey was like, man, just get insurance. People used to call in, oh, Chauncey's a sellout. But I'm like, no, he's just real.</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: If callers got out of hand, Bailey deployed his technologically advanced video caller ID. It displayed the caller's image, he said, then a picture of a chimpanzee would pop on screen or a baboon or donkey. He didn't take himself too seriously, and he always got the last word while staying focused on giving his community a voice.</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: Kevin Weston says, this proximity to the community was Bailey's strength.</s>Mr. KEVIN WESTON (Publisher, Youth Outlook): If you were in the black press and you are in the community and you're dealing with issues, you're going to have to deal with the people. I don't know if a lot of young journalists even know Chauncey Bailey, but I think it's up to the folks that, you know, knew him and know what it means to actually do that kind of work that should, you know, keep that spirit alive.</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: And Weston says, one way to do that is to give busy reporting. He says there are plenty of stories in Oakland right now that young people should be telling, and that only we can tell.</s>Mr. KEVIN WESTON (Publisher, Youth Outlook): You know, who's telling the story of these murders or these young women that are out on the street, (unintelligible) these young men who are not able to get jobs or the awful public education that you have in Oakland. You know, who will - who's going to be able to break it down better than you all can? And really, to make money, you don't necessarily have to. So this is something that you have to have a passion for and that you feel like it's part of your calling.</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: As I listen to Weston talk, I wonder who is going to take on the task of local investigative reporting in an industry that, one, doesn't pay well, and two, could cost you your life. So it remains to be seen what influence Chauncey Bailey had on Oakland's young journalists. And who among my own generation will step up to take his place?</s>KING ANYI HOWELL: For NPR News, I'm King Anyi Howell.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: And that report came to us from Oakland-based Youth Radio. |
The popular video site YouTube.com launched a hip-hop and rap video contest this week. The company's spokesperson, Jeben Berg, tells why the online giant seems to be going into the business of searching for new talent. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm Farai Chideya. And this is NEWS & NOTES.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: The rise of YouTube has reconfigured the media landscape. It's the place online where the average Joe can post homemade videos for the world to view. And lately, YouTube has taken that idea to another level. It's co-sponsored a presidential debate with CNN and began hosting music video competitions. The latest contest is going to feature the best aspiring rap and hip-hop performers. It's called YouTube OnTheRise Rap Edition. And the company has enlisted hip-hop fave 50 Cent to promote the series.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: 50 CENT (Rapper): Hello, this is 50 Cent. This is YouTube rap contest. Submit one original music video, original beats, original lyrics. (Unintelligible) MCs. If you have skills, determination, (unintelligible) telling you you're really ready, you can win all you need to win right here, right now.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Jeben Berg is a programming spokesperson for YouTube. Welcome.</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): Welcome. Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So did you ever watch that MC Rove clip? Is this really what we're looking for more of?</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): No. No. Not at all. We're looking for aspiring MCs.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what, you know, if you were going to coach me, what would you say I should do to make the cut?</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): You know, the most important - I mean, 50 Cent just said it right there - the most important thing is originality - original lyrics, original beats. Demonstrate, you know, some unique skill set that you have with it, and bring it. You know, this is a peer contest so your peers are reviewing it. So basically, show and prove. And this is certainly an opportunity to do that.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what kind of people are actually submitting entries in terms of age, race, region, any of that stuff?</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): Well, you know, I couldn't speak to region right now, but, you know, we have received, you know, roughly about a thousand submissions so far. Of those, I would say that there are several hundreds that are absolutely serious aspiring MCs. There are certainly, you know, kind of the parodies that always come along with YouTube. But right now, we are seeing some extremely high quality submissions.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what about content? And what I mean by that is that YouTube is fairly open platform. It's been open as well to people using it for questionable language and imagery. And hip-hop is actually, you know, as you know, no stranger to controversies over words, lyrics, imagery. Do you have any kind of screening process? What do you look for that you say this just can't be online?</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): Okay. So well, you know, YouTube has a very well defined, in terms of youth policy. Every submission that we're getting is coming from an account that someone has to setup on YouTube, and they have to follow our sender terms of use, which can be pretty wide. But really, what we're looking for is, you know, it's just creativity. And we're certainly not looking to bridle any of that. You know, we want people to, you know, to say and to speak in a language that they express themselves in. So you know, we're not looking to censor any of it, you know? But, of course, you know, there are certain ways that people can be creative, at the same time, without being offensive.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Why do you think YouTube has so much traction in things like the presidential debates, which, I think, were surprising to a lot of people?</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): Well, right now, I think it's very important to note that, you know, we approach every one of these programs from the concept that we have an enormous community and an enormous audience. And if we provide programming that help facilitate more video submissions specific to those types of programs, be it the debates or be it, you know, going genre-specific with the music like we've done here, you know, it's self-perpetuating in many ways.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what do you have ahead? What's your next big project?</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): We're certainly going to continue with the OnTheRise program. It's going to take many interations over 2008, specifically. We're also looking at a number of other types of programs. We'll have one that we'll launch in October that will be a call for submissions for short films. And we'll be enlisting the help of some industry trade experts to help us judge those, to help us develop a criteria to look at them. And we're also going beyond that. We've got some pretty massive global programs that we're looking at right now that - they're going to be pretty sensational, we think.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: All right. Well, since we've been talking a little bit about music, we're going to go out of this segment with perhaps YouTube's first music hit. It's not exactly hip-hop.</s>Mr. TAY ZONDAY: (Singing) Chocolate Rain. Some stay dry and others feel the paint. Chocolate rain.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So Jeben, you know, "Chocolate Rain", what can you say? Covered again and again. Thank you so much.</s>Mr. JEBEN BERG (Spokesperson, YouTube): You're welcome.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Jeben Berg is a programming spokesperson for YouTube. The winner of the YouTube OnTheRise Rap Edition will be announced September 7th.</s>Mr. TAY ZONDAY: (Singing) Builds a tent and say the world is dry. Chocolate rain. Zoom the camera out... |
For the latest news from the continent, NPR East Africa Correspondent Gwen Thompkins talks about the murder of two prominent journalists in Somalia, a new report by Human Rights Watch on alleged war crimes in Mogadishu and the reported call to close the Eritrean consulate in Oakland. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm Farai Chideya. And this is NEWS & NOTES.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: It's time now for our Africa update. Two prominent journalists in Somalia are murdered. Also, why some reporters in Kenya have threatened to demonstrate. And a new report by Human Rights Watch on alleged war crimes in Mogadishu.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: For more, I'm joined by Gwen Thompkins, NPR's correspondent in East Africa. Hi, Gwen.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Hi, Farai. How are you?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm great. We know that you're in Kenya but let's start with something taking place in our backyard. The U.S. has reportedly called for the closing of the Eritrean Consulate in Oakland, California. Why is that?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, you're right, Farai. The Eritrean Consulate in Oakland has 90 days to close. Washington called for the embassy to close in response to violations apparently made against the U.S. Embassy in Eritrea recently.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: The Eritrean government has reportedly demanded to inspect the embassy's diplomatic pouches. Now, these are the bags that carry mail and other communications to and from the U.S. Embassy. And under international law, these pouches are not to be opened for foreign inspection.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: The Eritrean government is also reportedly imposed visa restrictions on U.S. officials in Eritrea. And diplomatic slights like these suggest that the relationship between the two countries has really soured.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Part of the reason could be because of regional rivalries here in East Africa. Eritrea and neighboring Ethiopia are bitter rivals. And the U.S. and Ethiopia have become very public allies, working in tandem on breaking the Islamist movement in Somalia and in rooting out terrorist strikes in the area. Eritrea has accused the U.S. of helping stall efforts to resolve its border dispute with Ethiopia.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So talk about this border dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea more.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: There was a time when Ethiopia had a port. Unfortunately for them that port is now in the country of Eritrea, which broke away from Ethiopia not long ago. The two countries have never resolved the dispute over where exactly Eritrea ends and Ethiopia begins. And this is going on for quite some time. There's actually been bloody trench war that occurred between 1998 and 2000 between the two countries in which thousands and thousands of soldiers on both sides died.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what is the effect of the consulate closing, especially for the Eritreans in the U.S. or on Americans?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, the consulate closing will make it that much more difficult for thousands of Eritrean nationals living in California to be in contact with their government. Now these folks still have to pay taxes to Eritrea and it would be reasonable to expect that Eritrea's government will lose some of that tax money. The only Americans affected by the closure would be any who work at the consulate or who might be planning a trip to Eritrea and need visas.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So let's turn to Somalia. This week, Human Rights Watch, a New York-based group, issued a report on alleged war crimes in Mogadishu. What can you tell us about that?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, the report says that all warring parties in Mogadishu have violated international humanitarian laws with regards to civilians. The report also says that the bodies of some soldiers in Mogadishu have been desecrated in the fighting.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Ever since December of 2006, when the Islamist movement that controlled Mogadishu fell from power, there's been an insurgency at work there that has challenged the authority of Somalia's transitional government.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: The Human Rights Watch report concentrates on the fighting that took place in Mogadishu in March and April of this year. And it found that Islamist fighters were embedding themselves in densely populated civilian neighborhoods, hiding among ordinary Somalis and putting them at risk.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: The report also found that Somali and Ethiopian forces were bombing these civilian neighborhoods indiscriminately, and that all sides were hindering efforts to care for the wounded.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: There's also been a problem, Farai, of the landmines in Mogadishu. These explosives have been killing any number of children and other civilians there this year. And if the report's allegations are true, then Human Rights Watch is right. There have been war crimes committed against civilians in Mogadishu. Now, hundreds of Somalis reportedly died in Mogadishu in April and May and several thousands have fled the city, never to return.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What's been the reaction so far to the report?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, there's been no word, as of yet, from the insurgents, not that it was expected. But the transitional government in Somalia has reacted very strongly. They've denied any in all of the report's findings.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Prime Minister Ali Muhammad Ghedi also said that the report failed to mention any of the gains the government had made in moving Somalia towards stability. He even accused Human Rights Watch of working on behalf of Islamist fighters.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: But on one point, Ghedi has to agree with the report. It cites the international community for turning a blind eye to the fighting in Somalia and thus making the situation worse.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Ghedi has been pleading with the international community to send more peacekeepers to Somalia. Right now, there's supposed to be an African Union force there that's supposed to be 8,000 strong. But there are only 1,600 African troops there and they have been under siege for so long that they have made very little progress toward keeping peace in Mogadishu.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Last week, I went to the National Association of Black Journalists Annual Convention in Las Vegas, and there was an award given to a group of Somali journalists who had been pioneering and groundbreaking in asking for free journalism and free speech. But over the weekend, we heard about the murders of some prominent journalists. Can you tell us about that?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Yes. It's been a real setback for Somalia and actually for the region as well because getting news and information out of Somalia can be tough.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: The founder of Horn Afrik radio, a well-known independent and privately owned radio station based in Mogadishu, was killed in a car explosion on Saturday. And what so ironic - sadly ironic about the situation is that he had just come from the funeral of a popular talk show host at the station who had been shot to death outside his home Saturday morning.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: And though the transitional government has blamed Islamist fighters for the killings, it's a bit unclear who is responsible. Two suspects have been taken into custody. That's all anyone is saying at this point. And it's also important to note that Horn Afrik radio had been fairly evenhanded in its coverage of all sides in the fighting in Mogadishu. It had angered the government as well as Islamist fighters.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So reporters where you are in Nairobi have threatened to demonstrate tomorrow. Why?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, the Kenyan parliament has passed a media bill that would, under certain conditions, require journalists to reveal unnamed sources in court.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Now, Farai, what's sort of nutty about this bill making it this far is that there appears to have been no quorum at the time of the vote. It was passed by only 29 out of 222 lawmakers. And this clause, which was added quite late in the process, has stirred up all sectors of civil society here. Whistleblowers who have brought corruption scandals into the open over the past several years, they could not have done so, it's fair to say, without cover of anonymity in many instances.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: If President Mwai Kibaki signs this bill as it is written, then this would be a setback for media in Kenya. And you have to remember, Farai, that Kenya is seen by many in this region as sort of the last great hope for democracy in East Africa. But the government here might find a way to wiggle out of the mess. They say that it is as yet unclear whether the clause in the bill that will require journalists to name their sources, whether that clause is legal. So they're going to take it under review.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: All right. Well, we hope to hear more from you on that subject. Thanks, Gwen.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Thanks so much, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Gwen Thompkins is NPR's correspondent in East Africa, speaking to us from Nairobi, Kenya. |
Showtime's highest rated series, Weeds, features actress Mary-Louise Parker as a marijuana dealer in a California suburb, who gets her supply of pot from an offbeat black family living on the other side of the tracks. The actress Indigo and executive producer Roberto Benabib talk about the show's evolution. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Showtime's highest-rated series, "Weeds," kicks off its third season tonight. The eccentric comedy features actress Mary-Louise Parker as Nancy Botwin, a marijuana dealer in an upscale California suburb. After her husband dies, Nancy starts selling pot to keep her kids in the lifestyle that they're accustomed to. So where does she get the weed? From an offbeat black family living on the other side of the tracks. The series and its cast have been nominated for Emmy's, Golden Globes, even an NAACP Image Award.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: For more, we have actress Indigo, who plays Vaneeta, the daughter of the matriarch on the program, and Roberto Benabib, an executive producer and writer for the series.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Hey, guys.</s>Mr. ROBERTO BENABIB (Writer and Executive Producer, "Weeds"): Hey.</s>INDIGO (Actress): Hey.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So it's great to have you in studio. People are really feeling your show.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Roberto, first of all, tell us how the third series is being received. And secondly, just give us your description of what you think the show is about.</s>Mr. ROBERTO BENABIB (Writer and Executive Producer, "Weeds"): Well, the third season is being very well received at the moment. Some very nice reviews in the L.A. Times - and New York Times actually raves, if I might say so myself. And it's incredibly gratifying because the show is a show that has morphed. It has changed. It started season one being about a housewife who was trying to make ends meet by dealing dime bags to her neighbors in suburbia. And in season two, it grew. And she literally grew, started to grow and became more of an entrepreneur. And season three ended in quite a bit of - season two ended in quite a bit of mayhem. And season three is about the consequences of growing both as an entrepreneur trying to traffic in illegal drugs and also as a housewife who's turning into a bit of a gangster.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Indigo, you and your mom on the show are really hilarious in this very bitter way. How would you describe your role and her role?</s>INDIGO (Actress): I don't know. I always like to say, like, I'm like her little sidekick. If you notice, most of the scenes we have together, she will say something, and I'll like chime in, it's like we pick up on each other's thoughts. So it's a really nice dynamic. The writing is great. So it's always fun when we get the opportunity to speak the words that the writers write.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And how do people approach you - and I'm sure they do - about the show, fans who might meet you or see you?</s>INDIGO (Actress): They love the show. You know, I noticed, after season one, I used to get spotted a little bit. But after last season, it started happening all the time. And, I mean, they just love the show. They want to take pictures and they always tell you how much they love the show. And before season three, was getting ready (unintelligible) like when will season three coming back? I can't wait to see it. That season finale last year was crazy. So they really, really love the show.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, the show was nominated for an NAACP Image Award but some folks have also said, look, this is totally racist. Why did the black characters have to be dealers on TV? What do you say to that?</s>INDIGO (Actress): Well, the interesting thing about the show is I don't think anyone is necessarily portrayed in this completely positive light. You know, everybody has some type of dysfunction or something. And the other interesting thing is out of all the other families on the show, despite the fact that we sell weed, we're the most functional family. You know, we're close. We communicate with each other. We have each other's back. So I don't know. I mean, it's interesting to me when people want to try to take the conversation there. Because like as I said, everyone on the show is doing something, dealing drugs or doing something that they shouldn't be doing.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Roberto, I'm going to play a little bit of the season three premiere tonight. I want you to - get you to comment on this. So this clip features Nancy talking to her son Silas in a police station after he's been arrested. He took his mother's stash of weed and she uses the code word dry cleaning and tells him she's got an enormous problem.</s>Ms. MARY-LOUISE PARKER (Actress): (As Nancy Botwin) Silas, where is the dry cleaning? I need every last bag of clothing or my boss is going to kill me, just shoot me dead. You got that? Where is it?</s>Mr. HUNTER PARRISH (Actor): (As Silas Botwin): It's on the trunk of my car.</s>Ms. MARY-LOUISE PARKER (Actress): (As Nancy Botwin) Your car?</s>Mr. HUNTER PARRISH (Actor): (As Silas Botwin) Yes.</s>Ms. MARY-LOUISE PARKER (Actress): (As Nancy Botwin) Would that be the car Celia is driving?</s>Mr. HUNTER PARRISH (Actor): (As Silas Botwin) That would be it.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And so Roberto, what's that all about?</s>Mr. ROBERTO BENABIB (Writer and Executive Producer, "Weeds"): That is the resolution to one heck of a cliffhanger last season where, literally, everyone was left hanging. Pot was missing. Poor Nancy had a gazillion guns pointed at her, and her son had stolen it. And that's just the starting point for this season. It actually takes us two episodes to kind of fully resolve literally just the cliffhanger. And then I would say in episode three, we kind of start our season normally and say, okay, as a result of all this, these are the consequences.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, let me ask you about writing - obviously, a very powerful role in the series. So when you write for Indigo, do you think of her as an actress as well as the character she's portraying?</s>Mr. BERNABIB: I think you think of the actor - their voice. I think you hear the actor's rhythms and the actor's voice in your head. And although the character is not the actor, the character speaks through the actor. And you try to play to the voice a little bit. Yeah, I will definitely hear Indigo's voice when I write the character Vaneeta. I will definitely hear Romany's voice when I write Conrad. It's a very strong tool in just making the dialogues sound conversational and natural.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So back to this whole question of stereotypes, archetypes, what do you see in Vaneeta that you like, and what do you see in Vaneeta that you don't like?</s>INDIGO (Actress): Vaneeta and I actually have some similarities. She speaks her mind. I'm probably not quite as blunt as she is, but I'm not one to bite my tongue either. What don't I like about her? I can't really say there's anything that I don't like about her. I think, overall, she's a likable person. I mean, I don't - even when I meet the...</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: She's got a sharp tongue though.</s>INDIGO (Actress): Oh, she does. But I didn't hear any fans complaining when she cursed out the guy - The Nation of Islam guy. They all seemed to enjoy it. So I don't know. I mean...</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And, you know, when you guys think about being on Showtime, do you ever worry - I mean, in many ways, pay cable has become the place where television flourishes. At the same time, you do have a smaller audience. Roberto, do you worry about that at all?</s>Mr. ROBERTO BENABIB (Writer and Executive Producer, "Weeds"): No, I don' worry, but I think those two things are cause and effect. I mean, I think we have more freedom because the audience is smaller. I think if you're on a network like CBS, you have to invite a lot of people into the tent. A show that only gets 7 million viewers is considered a show that's about to be canceled.</s>Mr. ROBERTO BENABIB (Writer and Executive Producer, "Weeds"): As a result, it is our narrow casting that I think allows us to do amazing work and allows us to say, there are a group of people out there who want to see this kind of television. They may not be the exact numbers that want to see "CSI," but they'll pay for it and, apparently, Showtime is a great business model as is HBO for this kind of television.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What are you looking forward to playing Vaneeta?</s>INDIGO (Actress): Next season?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Yeah, exactly.</s>INDIGO (Actress): I don't know. You know what, with the writers, you're always up in the air. You don't know what they're going to do because their wheels are working so much that they'll have an idea and then it'll change in a matter of a few days. So that's the interesting thing about this show. You're kind of just -you kind of just sit and wait, and you get the script, and you just pull it back and you're waiting to see what you're going to do. So, I'd love to - I mean, I think the ensemble - the core ensemble is amazing, and I'd love to be able to interact with a lot of them a lot more. So we'll see. Hint. Hint. We'll see what happens.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: On that note, Roberto, Indigo, thanks for coming in to the studio.</s>INDIGO (Actress): Thank you for having us.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Roberto Benabib is an executive producer and writer for the Showtime series, "Weeds," and actress Indigo plays Vaneeta on the program. They sat down with me here in our NPR West Studios.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's our show for today, and thank you for sharing your time with us. To listen to the show or subscribe to our podcast, visit our Web site, nprnewsandnotes.org. No spaces, just nprnewsandnotes.org. To join a conversation or sign up for our newsletter, visit our blog at nprnewsandviews.org.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: NEWS & NOTES was created by NPR News and the African American Public Radio Consortium.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Tomorrow, a special Roundtable on gun violence.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm Farai Chideya. This is NEWS & NOTES. |
A federal appeals court has ruled that insurance companies are not liable for the New Orleans homes and businesses that were flooded when Hurricane Katrina breached the city's levees. Attorney Daniel Becnel and his client Robert Harvey discuss the ruling. | CHERYL CORLEY, host: I'm Cheryl Corley in for Farai Chideya. And this is NEWS & NOTES.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: A federal court added a new twist last week to a tangled post-Katrina story.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Many New Orleans resident lost their homes to flooding. Some sued their insurers for not covering the damages. But insurers argued the damage was caused by the city's breached levies and not their responsibility. A district court agreed, but a federal appeals court has now sided with insurers, clearing them of billions of dollars in potential claims.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: This ruling could mean very bad news for tens of thousands residents, business owners, and schools in and around New Orleans. David Becnel is one of several lawyers representing plaintiffs in this and other federal Katrina cases. Among his clients is Robert G. Harvey, who is also with us now.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Gentlemen, welcome to the show.</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): Glad to be here.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: All right. Well, this has been a tug-of-war over what caused the damage during the hurricane and what insurance policies specifically said and if they - the insurance companies - were responsible for flood coverage.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Daniel, why don't I begin with you? Is this hairsplitting or pretty clear-cut as the appeals court would have us believe?</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): Well, I don't think it's as clear-cut as the appellate courts thought. In fact, Judge Duvall, who is a Louisiana U.S. district court judge, one of the most respected in the South, said the policy was ambiguous. And when it is an ambiguous policy, it is held to be in favor of the person who received the policy, not the person who wrote the policy.</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): One of the important areas of concern in this case was that the plaintiffs and their lawyers had asked the appellate court to remand this case for determination by the Louisiana Supreme Court. As you know, we have unique laws in Louisiana compared to most of the other states of the union.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: How so?</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): And - well…</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: What is unique about Louisiana's law?</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): Well, the law is codified in - called the Code Napoleon, was originally put together by Napoleon Bonaparte in the 1700 and 1800s. So it's unique. In that determination, they refused to allow the Supreme Court of the state of Louisiana to interpret its own laws and they just did it themselves.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: So you're saying that in this case - because Louisiana's system of laws based on what's called Napoleonic Code instead of English Common Law or Case Law, that there is a difference on how the case was handled and how the judges ruled in this case?</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): That's what we believe.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Mm-hmm. And you're saying that you would have liked it. Do you think you would have gotten a different ruling from the Louisiana Supreme Court?</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): I think we would have.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Now, Robert, you're home, as I understand, it was not covered by flood insurance, is that correct?</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Mr. ROBERT G. HARVEY (Plaintiff): That is correct.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Uh-huh.</s>Mr. HARVEY: I live in an area where FEMA had designated it was not flood-prone. And therefore, flood insurance was not required.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: So you decided not to buy flood insurance as a result?</s>Mr. HARVEY: Well, it was a part of a package through the bank, so they did not put flood insurance on the property. So I was in the property, the flooding occurred hours after the storm. I had gone outside and cleaned up - actually, I went to bed at 5:00 the evening of the storm, watching television with a generator. When I got up at around 8:30 or 9:00, go to the bathroom, and guess what? Water everywhere…</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Mm-hmm.</s>Mr. HARVEY: …just coming up. When you begin taking the term flood, if you try to (unintelligible) it so many ways as the insurance companies have, it's going to be ambiguous. And I can give you an example if you want one.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Go ahead.</s>Mr. HARVEY: Well, if I have a homeowner's policy and I have a plumber come in and fix my washing machine, and I go off to the show and I come back and that pipe he fixed broke, and eight feet of water sitting in my house, I open at the door and it comes out, that's a flood. I mean, the first thing you'll say, my house flooded. In this case, what you have is you didn't have an overtopping of the levies. You didn't have any undercurrent. What you had was a wall that broke, just like the pipe broke. What is the difference between it occurring inside or outside? It should be a covered event.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Mr. Becnel, let me bring you back into this. What is your next step then?</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): Well, what we intend to do is, first, ask for a rehearing and possibly, ask for an en banc rehearing so some of the - in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, you have judges from Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. And so if we get an en banc, which would mean some Louisiana judges, some Mississippi judges and some Texas judges, we might have a different outcome.</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): Failing that, then we would apply to the United States Supreme Court. Because what is unique about this case and what is unique about Mr. Harvey, is not only did he lose his home, but he had, in earlier years, been chairman of the Orleans Parish Levee Board. He basically had to follow the federal rules that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers told him what to do, how to do it, how to protect the city, as such.</s>Mr. HARVEY: Actually, I was president of the Orleans Levee District, which is charged with flood protection for the city of New Orleans. And in that capacity, I can tell you my knowledge of this is I was never for parallel protection where the wall broke. I was for (unintelligible) protection. But as Danny just said, you're obligated to follow the law as passed in Washington and then there's nothing else you can do about it.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Well, thank you so much, Robert and Daniel, for joining us. Daniel Becnel is one of several lawyers representing victims of Hurricane Katrina in this and other federal cases. Robert G. Harvey, one of his clients, they spoke with us from Audioworks in New Orleans.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Thank you, gentlemen.</s>Mr. DANIEL BECNEL (Litigation Lawyer, Becnel Law Firm, LLC): Thank you.</s>Mr. HARVEY: Thank you.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Among the insurance companies named in the lawsuit is Allstate. They declined our invitation to appear on the show, but did send this statement, quote, We settled 98 percent of Katrina claims in Louisiana and 99 percent in Mississippi, resulting in billions of dollars going back into the community to aid recovery. As stated in the ruling by the Fifth Circuit Court, regardless of what caused the failure of the flood control structures that were put in placed to prevent such a catastrophe, their failure resulted in a widespread flood that damaged the plaintiffs' property. This event was excluded from coverage under the plaintiffs' insurance policies and under Louisiana law. We are bound to enforce the unambiguous turns of their insurance contracts as written, end quote. |
We remember Professor Asa Hilliard, a tireless advocate for culturally sensitive college admissions testing and teacher training. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And we close the show today with a pair of remembrances.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: First, Dr. Asa Hilliard, a professor of urban education at Georgia State University. He was in Egypt, guiding students on foreign exchange trip when he died.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Hilliard was a founding member of the National Black Child Development Institute, and he worked tirelessly to level the playing field for black students. He encouraged colleges and universities to revise standardized admission tests or stop using them altogether because of cultural bias. And he encouraged all students, black or white, to broaden their horizons and learn more about African cultures. When he died, Hilliard was doing just that, leading a student tour through Egypt.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: A spokesperson for Georgia State University says, though an official autopsy has not been done, Hilliard may have died of malaria. He was 73-years-old. |
The vaccine helps protect men against anal and throat cancers that can occur after sexual activity. It may also protect women, indirectly, by reducing transmission of HPV. Public health officials have been trying since 2006 to get parents to have their daughters vaccinated, but rates remain low. Richard Knox, science correspondent, NPR | NEAL CONAN, HOST: And now, a warning. If children are listening, our next discussion involves some frank talk about the human body. A federal panel voted this week to recommend a vaccine to prevent the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus or HPV for all boys 11 or 12 years old. The vaccine was recommended for girls in 2006, but usage remains low and has sparked controversy. The panel, that advises the Centers for Disease Control, said the vaccine will help protect men against some anal and throat cancers that can occur because of sexual activity, and may protect women, too, indirectly by reducing transmission of HPV, which can cause cervical cancer.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: If you have questions about the HPV vaccine and the recommendation, give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org and click on TALK OF THE NATION. NPR's science correspondent Richard Knox joins us from Dorchester, Massachusetts. And nice to have you back with us.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Thanks, Neal. Glad to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And, Richard, a lot of the controversy about the age. Why a vaccine to protect against a sexually transmitted virus at 11 and 12 years old?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Well, it's because there's a lot of sexual activity that begins early, believe it or not, and also because it's more effective if you vaccinate early in the preteen years, and you get a better immune response. It's very difficult to know when a particular child is going to start experimenting sexually, and so the public health people think that it's better to get ahead of the curve.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And the recommendation, as I understand it, was unanimous, with one abstention.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: That's right. It was 13 to - no votes, and one woman abstained. I think there's pretty good consensus in the public health community that this is a good idea. I mean, this is a vaccine that prevents cancer, several different kinds of cancer, probably. And that's pretty, you know, that's a pretty valuable thing to have.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Do we know how effective it is?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Yeah. It's very effective. I think, you know, a number of different strains of human papillomavirus, or HPV, there are two vaccines out there now. One of them is effective against - preventing two of them, and the other is effective against four. The one that's being recommended for boys is effective against four. These are the ones that are most responsible for the cause of cervical cancer, anal cancer, genital warts and other cancers that they're worried about. I think it's, you know, well over 90 percent effective.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And as the - I certainly looked at the political fallout from the recommendation five years ago that this - the - given to girls ages 11 and 12 and we see very low usage rates.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Yeah. It's - I think the public health people are disappointed. I think it's far fewer than half of girls between 13 and 17 have gotten the vaccine. It's about a third have gotten all three doses, and that's after five years. It hasn't been terrifically aggressively promoted, so maybe that's part of it. But I think a really fundamental reason is that a lot of parents have trouble thinking about vaccinating their young girls against a sexually transmitted disease. They're just thinking that's a - that that's a risk for them, and it isn't, thank goodness. But, you know, as I said before, the thinking is to get them protected before they enter those years.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Here's an email from Tom(ph) in Raleigh, North Carolina. Please eliminate some confusion over this issue. We already know the HPV vaccine for girls now. You report about it for boys. Obviously, vaccines are for youths because they are preventative. Can they be used - are they effective for adult women and men, or are they just for youths?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Well, the problem is that once you get infected with one of the strains of a virus that the vaccines protect against, then it's too late to be protected. So, you know, it's important to get them before the danger zone happens. The - I'm sorry. I think - what was the other question?</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Well, the question was: Is it OK to use it for adult men and women, or is it just effective if administered before sexual activity?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Yeah. No, I think that's the rationale, is it's - it really needs to be, you know, kids need to be protected before they encounter the virus, and you're not quite sure when it's going to happen.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: This is an expensive vaccine, as far as these things go. Does this recommendation mean it might be covered under insurance policies?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Probably so. It is expensive. I think the vaccine itself, it costs over $300. And then there's administrations fees that can bring that up considerably over 400. The importance - or one aspect of the vote this week by the Advisory Committee on Immunization to the CDC is that when the CDC recommends a vaccine for routine use, most insurers will follow suit. Also, a lot of childhood vaccines are paid for by a federal program - a federal state program. And so, once the CDC accepts these recommendations, as it's expected to do, then it will cover - that program will cover a lot of kids.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: We asked a question about, should you get it after - when you're an adult? Here's an email question from Kathy(ph) in Brigham City, Utah: I see the recommendation age is 11. Is it OK to give it earlier, or is 11 the youngest a girl should get the vaccine? I know we give a lot of vaccines earlier versus later in a child's life.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Yes. The experts say that it can be given beginning at around age nine, and they recommend routine vaccination in 11 and 12-year-old boys, and I think it's the same for girls. It can be given and should be given up to the age of 21 in boys - I think 26 in girls, if I'm not mistaken - if they haven't gotten the vaccine before then.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Let's see if we can go next to a caller. This is Stacy(ph), Stacy with us from Cleveland.</s>STACY: Yeah. So the age of nine is the recommendation now for this vaccination? And I wondered what - first of all, that's my first question. Second of all, you said that there's a routine vaccination that's now recommend. How often is this vaccination to given in the routine? And you said it's $400 for vaccine. So I'm wondering how much profit the company has made so far? Those are my questions.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Go ahead.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Sure. Well, first of all, just to be clear, it may be given as early as nine, but the recommendation is that it be routinely given to 11 and 12-year olds. You know, it's just at the discretion if you wanted to do it earlier than that, or the doctor recommends it earlier than that. It needs to - kids need to be given three shots over a period of months, I guess, in order to be fully protected. I don't have the vaccination schedule in front of me here, but it's, I think, you know, within six months after the first shot, and so on. And I didn't catch the list of - the last part of your third question.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: How much profit has the company that manufactures the vaccine made? I believe it's Merck.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Ah-ha.</s>STACY: Correct. That was my question.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Well, I don't think they've made very much, because it hasn't been terribly enthusiastically adopted. As to how much they would stand to make, you know, that's a good question. I don't have the answer to that.</s>STACY: No, no, no. That wasn't my question. Of course (unintelligible)...</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Obviously, if the recommendations get followed, there are, you know, tens of millions of young people every year who would be eligible. And so, presumably, it will be a profitable thing for these two companies that make these two vaccines.</s>STACY: Right.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Stacy, thanks very much for the call.</s>STACY: Sure. (unintelligible).</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Let's go next to - this is Lee, and Lee's with us from Charlotte.</s>LEE: Yes. Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my call.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Sure.</s>LEE: I'd like to know if there have been any follow-up studies. Although I'd like to get my young teenage daughter the vaccination, her father - with whom I am not with - has voiced his concern that this will, you know, give her some false confidence and create some kind of promiscuity. And I'd like to know if there had been any follow-up studies as to behavior in those girls that have gotten the vaccine. And have there been any follow-up studies on any kind of side effects?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: There have been studies on side effects. Let me talk a little bit about that first. They've been monitoring - something like 35 million doses of these - this vaccine has been shipped out, and something like that, presumably, have gotten vaccinated. And they've been monitoring - the CDC, that is - has been monitoring pretty closely any kind of side effect, serious or non-serious, in those kids. They have not seen anything out of the ordinary, which is to say that - well, a number of the kids have fainted, as happens with any vaccination, actually.</s>LEE: Yeah.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Other - you know, side effects like tenderness of the vaccination site have happened, but that's not really out of the ordinary, either. There have been something like 35 verified deaths among kids who have had the vaccine, and that sounds really terrifying, of course. But really, you have to think about that carefully because, you know, this - it doesn't mean that the vaccine caused it. I mean, it's like a certain number of people, you know, 12-year-olds, for instance, die, unfortunately, after they've entered fifth grade. But that doesn't mean fifth grade caused the deaths. So they haven't found any unusual patterns of serious, adverse events or deaths among kids who've had the vaccine.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: As to the behavioral studies, I haven't seen any, not to say that it - they're not happening, but I - it hasn't been considered in the debate that I've heard from the CDC so far. And I'm suspecting that they really haven't done that. I mean, I guess you would worry about whether somebody who feels - has been vaccinated feels less vulnerable to infection, at least by this virus. But there's a whole lot of reasons why you're still vulnerable to other sexually transmitted disease and other things that come from promiscuous sex. So this certainly doesn't change any of the messages that kids - that all kids should get, vaccinated or not, about, you know, being careful and about casual sex and, you know, and all that stuff. I don't - you know, I think that's unanswerable question, but, you know, it's not unique to this vaccine.</s>LEE: Right. And I think that's a lot of what was initially brought up, that, you know, oh, well, this is going to give the kids free license to go ahead and have sex. And I think that's kind of ridiculous, but, you know, it would be interesting if somebody did do a follow-up study on behavior.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: It would be good. Yeah, and I think that needs to be addressed, but I don't think it has been yet, as far as I know.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Lee, thanks for the call.</s>LEE: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: We're talking with science correspondent Richard Knox about the HPV vaccine, which is now recommended for boys, as well as for girls. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And here's a couple of emails, this one from Jordie(ph) in Oakland. I'm a pediatric nurse practitioner and a mother of a sexually active 19-year-old boy. I've been waiting to have this recommendation since they came out recommending it to girls. When I approached my son about getting the vaccine, he quickly responded: I'm down with that, and got his first one the next day. It's about time. The 16-year-old is next.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And this is from Judy in Bexley, Ohio: I wish the media would start consistently calling this a cancer vaccine. That's what it is. Perhaps, then, people will stop thinking about the method of transmission of the virus and start thinking rationally. And, well, is it - would it be accurate to call it a cancer vaccine?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Absolutely. That's the - that's its purpose, and that's what it's been shown to be effective. Let's just go over those things a little bit, because, you know, when it was recommended and is recommended for girls, the main rationale is that it prevents cervical cancer, and that's proven that it does. And that affects 15,000 women a year and kills - I can't remember the number, but it's like maybe 4,000 a year, something like that. It's not a common cancer anymore because of pap smears, but it still does happen. But there are other - you know, there are other cancers of the reproductive tract in women that it probably prevents.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Anal cancer has been growing in recent years, and that is definitely a risk factor for men who have sex with men. But interestingly, there are slightly more women who get anal cancer every year - something around 3,700 - than men. So it's - women are at risk for that, and this was thought to be able to prevent that.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Mouth and throat cancers are - that's a really serious one. About 40,000 people in the United States get a diagnosis of mouth and throat cancer every year, and it's a very difficult one. It used to be a cancer of older people who had smoked and who had drunk a lot of alcohol. That's been shifting, according to the cancer experts I've talked to. And now, cases are younger. Men are more than twice as likely to get that. That is thought to be related to oral sex, and this is thought to prevent that, although the evidence is not as solid and nailed down as it is for these other cancers.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: The vaccine came up in the presidential campaign. Governor Rick Perry of Texas had passed a law mandating the use of the vaccine for all girls in public schools - or all girls in Texas. There was an opt-out, I think. But he was upbraided for that. He called it a pro-life issue, protecting the lives of women, and he later said he was sorry for that. He thinks he's made a mistake. Was Texas the only state to mandate the use of the vaccine?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Yes, it is - or was. They've rolled it back.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Virginia and the District of Columbia require for kids entering middle school - girls entering middle school, at least - but there is a - if you get a note from your doctor, you can get permission not to have it.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Here's an email from Lisa in Auburn, California: Please remind listeners the HPV vaccination can be available for a very reduced fee through your county health department, as was mine for both my daughter and son. It was quite easy and under-utilized here in Placer County, California, where we've walked in without a wait on many occasions. So there are alternatives.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Yeah. That's that federal program that - that helps states and localities pay for childhood vaccines.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And in align with this recommendation, is there going to be a public education campaign to get people to - persuade people to get over their squeamishness about using this vaccine which can save lives?</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: The CDC says yes. They acknowledge that there's been a lot of confusion and a lot of emotion around the recommendation for vaccinating young girls. One of the reasons why the expert committee this week voted for, they said, was that it addresses the equity question. In other words, it should be an equal opportunity vaccine, and that boys should be bearing part of the burden of getting it and preventing these diseases, as well as girls. And they hope, I think, that that's going to diffuse a lot of the emotion. Although, I guess, it remains to be seen. But the CDC officials say that they realized they've got to do a better job at getting the message out, that - what this is for and why they're recommending at these young ages.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Richard Knox, thanks very much for your time.</s>RICHARD KNOX, BYLINE: Oh, you're welcome.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: NPR science correspondent, Richard Knox, who joined us from Dorchester in Massachusetts. On Monday, student loan debt and the choices many students are forced to make after they graduate. Join us for that. This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan, in Washington. |
Activists report at least nine civilians were killed in Syria Wednesday. State TV reported President Bashar al-Assad's supporters packed a square in Damascus. He is being pressed to start a dialogue with the opposition. Washington Post foreign correspondent Liz Sly talks about recent developments. | NEAL CONAN, host: This week, the world watched as Tunisia held its first free and democratic election. Last week, the 42-year dictatorship of Moammar Gadhafi ended in airstrikes and gunfire. Meanwhile, the cycle of protest and crackdown continues in Syria. Activists reported at least nine civilian deaths today, while state television reported that tens of thousands packed a square in Damascus to support President Bashar al-Assad. Washington Post foreign correspondent Liz Sly will join us in just a moment.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We'd also like to hear your questions about what's going on in Syria. Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. Liz Sly joins us now from Beirut. Nice to have you with us today.</s>LIZ SLY: Hello.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I understand you just returned from five days in Syria. It's been very difficult for foreign correspondents to get to stay even half a day.</s>LIZ SLY: That's right. I did manage to spend about 24 hours there in July, but otherwise, I've been leaning on the Syrian authorities for a visa since February. And finally last week, they said I could go.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And how were you - was this one of those trips like that one in July where you were constantly attended by a government minder?</s>LIZ SLY: Well, I wasn't actually constantly attended by a government minder in July. I went to attend a conference, which they said we could cover, but nothing much was going on, on the day I arrived. And I wandered off, and they hashed(ph) the U.S. Embassy, and that was, of course, very newsworthy, so I wandered over there, interviewed people, walked around. And they didn't even find out until the next day.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this time?</s>LIZ SLY: This time, it was very, very different. I was shepherded everywhere, escorted everywhere, and it was made clear to me that I wasn't supposed to leave the hotel on my own.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And were you able to do so nevertheless?</s>LIZ SLY: I tried. I tried.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There was a tweet from your second day in Damascus: A quick spin through some upscale Damascus cafes. Gadhafi was insane. We love Bashar. Libya is different from Syria. Was that the sentiment you were getting throughout your trip?</s>LIZ SLY: Yes. It certainly was. I mean, it was a - I mean, I saw quite a lot of different facets of what's going on in Syria during this trip. But one thing I certainly picked up is that there is quite a lot of support for Bashar in Damascus. I don't think this was being put on for the sake of the government people who were with me. And when people spoke English, he stepped away, anyway. People were very happy to volunteer how much they love Bashar and how much they hate Americans for interfering in their country.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And interference, the most recent example of that, Ambassador Ford, who was recalled from Damascus to Washington and the State Department said it was afraid for his safety after what they described as rent-a-mobs put him in jeopardy.</s>LIZ SLY: That's right. When - a sign - I think that's a real sign of how tense things are between Syria and America that the U.S. just felt it wasn't safe to keep Ford in Damascus anymore.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In the meantime, of course, the Syrian ambassador, tit for tat, was recalled for consultations in Damascus. So there is no official representation at the highest level in either capital at the moment. But the Syrian government has more problems than its relations with Washington.</s>LIZ SLY: Well, the Syrian government has an enormous number of problems, one of which is a revolt that - it's not gone away after eight months. Perhaps just as worrying from the point of view of most of the ordinary Syrians I spoke to is the rather dire state of the economy, which is in a bit more of a critical state than we might have imagine from the fairly limited sanctions that have been imposed so far. But they seem to have had a huge psychological effect, as has the unrest of the past eight months, and people really described some very dire economic conditions indeed.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: How is that manifesting itself?</s>LIZ SLY: Well, at the moment, it's not manifesting itself in sort of anything dramatically, like sort of hunger or desperation or anything, but people seem very anxious about the future. I mean, the - I really only saw - most of my time I spent in Damascus and the capital is a little bit of a bubble. It has been somewhat immune from the unrest that's plagued much of the rest of the country, but people there are certainly very anxious about the future. They don't really know what's coming next - and it's the economy that makes them really worried.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the other stronghold for the government is the other major city, Aleppo. But elsewhere the protests continue unabated, and there has been the formation of a national council to represent the Syrian opposition. They're based in Turkey. Are they getting much support?</s>LIZ SLY: Are they getting much...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Support.</s>LIZ SLY: Well, you've got really a different situation between Damascus and the rest of the country, and there are different situations in all of the rest of the country. This really is a revolt of the provinces against the center, and it's a revolt, really, of the working classes against the elite. And I wasn't really able to go and spend time among those people who are part of this revolution because I wasn't able to move around freely. And certainly among - but certainly, from all the protesters I've talked to and from what we know from the videos, the Syrian National Council does have huge support on the ground among the protest movement. They have attached themselves to this as a great source of hope.</s>LIZ SLY: And in the capital there, I found many people still supporting the government, or at least uncertain - there's a kind of aversion to the Syrian National Council because they feel it's being imposed from abroad. They're representing foreigners, and there's this huge, like, fear that there's a conspiracy against Syria by foreigners to invade it and take it over like Libya and Iraq.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In the meantime, there had been talk of what had been largely a peaceful protest movement thus far, that after more than 3,000 people have been killed, according to the United Nations, it was time to take up arms.</s>LIZ SLY: A lot of protesters are calling for arms. They're very frustrated, they're extremely demoralized that they've not succeeded, really, in denting this government at all in the eight months of peaceful protests. And a lot of people are saying only weapons will do the job. And we are seeing a lot of signs that that is happening in the protest areas, not all over the country, not every place where people have protested certainly. But in Homs, it's clearly, clearly become a militarized situation and almost sort of low-level civil conflict situation, and in parts of the northern province of (unintelligible) and Hama as well, you're getting reports of guerilla attacks and bombings on a daily basis.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: As you know, the government has maintained all along that its troops are the victims of armed gangs. Does not - do not these kind of attacks, as they develop, play into the government's hands?</s>LIZ SLY: Well, that's the big fear that a lot of people have, is that this really will then justify the government's use of very harsh tactics to crack down, and a lot of people are saying, please don't let's go down the route of armed resistance, armed rebellion, because there really isn't much chance if the protesters will get enough arms quickly enough to confront the government anyway. And in the process, the government will use this to justify even harsher measures.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Liz Sly, the Washington Post foreign correspondent, with us from Beirut. She returned from a five-day visit to Damascus and other parts of Syria earlier this week. 800-989-8255, email us: talk@npr.org. Let's get Carl(ph) on the line, Carl with us from San Jose.</s>CARL: Yeah. I was in Aleppo myself years ago, and I found a great, great welcome, great - just people - they're so friendly and liking and doing everything for me. And when this started like seven months ago, I felt like immediately the West - the U.S. should just send cruise missiles into the palaces of the dictators there in Damascus because the government is just not going to do anything except shoot people. I mean, they have no - and these sanctions and talking, talking and scolding the dictator, it's not going to do anything. What do you think would happen if the West just decided we're going to send drones and cruise missiles and we're just not going to let them shoot people at will? We're going to target their, you know, these Americans in the West, they know how to target people. They could target their palaces and other things just to let them know that they just can't do this.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The aerial intervention in Libya, of course, followed a United Nations Security Council resolution, which in turn followed a resolution by the Arab League. Liz Sly, neither of those things likely to be coming up in the Syrian context.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: It's just so hard to imagine that happening in Syria because Syria is so different from Libya. Gadhafi was a madman. He had no friends. He was widely regarded as (unintelligible) lots of Arab countries were willing to dumb him, and the West was willing to turn against him.</s>LIZ SLY: Bashar al-Assad sits in a very, very strategic area of the Middle East. It's the crossroad of multiple simmering conflicts in the region. He's next door to Islam. He's next door to Iraq. He's next door to Turkey. He has an alliance with Iran. He sponsors Hezbollah. He's on good terms with Hamas, although that's a little strange. And several people I spoke to, they're very(ph) frightened that if any dares to attack Syria, they will attack Israel and Iran, and Hezbollah will join in the fight.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So a regional conflict would ensue if there was intervention, at least that's the fear.</s>LIZ SLY: Yes.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And as you look at...</s>LIZ SLY: And I think that's why you're seeing the West be much, much cautious over Syria than they have been over any of the other Arab revolts.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Liz Sly of the Washington Post. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I needed to ask you a question about the internal support for the government of Syria. Of course the president and his family are Alawites, which is a minority sect. We are told that other minorities, Christians and Kurds, support the president in their power because they fear what might happen if he was removed from power.</s>LIZ SLY: Well, it's true that a lot of Christians are supporting the current government precisely because they fear what would happen if he was removed. One thing, Bashar, I think, has been known for over the past decade and his father before him was enforcing a kind of - quite rigid form of secularism. They've always been extremely fierce with Islamic fundamentalists.</s>LIZ SLY: And a lot of the minorities in Syria are concerned that if the protesters - if the protest movement was empowered, it would be majority Sunni because the majority of the country is Sunni Muslims, and that they would end that secularism for which Syria - on which Syria has prided itself for quite a long time. So yes, it's true. Many of the minorities are leaning more towards the government than they are towards the protesters.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's get another caller in. This is Chip, and Chipper with us from the Amargosa Valley in Nevada.</s>CHIP: Yes. Hello?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yes. You're on the air, Chip. Go ahead.</s>CHIP: Yes. Well, I'm wanting to know what kind of government - I mean, you said with the Kurds and everyone is afraid of - is that what's happening? Do you think that's what will happen after - if Bashar al-Assad is overthrown? And is that what's happening in Libya, in Egypt right now? Are we going to have, like, hard-line Muslims and Sharia law in the area? Is it going to be, like, worse than it was under the dictators?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Liz Sly, can you...</s>LIZ SLY: I don't think there's any evidence at the moment that this is an Islamic revolution at all. What it is, it's a revolution, as I said, mostly for provinces, mostly of the poor and working classes, and it's a revolution of frustration and anger. There are, undeniably, some Islamists among them, and they - they have – they haven't really - they made themselves (unintelligible) but it is certainly possible that some form of Islamic politics would come to the fore if there was democracy in Syria. But that's something, I think, we're going to see all over the region, and as you said, in Tunisia, in Libya and in Egypt it's quite clear that Islamist parties are being empowered by their democracy. I don't think that means they're going to have Sharia and Islamic law. There are some very moderate Islamist parties that speak in the name of Islam but don't want to impose those kind of things.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Chip, thanks very much for the call. As we continue to look ahead, you spoke about the frustration that fuels the protest movement. But as you also said, they are going to be increasingly frustrated that they seemed to be making no great headway at this point.</s>LIZ SLY: Yes. I think there's a huge amount of frustration. And also, with some of the activists I speak to there's a huge amount of despair as well because they were very optimistic following Tunisia and Egypt that this would, you know, it was only a matter of time. You only had to go onto the streets and march around and make a lot of noise, and the government would fall, and that's not happening in Syria. And it doesn't seemed that there's any likelihood it's going to happen anytime soon.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The power resides, perhaps, in the armed forces. Is there any suggestion that the revolt has, in any way, spread to the armed forces?</s>LIZ SLY: We have seen defections from the army, and there are battles taking place in different places between defectors from the army and the regular army. And they have formed a group recently called the Free Syrian Army, which is claiming lots of the attacks that place and coming(ph) to represent a rebel army, if you like. The evidence of them actually achieving any kind of critical mass that were enough to make a difference to the balance of power in the country, it's just not there. They just seemed to be very small groups of defectors who kind of run away in tiny groups because they don't agree with what's happened or they don't want to shoot protesters. And they put up a fight in some places, but there's not really a lot of evidence that this is gaining ground or taking off.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So is this likely to continue at the level of nine people being killed a day?</s>LIZ SLY: I think at the moment it is, unfortunately. Yes. We're going to see any - I don't see any sign that anybody is prepared to give way on anything at the moment. The regime thinks it's winning, and there are some signs that it is. And the opposition is in some ways in disarray. They haven't really got their act together. It's taken them an awfully a long time to form this council that they did form earlier this month. Since then they haven't really come up with any clear positions on anything. They haven't spelled out what they would do if they took power, and that too is deterring some of those people who aren't quite sure what side they're on from actually joining the opposition. They prefer to stick with what they know to the uncertainty of what might take place if the regime fell.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Liz Sly, thank you very much for your time. We appreciate it.</s>LIZ SLY: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Liz Sly, a foreign correspondent for The Washington Post, just back to Beirut after five days in Syria. |
Commentator Jeff Obafemi Carr sends this week's Snapshot from his favorite Nashville barbershop. Carr, a Nashville native, is a writer, actor, licensed Baptist minister, and the host of the weekly radio program "Freestyle." | CHERYL CORLEY, host: And it is time now for our Friday Snapshot. This week, we turn to Jeff Obafemi Carr. The Nashville native is a writer, active actor, licensed Baptist minister and host of the weekly radio program, "Freestyle." And he sent today's Snapshot from his barbershop.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): The other day, I needed a haircut -badly. So I called up Keno(ph), one of my favorite barbers, and asked if he could squeeze me in. Now, Keno was not my childhood barber. So things are a little different at his place. When I was growing up, I get my cuts at Charles and Eddie's economic barbershop(ph), or Mark and Reverend Dickson's Community Barbershop in my South Nashville neighborhood.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): In both places, a new generation of civil rights leaders were raised on stories told from one chair to the next. They would catch who had marched with King and shed blood on the very downtown streets I walked when changing buses. Forget school. When you sat on that barber chair, buddy, you are going to get lectured. And you had to do more than listen in the hot seat. You had to fuel questions thrown with sermonic fervor. Looking back, I'm all the better for it.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): My new barbershop isn't quite like that. My barber is a 30-something like me and a lot of the cats cutting in his spot are even younger. BET is often playing on the flat screen in the corner or the latest theatrical release, courtesy of the friendly neighborhood film distributor.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): When I walked in recently, two brothers were sitting in the corner, playing chess on a large glass board. I love to see that because chess is a thinking man's game, a game of power, strategy, yeah. That's good stuff for the brothers. And it fit right in with that image in my head of the barbershop as a sort of training ground for minds of young and old.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): So I took my up in the chair and chatted lightly with Keno, catching up on what's going on in his life and updating him on mine. I also kept my eyes on those brothers in the corner. But it didn't take long for the confusion to set in. At first, I thought it was because I was trying to talk and watch the match at the same time. But I knew it wasn't just me when one of those chess cats moved a knight diagonally across the board, then removed his opponent's pawn and rook. I don't know what they were playing. But one thing is for sure. It was not chess.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): It took me a minute to give my bearings and another to restrain myself. I wanted to interrupt, ask what they were playing, and maybe show them how it's really done. But I didn't want to look ignorant, or worse, uppity. So I shut up and watched.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): There had to be rules because they were playing it lightning speed and they were chatting about other things at the same time. Well, whatever the rules, I never figured them out. I just got frustrated. Why don't the brothers just play the game the right way, I wondered. Then again, they were having a ball doing it their way. That's when I realized that I was frustrated and only because I felt left out of the fun.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): In the story of America, we have a history of rewriting the rules, whether it's in music, with the blues, jazz, or hip-hop, or in athletics, with the bump and run, or 360-degree dunk, or in writing with the choreopoem(ph). Black people innovate. That's what we do. And most of the time, the world is made all the better for it. So I didn't say a word, paid my barber for a really fly cut, and made my way to the door.</s>Mr. JEFF OBAFEMI CARR (Host, "Freestyle"): But before I left, I looked back at the brothers in the corner. Nah, it wasn't chess. But it brought two people together in conversation, in laughter and in brotherhood. Isn't that what a game is supposed to do? Maybe next time, I'll be bold enough to ask about those rules. And maybe, just maybe, they'll even let me play. If so, I'm sure I'll be the better for it.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: Commentator Jeff Obafemi Carr lives in Nashville, where he acts, he writes and he hosts the weekly radio program, "Freestyle."</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: And that's NEWS & NOTES. To listen to the show or subscribe to our podcast, visit our Web site, nprnewsandnotes.org. No spaces, just nprnewsandnotes.org. To join the conversation or subscribe to our newsletter, visit our blog at nprnewsandviews.org.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: NEWS & NOTES was created by NPR and the African-American Public Radio Consortium.</s>CHERYL CORLEY, host: I'm Cheryl Corley. Farai Chideya will be back on Monday. This is NEWS & NOTES. |
Parents and educators have debated single-sex education for years, and the number of schools offering single gender classes has grown. But some researchers argue there is no evidence that boys and girls learn differently — and that gender separation can perpetuate sexist stereotypes. Sarah Sparks, reporter, Education Week Renee Finke, elementary school teacher, Parkway School District, Missouri Nathan Blackmer, principal, Lake Bluff Middle School, Illinois | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. The long-running debate on single-sex education erupted again last month when a report in the journal, Science, concluded that there's simply no empirical evidence that segregating boys and girls improves education, but that it can perpetuate sexist stereotypes and hinder social development, none of which convinced advocates on the other side.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Over the past decade, the number of American public schools that offer single-sex classes has grown to more than 500. Since the debate is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon, we'd like to hear from teachers and students about your experiences with single-sex education. Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Later in the program, ComPost columnist Alexandra Petri joins us on the line between political biography and fact. But first single-sex education. Sarah Sparks covers education research for Education Week and joins us here in Studio 3A. Thanks very much for coming in today.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Nice to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the Science article reads like a comprehensive condemnation of single-sex education. Is this based on new research?</s>SARAH SPARKS: No, this is a compilation of research done both by the authors of the study, as well as their reading of other studies available. It's probably the newest - a review of the newest research.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the research focuses on brain science?</s>SARAH SPARKS: In part. There are - some of the authors involved, particularly Lise Eliot is a neuroscientist, and it is a response to the sort of emerging justification for single-sex schools that relies on brain image studies that seem to show differences between boy and girl brains.</s>SARAH SPARKS: What the authors in the study are saying is that most of these studies have been either misinterpreted or vastly expanded the reach of what the results actually mean, to say that they lead to a difference in academic and instructional practices that should be done in schools.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So no evidence to support change. In fact, I think they dismissed it as pseudo-science.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Correct. In fact, the title of it was "The Pseudo-Science of Single-Sex Schooling." They were very adamant about it, and to be fair, all of these authors are - have also created a nonprofit organization, the American Council for Coeducational Schooling. So they're very much in favor of not using these.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And in fact, advocate that single-sex education, at least in public school, should be banned.</s>SARAH SPARKS: That's correct. They have asked the Education Department to rescind its 2006 rule that allows single-sex schools and single-sex classrooms with certain provisos.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And these would be waivers under Title IX, for example.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Correct.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Now, opponents who advocate single-sex schools, say nonsense, we've looked at some of the same studies, and, well, you can come to completely different conclusions.</s>SARAH SPARKS: That's true. There - I mean, the big problem seems to be that there haven't been a whole lot of rigorous studies of single-sex schooling at all. In the most recent Education Department study, which was conducted through the American Institutes of Research, they looked at more than 2,200 studies, and of those, only 40 met even the minimum requirements of quality of the research.</s>SARAH SPARKS: And those, pretty much, found mixed results of whether single-sex schools were actually beneficial or not. There just hasn't been a lot of solid research in the area.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And it's difficult research to do. One of the interesting things was in this science article, they said, well, yeah, you can point to scores that improve, but a lot of that is due to the fact that people like innovation, and they're responding to change rather than to some inherent quality in single-sex education.</s>SARAH SPARKS: There's a really interesting study that is going to be released this spring that's looking at the effect of single-sex schools for minority boys. It's being conducted by the Metropolitan Center for Urban Education.</s>SARAH SPARKS: And they have so far found that - the preliminary data says that it hasn't really been a matter of single-sex versus co-ed. You really find the improvement from individual interventions that might be used in a co-ed or a single-sex situation.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So that it may not matter, in that respect, yet again, the journal, Science, a peer-reviewed journal, comes back with the conclusion that not only is there no empirical evidence that it improves education, there is evidence to suggest it increases sexist stereotypes.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Right, particularly the studies that were mentioned in that article are among early childhood studies. And it basically found that when you have kids separated, they are more likely to hold onto sexist stereotypes. One of the reasons that a number of the programs that were started in California for single-sex education got shut down fairly quickly afterward, was they found that there wasn't a real - the teachers ended up using some sexist stereotypes like teaching flowers for girls and cars for boys kind of thing.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I see, and is there anything, though, to prove - there's again advocates for single-sex education, come away with the argument that, you know, boys and girls learn differently and therefore should be taught differently.</s>SARAH SPARKS: That's the biggest debate right now is whether the physical differences which admittedly are there and are bigger at different ages, whether those actually translate to academic learning differences. One of the things that's argued in the article is that differences in brain volume, for example, that are talked about in terms of differences in boys' brains and girls' brains don't necessarily transfer to a difference in academic learning style.</s>SARAH SPARKS: On the other hand, there have been many programs associated with teaching for boys, a more active style, or teaching for girls a more collaborative style, whether those have to do with something related to the sex of the students involved versus just differences in learning styles. There hasn't been a lot of research that has looked at this particular intervention being tied to sex.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This study got a lot of attention because it was in a peer-reviewed journal and a well-respected journal. What's been the reaction since publication? Has the argument just gone back and forth?</s>SARAH SPARKS: It didn't - it certainly didn't really convince people on the other side that their single-sex programs were wrong, and it was a bit in an echo chamber of the folks who have been trying to get single-sex schools to be shut down. Certainly the ACLU has found it helpful.</s>SARAH SPARKS: The lead author, Diane Halpern, is one of the lead witnesses in the ACLU's cases on - against single-sex schools, most recently in Louisiana. But I think the - there's still most of all a concern about finding good research, finding programs that work.</s>SARAH SPARKS: It's not so much that I see a lot of schools that want to do this just for fun, they are searching desperately for things that will work, particularly with - right now, particularly with boys of color.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And yet they get criticism for looking for magic bullets. The answer, critics say, more resources, better teachers.</s>SARAH SPARKS: If there's one thing that both sides on this debate agree on, it's that the research really shows that the more you are able to pay attention to individual student differences, and the more you're able to tailor your interventions to meet those students needs, the better the students do. And whether that means the students being in a small group with others of their sex or being in a co-ed group, it seems to have more to do with what you're doing to the kids and with the kids than who they're with.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Has the suggestion from these scholars that the Department of Education close down this experiment with single-sex education, how has that been received?</s>SARAH SPARKS: I think it's come at a time when the budget is also making both the federal and a lot of local school districts ponder these programs again. There hasn't been a whole lot of strong research that they've been able to use to promote. So it really depends - it really is dependent on what school district you're in.</s>SARAH SPARKS: I know Wake County, in North Carolina sorry, has just voted to experiment with one of these programs, in part for some cost-savings and in part to try to get a good thing that they can study. By the same token, a lot of other school districts are canceling programs that had been in place because they can be more expensive.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: They can be more expensive.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Depending on how they're being implemented.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And some places have instituted academies, either for girls or boys, and some say the results have been outstanding.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Oh sure, particularly the - Chicago's urban charter for all-boys' school has had really wonderful results. And there's a lot of interest in studying why they have, whether that is related to the single-sex and the solidarity and motivation of the boys there or other instruction.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Sarah Sparks covers education research for Education Week. She's here with us in Studio 3A. When we come back from a short break, we're going to hear advocates from both sides. We also want to hear from teachers and students with experience of same-sex education. Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. The debate over single-sex education - it's gone on for a long time - resumed again last month when the journal Science published an article that strongly advocated against same-sex education. Our guest today is Sarah Sparks, a reporter with Education Week who covers education research.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Joining us now by phone is Renee Finke. She's a fifth grade teacher at Carmen Trails Elementary School in the suburbs of St. Louis, and she is with us - excuse me, not on the phone but from member station KWMU. Nice to have you with us today.</s>RENEE FINKE: Hello, nice to see you, or nice to meet you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much. And Nathan Blackmer joins us from the suburbs of Chicago, where he's principal of Lake Bluff Middle School in Illinois . Nice to have you with us.</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: Thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Renee Finke, let's start with you. You teach both same-sex classes, some of them, and co-ed classes. What's the difference, and how did this work out?</s>RENEE FINKE: Well, I teach an all-boys fifth grade class at my school. And since we switch for science in fifth grade, I also have the opportunity to teach science to the girls' class and to both mixed classes. It's a really unique experience for me.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And do you see advantages or disadvantages?</s>RENEE FINKE: I really see some advantages. This is my third year with single-sex teaching, and I've seen it with the boys more frequently, but I do see it with the girls too, especially in science. The girls with science, I see them trying new things that they would not necessarily try.</s>RENEE FINKE: An example, last year we made Connex(ph) cars for our motion and design unit, and at first the girls were very hesitant to try to build their cars. But once they realized there was no one else to do it for them, they really jumped in, and they built the cars and did a great job and were interested to do new things.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nathan Blackmer, what's your experience with same-sex education at the Lake Bluff Middle Schools in the Chicago suburbs?</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: Well, you know, we're somewhat limited in that we are a small school. We're 335 students in a middle school, grades five, six and seven - or six, seven and eight. And so we don't have single-sex classrooms, though on occasion we have some that are heavily weighted, mostly boys or mostly girls. So I have that point of comparison.</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: And I will say that that does present challenges for us. Frequently we've found that the boys tend to be perhaps less on-task in a situation where there are more predominately boys in the class, you know, less so when we see the majority of girls. But certainly if I'm going to be talking with a teacher about how to improve instruction in a classroom, one of those things that they often cite as a problem is the number of boys that were in a class.</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: So I haven't necessarily found it to be one that we would consciously want to set up. It just so happens we do that on occasion because of the structure of our schedule.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And as you, I'm sure, are aware of the debate, does arguments about brain science, does it sway you one way or the other?</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: You know, it does not, at least not of any of the research that I've seen thus far. The fact is, we're preparing students for - we're not preparing students for a single-sex working environment and life beyond school. So I do worry about isolating students and segregating them by gender, with the understanding that that's not the world we're preparing them for.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: One quick response from Renee Finke on that - the world they're going out to work in and live in, it's not segregated by sex.</s>RENEE FINKE: No, it's not, and we talk about that in our classroom. Although I have all boys for reading, writing, math and science, when I have them, they do do projects with the girls. We're with the girls in PE, and we're with the girls whenever we have a major grade-level project, and there's always that discussion.</s>RENEE FINKE: And my boys realize that this is not a single-sex world. They realize that they're mom's a girl. They have sisters. When they grow up, they'll be working with girls. And so they rise to that occasion, and they treat those girls just like they would treat each other.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, let's get some callers in on the conversation. Let's start with Ruth, and Ruth is with us from Woodlands in Texas.</s>RUTH: Hi, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Go ahead, please.</s>RUTH: Okay, I taught actually for several years in both a single-sex situation, and then I taught similar-type students of the same level in co-ed school, both of them middle school math. And I found that there was actually quite a difference in the participation of the girls in the classroom. And I think it's particularly true for kids at that age and with math and science.</s>RUTH: I mean, they were talking about science and the girls participating more with building the cars when the boys weren't there to do it for them, and I found that the girls tend to have more confidence and speak up in those types of classes more when they don't have the distraction and maybe the intimidation factor of having the boys with them in the classroom.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The intimidation factor, what do you mean by that?</s>RUTH: Well, I think what I mean by that is they - well, you know, we talked about - you mentioned the stereotypes that maybe are perpetuated in certain situations. I think a lot of the kids come to the classroom with some of those stereotypes from outside of school. And girls, although it's getting better, I definitely see with my own daughters in co-ed education that they're much more confident than girls perhaps when I was in school were in those subjects.</s>RUTH: But I think that a lot of times there are too many girls who come to it thinking that that is a masculine subject area, and they just are not as willing to speak their mind and to believe that they can be good at it when they have a lot of boys in the classroom who do believe that of themselves.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nathan Blackmer, I wonder if we could get a response from you. Has that been your experience when you have those weighted situations you were talking about?</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: You know, not necessarily. I guess my response to that comment would be: What would you do, even in a single-sex environment, where one of your female students is not taking risks and speaking up and contributing to class the way that you would want to do? What are those skills that you would use for that student, and why wouldn't that same skill be effective in a co-educational setting?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ruth, thanks very much for the call, we appreciate it.</s>RUTH: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's go next to - this is Daley(ph). Daley - I hope I'm pronouncing that correctly - is in Phoenix.</s>DALEY: Yes, that's correct. I'm a first-through-third-grade teacher, so six-to-nine-year-olds in a - hello?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yes, you're on the air, go ahead.</s>DALEY: Okay, in a Montessori environment, which is much more independent. The children get lessons at their own level rather than all first-graders or all second-graders. So I see - a lot of what I teach is the social and emotional development and problem-solving, not just with girls - because girls are good at problem-solving with other girls.</s>DALEY: It's when you have to teach them to problem-solve with other boys that I see, especially with my grade level, if they were segregated, I believe that they'd miss that developmental period.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I wonder, Sarah Sparks, is there any education research that suggests - and we have an email on this from Elizabeth(ph) in Fenton, Michigan - are there any differences in results by year? I attended an independent, non-religious K-12 school where the genders were separated in the middle school years. Couldn't say enough about how glad I was to have been spared a part of the social trauma of those years.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But as our caller Daley is talking about, very young children.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Yes, and there has been research both at the middle school level, where there's a big focus on whether to separate girls and boys for some of the math and science classes, as well as some of the early years. And in fact, one of the studies mentioned in this Science article was related to very early childhood.</s>SARAH SPARKS: The researchers found very similar things to what the caller is saying, that boys and girls who were separated in these very early childhood situations were more likely to end up with gender stereotypical views.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Now, this was with very young children. There's - I have not seen that replicated and whether those are prolonged results.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Renee Finke, you're teaching fifth grade. That's, I guess, halfway - you know, that's just the beginning of middle school.</s>RENEE FINKE: Yes, we're in an elementary school, but we are at the top of our elementary school.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So your experience very positive, you say, with the students. But the socialization aspect, that's an important part of going to school.</s>RENEE FINKE: It is, and with my boys in particular I have found that it's helpful for us to do very explicit teaching for problem-solving when an issue arises in the class. We really take the time to get those kids together and have them practice saying, you know, I didn't like it when this happened, and it made me feel - and having those boys, you know, teaching them how to express how they felt and then in the future could you please.</s>RENEE FINKE: And really breaking down those steps to problem-solving has helped my boys, and now I see them using that on their own without my help when they're working with each other.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Daley, thanks very much for the phone call, appreciate it.</s>DALEY: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nathan Blackmer, I wanted to ask you something about what Sarah Sparks mentioned earlier in the broadcast, and that is: Would it be more expensive in your school to institute same-sex education?</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: Yeah, yeah, it would be. That would go without saying. In order to segregate our students we would have to duplicate the academic classes that we're providing, and as a result we'd need a whole new set of teachers to do that. So yeah, it would be significantly more expensive.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I wanted to get back to that word, Sarah Sparks, segregation. This is an argument that was part of that study that was published, the article in Science, saying you may try to say it's apples and oranges to say that this is different from racial segregation, but they say no, it isn't.</s>SARAH SPARKS: Well, I mean that's - that's kind of the core of the debate going back for decades with regard to single-sex ed. I think that the people who are opponents of single-sex education argue that it is separate but unequal is - separate but equal is inherently unequal. And, in fact, the Department of Education, when they were allowing these, said that the education for students of both sexes in these programs have to be substantially equal. So even there, they were saying that there could be differences in how the classes are run. It just should be substantially equal and should have a compelling reason for the achievement of the students.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Renee Finke, is this something that you think about or that worries you?</s>RENEE FINKE: We've talked a lot at our school. And I think one of the reasons that it works is because it is a choice for our parents. At each group level that we offer single gender, we also have mix gender classes. And I think having that choice helps out. I think it's just another way for us to differentiate, to better meet our kids' needs. It may not be the best for everyone, but it's the best - good for some.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And that choice, Nathan Blackmer, some people have argued, look, in the past, people of means have always had this option to send their kids to a private school that was all girls or all boys. Now, this choice is only now becoming available to those who might want to take advantage of it in public schools.</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: Yes, I would say that in the area that I work in, there aren't a lot of offerings. We do have some private school settings that offer that. Though here in Chicago, (technical difficulty) of those. I guess it comes back, for me, to the point that parents who take an interest in putting their children in the best possible environment are also parents of students who tend to be those that are higher achieving. It would be curious to know would parents less involved in their child's academic career also be those that would consider this sort of option. So I don't know the answer to that question.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: It goes back, Sarah Sparks, chickens and eggs, are the parents who are more involved, are their kids doing better because their parents are more involved.</s>SARAH SPARKS: That's been a fundamental problem with the research to date, actually, is the selection problem. The parents who are participating in these programs do tend to be more involved. And there are other similarities with regard to the students who are participating in the programs.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Sarah Sparks, a reporter for Education Week. Also with us, Renee Finke, a teacher at Carman Trails Elementary School in St. Louis suburbs, and Nathan Blackmer, a principal at Lake Bluff Middle School in the Chicago suburbs. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. And let's go next to Weld(ph). And Weld's on the line from Philadelphia.</s>WELD: Hi, everybody. Great show. I attended an all-boys school from kindergarten through 12th grade. I had a wonderful experience. And I feel that having a single-sex environment has a very similar effect having school uniform, where it starts to strip away some of the things that can be a distraction in the environment and gives both the teachers and the students a little bit more opportunity to focus on school and why they're there. Because the socialization of having boys and girls together is worth discussing and the quality of teachers obviously matters, but all things being equal, I honestly believe that it gives students a little bit more opportunity to express him or herself as an individual and intellectual and less though as someone as part of a broad group where there is more pressure to conform.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Pressure to conform - well, that's not going to go away no matter how you change schools. I think that's a function of human nature.</s>WELD: Sure. Well, but I think you're right that conforming is important. There are different levels of it. And by removing sex from a classroom, it's a very strong reason to conform (unintelligible) taken out of the environment where it really doesn't have a place.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Renee Finke, fifth grade - the hormones, for the most part, have yet to flow. Are those distractions a factor in your school?</s>RENEE FINKE: They're starting to just because we're in fifth grade now. The boys and girls obviously notice each other, and we see them playing together at recess this year, where that didn't happen last year. But at the same time, when friend - when we're in our classroom, we're focused on the learning. I make a point for the boys to say, you know, ask every day why are we doing this, why are we learning this. And we try to figure out what's the point of this lesson, so they know why they're here, and it's to get an education to be ready for the next year and the year after that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Here's a retired science teacher Nisa(ph), emailing us: What needs to be recognized is the differences between boys' and girls' brain are not absolute. Many girls share the need for active hands-on learning. Many boys do better in cooperative settings. What happens to these individuals when they are arbitrarily assigned to a learning environment based on sex? And, Nathan Blackmer, that seems to be what your concern is?</s>NATHAN BLACKMER: Yeah, it is. You know, I still feel that these are formative years. And not only are we teaching academic subjects, we're teaching behavior. We're teaching how to interact with one another. And (technical difficulty) we're not giving our students (technical difficulty) that opportunity (technical difficulty) to learn, then (technical difficulty).</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, Nathan Blackmer, we're going to say thank you very much. We appreciate your time. We're obviously having difficulty with our connection there. But we get your point, and we thank you very much for your time. Nathan Blackmer is the principal at the Lake Bluff Middle School in the Chicago suburbs. He taught seventh grade science for seven years before that and joined us by phone from Lake Bluff, Illinois. And I think, Sarah Sparks, you mentioned one new study that's coming out - is there some idea of some comprehensive blind research that could establish some unarguable fact here?</s>SARAH SPARKS: Well, I think that as you look at the neuroscience part of it, the interesting researches in how plastic our brains are and how much change there can be over the course of a child's career, as well as even into adulthood, and one of the things that they're finding is the tiny differences that might be between infants of different sexes can be changed either to increase those differences or to...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Diminish them.</s>SARAH SPARKS: ...reduce them. And that all has to do with how the teaching goes, how the family structure goes, all of those different things. So that's where, I think, the really interesting research is going to come from.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We'll have to wait for that. Sarah Sparks, thank you very much for your time. And our thanks as well to Renee Finke, who joined us. She's a teacher at Carman Trails Elementary School in the St. Louis suburbs, with us from KWMU, our member station in St. Louis. We thank her for her time as well.</s>Up next: After Senator Marco Rubio is accused of embellishing his past, we'll talk about truth, lies and political biography. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. |
In his bookReinventing Fire, Amory Lovins lays out his blueprint for freeing society of its addiction to fossil fuels, by saving energy with more efficient vehicles, buildings and manufacturing plants, and producing it with renewable options like windmills and rooftop solar. | IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. Imagine you no longer have monthly utility bills. All that money you use to spend on gas and electricity, still in the bank. Instead you get a check every month for making electricity using your solar shingles on your roof and pumping that surplus electricity back into the grid.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Or imagine pulling into a gas station, but it no longer sells gasoline. Instead, you can top off your car with electricity, hydrogen, biofuels, whatever. To those of you who already have solar panels on your roofs or an electric car in the garage, this may not sound so far-fetched. For the rest of us, this is the future.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let's talk about the year 2050 as imagined by my next guest. He says we can quit using oil and coal to power our country by 2050 and not just for the health of the environment but for national security, creating jobs, and saving money, motivations that he says transcend politics.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: But is this really possible? Is it reasonable to expect politicians, automakers and big oil and coal to innovate and disrupt, quote, business as usual? How is all this stuff going to get done and save or create jobs? Those answers are all in my next guest's book, "Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era." Amory Lovins is author of this book. He is co-founder, chairman and chief scientist at Rocky Mountain Institute in Snowmass, Colorado. Welcome back to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Thank you, good to be back.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You have a bold plan here, and you always think boldly, Amory.</s>AMORY LOVINS: I always try, and this is a pretty ambitious effort because three-quarters of our staff have been at it for about a year and a half.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, sketch out the plan for us.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Yeah, well, first what we found is you can run a very prosperous U.S. economy, 2.6 times today, in 2050, with no oil, no coal, also no nuclear energy and a third less natural gas. It's $5 trillion cheaper in that present value than business as usual. The transition requires no new inventions, no acts of Congress, and it's led by business for profit.</s>AMORY LOVINS: And to get there, we took seriously some advice attributed to General Eisenhower, that if a problem cannot be solved, enlarge it until the bigger system boundary includes more options, energies, degrees of freedom, whose absence made it insoluble when you had too small a view of the problem.</s>AMORY LOVINS: So we integrated all four sectors that use energy, in which we've worked in equal depth, namely transportation, buildings, industry and electricity, and indeed did find that, for example, it's much easier to solve the automobile and electricity problems together than separately.</s>AMORY LOVINS: We also integrated four kinds of innovation, not just in technology and policy but also in design, the way technologies are combined, and in new business models and competitive strategies. And together, those give much more than the sum of the parts, especially in creating very disruptive business opportunities.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So there are job creations here, because you hear always the opponents of new energy, alternative energy, saying that they're going to lose jobs, or if we build green products, those jobs are going overseas. There was, you know, talk this week about some American solar panel makers complaining to the U.S. government that it was unfair trade practices, the Chinese dumping all these solar panels here below cost and that there should be tariffs on them. How do you get past those arguments?</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, you could just look at what's happening in much of the rest of the world. In Germany, for example, there's fuller employment now than there was before the Great Recession, and that is due in substantial part to the conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel's, I think, smart bet that it's a better deal to invest in your own engineers, installers and manufacturers than to keep, say, buying Russian gas, because then you get the jobs.</s>AMORY LOVINS: And similarly, the more we innovate in solar, wind power and the other world market winners, the more we will get the manufacturing jobs not just the installation jobs, which of course cannot be offshored because your roof isn't going anywhere.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Are you saying in your book, because it's subtitled "Bold Business Solutions," "Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era," that it's not difficult to convince businesses that this is a money maker for them?</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, that is our - the initial reaction that we're getting. The book only launches, actually, on October 27, next Thursday, and in fact we'll be officially releasing it at a free public event that day hosted by the National Geographic. So if you go to Amoray.org/natgeo, you can find out more and register.</s>AMORY LOVINS: But I've been giving a sneak preview, as I am with you today, to some business audiences recently, and they're very interested, particularly when they learn there's $5 trillion net on the table, not counting any externalities, positive or negative. We assume those are all worth zero, which is a conservatively low estimate.</s>AMORY LOVINS: And of course if we counted those hidden costs, the business case would get stronger, but businesses are interested in enhanced revenues, avoided risks and gains in competitive advantage, and our approach to all four sectors is very rich in those things.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: One of the - one of the scenarios that people envision is that public transportation will be modernized, streamlined, cars will run in tandem on highways, maybe buses and trains too. But that also means that you may be putting some people out of jobs, are you not, who might be driving those buses or riding – or those trains?</s>AMORY LOVINS: There would actually be more buses and trains. Our scenario does not depend heavily on transit, although it does count IT-enabled ways to enhance transit car-sharing, ride-sharing, and also ways to make traffic free-flowing, ways to charge for road infrastructure by the mile instead of the gallon, and ways to use lucrative real estate models - smart growth, new urbanism and so on - so people are already more where they want to be.</s>AMORY LOVINS: And by doing those things, you can actually reduce driving by a surprising 46 to 84 percent and get the same or better access, but at the root of our transport suggestions is radical efficiency in vehicles, and not just the usual tripled efficiency cars and trucks that are coming at us, excuse me, trucks and planes, rather, but also a revolution in how we design and build and run automobiles.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Two-thirds of the energy it takes to move an auto is caused by its weight, and every unit of energy you can save at the wheels by taking obesity out of the car - less weight, less drag - saves an additional six units that you don't need to waste getting it to the wheels. So you actually save seven units of fuel at the tank for each unit of energy reduction in what it takes to move the vehicle.</s>AMORY LOVINS: So we focus on some new manufacturing technologies now offered by eight companies for making cars out of ultra-light but ultra-safe materials, and it turns out when you make carbon-fiber cars properly and design them in a more integrative way, it costs the same as making a regular car - that is, the ultra-lighting is free because the propulsion system gets two or three times smaller, and the manufacturing is so greatly simplified that it needs only a fifth as much capital.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: But you're talking about the future, where cars may be cheaper. I mean, getting from here to there, the cars are still going to be more expensive at this point, will they not?</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, what the ultra-lighting does right away is make electrification much more affordable, and then you're harnessing three very steep learning curves: one in the carbon fiber, one in the manufacturing, another in the propulsion system itself, cheaper batteries and fuel cells and so on.</s>AMORY LOVINS: But first of all, you use fewer batteries and fuel cells, and indeed BMW has confirmed that in its carbon-fiber electrified car entering mass production in 2013, one of three cars in the next year or two entering mass production that are carbon-fiber electrified, they say the carbon fiber is paid for by needing fewer batteries.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Now, it is true, though, that as you suggest, the electric cars are initially more expensive, even though they have a good value proposition, say, to fleet buyers, and to cope with that we suggest a very effective innovative policy called a feebate. That means rebates for efficient new autos paid for by fees on inefficient ones. And we'd like to do it not just in a revenue-neutral way but separately for each size class so that you're rewarded for buying a more efficient car of the type and size that you want but not a smaller one than you want.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let me see how that would work. So somebody who drives a gas guzzler would pay some sort of tax, and you would get it to buy a more efficient car.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, this only applies to new car purchases, not to what you're driving now. So when you go to do the dealer to buy a vehicle of your choice, there are more and less efficient offerings. But the price spread between them is widened according to how efficient or inefficient each one is compared to a norm for that size, and it's trued up every year to keep it revenue-neutral. So the effect is that you will pay attention not just to the first year or two of fuel savings when you're making your purchasing decision, but to the first 15 years, the full life of the vehicle, and therefore, you'll make a choice that's more efficient for society.</s>AMORY LOVINS: There are actually five programs like this in European countries now, and the biggest one, just in its first two years, tripled the speed of improving auto efficiency. But that's even before the big effect of it kicks in, and that is that automakers will make very different offerings, so your choice as a customer will expand. You'll have a lot more efficient things to choose from.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: 1-800-989-8255. Let's go to Andre in Jenison, Michigan. Hi, Andre.</s>ANDRE: Hello.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Hi, there.</s>ANDRE: My question is, in the future, will there be triple-decker buses with, like, more than four wheels and, like, hexagonal frames designs?</s>AMORY LOVINS: I have no idea. A triple-decker is, I guess, can that fit underneath bridges and stuff would be a good question. And is it stable? But certainly, the double-deckers in London work just fine, and you see them in some American cities for tourism.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Mm-hmm. Let's talk a little bit about alternative energy generation, because I was, you know, as I follow this around the country, you see that wind energy - solar energy seems to be a local thing. You see stories of local towns, or there's now talk about putting wind generators off of Rhode Island, things like that. I was reading today a story in The New York Times this week about Texas. This was amazing. Texas is spending almost $7 billion to build power lines that will carry wind-generated electricity to other parts of the state, because they're the number one wind generating state.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Yeah. They were 8 percent wind-powered last year.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You don't get much - this doesn't get much of attention - much attention anywhere else, a lot of these little projects. And you get the idea no one's doing anything until you just dig down.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, until you start looking around the world and you realize it's not just certain states in the U.S. that are doing very well with this - Texas, one of the leaders, of course, because they want to make money. But, for example, in Portugal, in the last five years, they took their renewable electricity from 17 percent to 45 percent, while the U.S. went from nine to 10 percent. The last three years, the U.S. has actually declined from number one to number two to number three in clean-energy installations. So in this now $200 billion-a-year global market, growing tens of percent a year, we're tending to miss out. And these technologies we invented are increasingly made overseas - China being the leader in five of them, and intending to be in all.</s>AMORY LOVINS: So we risk, as Tom Friedman says, buying all the stuff we invented from China. The good news is it'll be cheaper than our tennis shoes. But it would be better to make it here. And I'm therefore dismayed that last year, congressional dithering the fifth time around cut U.S. wind power installations in half while Chinese wind installations, nearly half the total in the world, blew past their 2020 target, and they doubled their wind installations for about the fifth year running. These wounds are self-inflicted. But one of the interesting things we've found in looking at different electricity systems is that as we rebuild our dirty, insecure, obsolete-in-many-ways electricity system, which we have to do anyway over the next 40 years, it's going to cost about $6 trillion net present value, no matter what we build. So...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let me just interrupt to remind everybody that I'm Ira Flatow, and this is SCIENCE FRIDAY, from NPR.</s>AMORY LOVINS: So we're going to have to rebuild the electricity system, anyway, and we are rebuilding it day by day. But if we look at what we could rebuild, we could do business as usual. We could do a new nuclear and so-called clean coal scenario. We could do centralized renewables, distributed renewables. And surprisingly, these four scenarios differ only immaterially in cost, but they differ profoundly in risk. And that is what is often driving investors away from the big thermal plants whose orders are withering and into the renewables, which, excluding big hydro, got worldwide $151 billion of private capital last year, and they added 60 billion watts. In fact, that's the amount of solar power (technical difficulties) - the wind - the world will be able to make every year by the end of December this year.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Mm-hmm. What will those, you know, stories about, like, Solyndra do to the alternative energy efforts? People point to that, saying, see? We told you.</s>AMORY LOVINS: We'll it's a political distraction. But of course, what Congress told the Department of Energy to do was to take risks that the private sector would not take by itself. In this case, the private sector did invest over twice as much as the taxpayers did. And the taxpayers will probably get much or most of their money back. But the reason that this company failed - it's maybe 2 percent of DOE's portfolio - is a success. The company did everything it was supposed to. Meanwhile, China dropped the price even faster. And because of that rapidly declining solar price, which was the objective of the whole exercise, the more commodity Chinese solar panels were able to undercut the price of the more advanced American technology before they could get to scale. Well, we risk having that happen to us more and more if we don't have a level playing field and fair competition and access to the grid.</s>AMORY LOVINS: But it's interesting that, last year, those commodities, solar panels, got cheap enough that, in recent months, California's private utilities had bought over four billion watts of the stuff, because it beats power from a new gas plant. And in a dozen states now, four companies will be happy to put solar panels on your roof. With no money down, it beats your utility bill.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right. We'll come back and talk lots more with Amory Lovins, author of "Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era." Our number: 1-800-989-8255. You can tweet us @scifri, S-C-I-F-R-I, or join our Facebook discussion, facebook/scifri, or our website at sciencefriday.com. Stay with us. We'll be right back. I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY, from NPR.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You're listening to SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: We're talking with Amory Lovins, author of "Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era." Our number is 1-800-989-8255. Let's see if we can go to the phones. Kelly in San Francisco. Hi, Kelly.</s>KELLY: Hi, Ira. This is Kelly. I'm a big fan of your show. We just recently bought - San Francisco, fixed up our house, and last year got - my husband and I built it. And it's completely solar-power. There is no gas line going in. We're getting, actually, our money back from PG&E, who's our local electrical company, probably between $300 to $400. And we got so excited, we also went out and bought our electrical car, and we're still getting money back from PG&E. So it's just sweet.</s>KELLY: And I want to say that it's doable. It's just sad to hear all the bad news. But I do think we need some government support. That's how we got some nice government support on that regard for building our house efficient. We use whatever we could find in the market, making the house very efficient, getting the heating just right so we could actually power just solar, and we're just excited.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Wow. Are you...</s>KELLY: And I think it should be shared.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Are you off the grid, Kelly, or are you still on the grid?</s>KELLY: No, we're still on the grid. So at nighttime, when there is no solar energy, we use PG&E services. But we produce so much during the day, especially the high peak, that actually, we get money back still at the end of the month, each month. So we have money every month.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Yeah, we do the - we do exactly the same thing, Kelly. We use, in our house, solar in the daytime, wind power that we buy from our co-op at night. And we're a net exporter of electricity. And, also, our house is what's called islandable, which means it works with or without the grid. So when we have power failures up in the Rocky Mountains, we don't even know. We just keep going.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, thanks for calling, Kelly. Good luck to you.</s>KELLY: Thanks for taking my call.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You're welcome. What is the government's role here, Amory?</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, there are some temporary subsidies which are generally political pawns to renewables. What's seldom mentioned is that there are generally bigger permanent subsidies to fossil fuel and nuclear energy. And I would like, actually, to get rid of all of them, those subsidies, and let always to save or produce energy compete fairly at honest prices, regardless of their type, technology, size, location or ownership. That's pretty much the opposite of the energy policy we have.</s>AMORY LOVINS: There's a very important government role in allowing free competition and interconnection to the grid, so there's more of a level playing field, and that is done mostly by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. But utilities tend to be regulated at a state level, and there it's really important, in the 34 states that haven't done this reform yet, to reward our utilities for cutting our bills, not for selling us more energy, which rewards the opposite of what we want. The - but it turns out...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK. So let me just say this...</s>AMORY LOVINS: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You think if we let them all float freely, all the different energies - coal, oil, nuclear, solar, wind, whatever - that the alternative energies could compete effectively with the other ones.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Yes. And, in fact, in the long run, as the higher volumes manufactured cut the cost further through learning curves, we found that unsubsidized renewables can ultimately compete even with the nonrenewable sources that would continue to get, we assume, all of the subsidies they get now. The - and also, of course, when you buy renewables or efficiency, you're getting other kinds of risk reduction that save money.</s>AMORY LOVINS: For example, there's less financial risk in building small, fast, granular projects than big, slow, lumpy ones. And when you buy solar or wind power to replace gas power, you're avoiding the volatility of the gas price, which is worth over two bucks on the gas price. So you're actually getting more value than you expected by getting a free gas price hedge. So we also look a bit at what happens if we use this kind of financial economics that takes account of risk, because that's another way of finding the extra value in the renewables.</s>AMORY LOVINS: But the real surprising thing we found is that all of the innovative policies needed in each sector to realize this transition from oil and coal to efficiency renewables can be done administratively or at a state level. So policies are needed to unlock or speed the transition, but they don't require an act of Congress. So we're end-running Washington gridlock, and we're doing that by using the most effective institutions we have. Free enterprise, in its co-evolution with civil society and accelerated by military innovation, to end-run the ineffective institutions, notably Congress.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So what is the block in Congress against renewables? And what - when did green become so political? I mean, we have states like Texas, you know, producing all this - you can't get a more conservative state. We listen to the - the governor is running for president, yet they have incredible renewable sources of wind there. We had the secretary of the Navy come on here to talk about how the Navy is trying to become more - greener and trying to become more energy conservative to save the lives of Marines and other soldiers in Afghanistan. How does this - there's just sort of a - there's a disconnect here, it seems.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, there is actually a lot of bipartisan support in Congress and at the state level. Many of the states with renewable portfolio standards encouraging renewables are indeed red states. And I think what you're referring to is probably that some parts of the political establishment on both sides tend to view, say, solar tax credits, wind production tax credit and so on, as a convenient point of political argument and kind of a pawn on a larger political chessboard.</s>AMORY LOVINS: But I think on both sides of the spectrum people are really pretty fed up with gridlock and want to get stuff done, which is, of course, why we work mainly with the private sector. And it's therefore very good news that in "Reinventing Fire" we don't care whether you care most about jobs and profits and competitive advantage or about national security or about health and environmental stewardship, because whatever most motivates you, let's focus on the outcomes, not the motives. And we ought to do the same things, anyway, for whatever reason. And then the stuff we don't agree about tends to become superfluous.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You said we need to level the playing field with - in terms of foreign competitors. What do you mean by that? Does that mean tariffs on dumping of solar panels for example?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, I think it's too early to tell what the evidence in on that and it's gone into a trade dispute process, and it'll be resolved there. Many governments, including China's, including our own, support different forms of energy in different ways, and that's a pretty complex, slippery slope to get out to.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: What do you mean leveling the playing field?</s>AMORY LOVINS: Oh. Well, I was referring, for example, to allowing ways to save or produce energy to compete fairly and without undue obstacles. One of the interesting things in the case of Texas, you mentioned, actually came from Governor George W. Bush. His PUC chair, Pat Woods, put in a very nice rule that was kind of plug and play that says if the inverter attaching your solar system to the grid is on the approved list that it meets all of the technical and safety requirements, you can connect it and just start generating and sending power back to the grid without asking or even telling your utility, because you won't hurt the lineman. You won't burn down your house. Nothing more should be asked of you. And that is the kind of competition-promoting rule that I think we need a lot more of.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Talking with Amory Lovins, author of "Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era." Let's go out to Tom in the Bay Area in California. Hi, Tom.</s>TOM: Hi. You know, I'm not a flat Earth guy, so I get this whole idea about renewable energy and electric cars and stuff like that. But the problem is, is that in my opinion, all that stuff is still a science experiment. We're no more efficient today than what we were 50, 60 years ago for power and - for wind power and solar. I personally think nuclear is the only option for a sustainable, different shade of green power source. And the thing is, what are all these electric cars - we've got 50 million electric cars on the road, what are all these electric cars going to plug into?</s>TOM: They're going to plug into an anemic, weak grid that could barely hang on the way it is right now. We need to spend trillions of dollars a year in our infrastructure just to get where it can absorb all of the renewable energy, the - our efficiency stuff that we're trying to do with electric cars and stuff like that. And at the end of the day, the one thing that you're not going to see is an electric bulldozer or an electric tractor trailer. That will never happen. So it's always going to be (unintelligible) or diesel that's going to be out there. And, you know, that's just my personal opinion.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let me get - Amory, how do you react to that?</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, if you'd be kind enough to look at "Reinventing Fire," and the technical backup for that will go up on the 27th at reinventingfire.com, you'll find we've documented very carefully from the actual market prices, the very dramatic manifold drops in solar and wind price and increases in effectiveness in recent years. And that is why the solar business is growing 65 percent a year for the last decade. It is why wind power contracts are now being written as low as three cents a kilowatt hour, beating the wholesale price.</s>AMORY LOVINS: We did examine the nuclear option and found, as investors have found, that it simply has no business case. That's why neither new nuclear nor new coal plants are in the official U.S. forecast for what's going to be built. They simply don't pay anymore. Better technologies have come along that do the job cheaper, more reliably, more resiliently. And when we looked in particular at a distributed renewable future, we found it could resolve all of the technical, financial, security, climate and other risks of the existing grid a lot better, and not only be equally or more reliable but be much more resilient so that we wouldn't risk in the grid we now have, which I agree is not very secure, we wouldn't risk cascading and potentially nation-shattering blackouts from solar storms or terrorism or a national disaster; rather we would make major failures impossible by design.</s>AMORY LOVINS: So I think if you look at the evidence in reinventing fire, you'll find that the technology and deployment have moved on beyond what you think is out there, but you are absolutely right that we're unlikely to have electric trucks. Heavy trucks can be tripled efficiency. They will end up running on any mixture of advanced biofuels and hydrogen, or if you like, you can run them on natural gas, but they won't need oil.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR. Talking with Amory Lovins. Amory, I have about a minute left. Where do we start first here?</s>AMORY LOVINS: Well, I would suggest starting by really informing yourself about the very exciting business opportunities, new technologies, new designs, new policies, new business strategies that are coming at us thick and fast in oil, electricity, in buildings and industry, in every sector, because the energy use we have is the sum of millions of decisions we made. Now we have better ways to make smarter decisions to capture our piece, each of us, of that $5 trillion that's sitting on the table. And if we really do that...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You're saying renewable energy is really good big business now.</s>AMORY LOVINS: Absolutely. It's a $200 billion a year global business. We need to get our piece of it as we build for ourselves the core industries of the 21st century and efficiently use that new fire, can make energy do our work without working our undoing.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Thank you very much for joining us, Amory. Amory Lovins is author of "Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era." |
In cities like New York and Washington, D.C., Julia Vitullo-Martin complains, law enforcement and city planners have installed jersey barriers, concrete planters and other "ugly measures that evoke fear rather than safety." In her op-ed for USA Today she calls it "militarized urbanism." Read Julia Vitullo-Martin's piece in USA Today | NEAL CONAN, host: And now the opinion page. The architectural adaptation that distinguishes the American city post-9/11 is the proliferation of Jersey barriers, the unlovely concrete walls used to redirect traffic, block off streets and protect buildings, part of what Julia Vitullo-Martin described as militarized urbanism. In a recent op-ed in USA Today, she argued that while we want our cities to be safe, we don't want to sacrifice beauty, energy and street life in the process.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: How has your city changed since 9/11? Give us a call: 800-989-8255. Email: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation at our website. That's at npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION. You can find a link to her op-ed there too.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Julia Vitullo-Martin is director of Center for Urban Development at the Regional Planning Association. She joins us from our bureau in New York. Nice to have you today on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Thank you for having me.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And are we talking largely about a downtown phenomenon, where something might credibly present itself as a target?</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: We're frequently talking about downtown and central city phenomena, in the sense that those are the locations that are most likely to have the kind of large, attractive, iconic buildings that are thought to be the most ready and available objects of terrorism. But we aren't exclusively talking about downtowns. This phenomenon of militarized urbanism, which really refers to the tendency of all sorts of property owners - not just the federal government, but all sorts of public and private property owners - to try to secure their space, and sometimes space they don't own, through these militaristic devices like Jersey barriers, and bollards, and closing streets and closing off formerly public areas.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Bollards are those big concrete planters, basically, that are also used to protect buildings, presumably, from would-be car bombs.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: That's right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And those big planters, too, and chain-link fences. Here in Washington, D.C., for example, part of Pennsylvania Avenue, the part in front of the White House has been closed off.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: That's right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And some people would say, well, wait a minute, eliminating traffic from there, suddenly it's a pedestrian plaza.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Well, it is and isn't a pedestrian plaza. Pedestrians are frequently closed off, as well, from the White House. I mean, that's happened to me several times when I've been in Washington. And it's not just the White House and the Capitol that are subject to militarized urbanism - it's all sorts of neighborhoods in Washington and in other cities, almost any place that an important dignitary or, you know, would-be dignitary, goes to and secures some kind of police protection.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So architects, obviously, and city planners do have to take into account security. You quote in your piece a well-known architect says, we can never forget 9/11. It's going to be part of everything we do from now on.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: That's right. And even though my piece attacks militarized urbanism - and I think we all should be extremely wary of permitting further invasions of security into our cities - 9/11 did have the effect of getting architects and developers and owners to really think about how to secure their buildings when they're putting the buildings up in the first place. And how to make those buildings as safe as possible, so that ugly devices aren't needed afterwards.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And give us an example. We've been talking about chain-link fences and Jersey barriers as examples of things that are not very - a good response to this. But give us an example of something that did work.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Well, for example, the - what used to be called the Freedom Tower at Ground Zero on downtown New York, One World Trade Center, which is now nearing completion. That building was redesigned to make it as safe as possible. And some of the things that were done, such as increasing the width of the emergency staircases and changing the air distribution systems so that it would be much less vulnerable to attack, improve the building and make it safer and are very unobtrusive.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Now, on the other hand, there is a problem at One World Trade that I don't think has been solved yet, and that is that the NYPD insisted upon a concrete barrier of 185 feet at the base of the building, and that was to be covered with a very attractive glass, and that glass proved very difficult to manufacture. So the architect has to go back to the drawing board on that one. But the point is, the architect and the owner are thinking about these things now and not later.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Julia Vitullo-Martin, the author of "Militarized Urbanism Chokes U.S. Cities" in USA Today. We'd like to hear how 9/11 changed your city, especially your downtown. Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. We should also point out, in your piece you argued that, in fact, a lot of the predictions after 9/11 did not come true.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: That's right. After 9/11, many prominent commentators, maybe even most prominent commentators, urged people to leave cities and leave New York in particular, and also urged that we call a halt to the building of very large or iconic buildings because these would attract terrorism. And in fact, just the opposite has happened. Americans have poured into their cities, and we've seen increases in population in New York, in L.A., in Houston, in Chicago, and that's great. And of course, owners and developers have continued to build large buildings. One World Trade Center, when it's completed at 1,776 feet, will be the largest building in America.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And it will be pretty much rented out too.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: And it will be pretty much rented out. And by the way, it's a great comfort in all of this that, yes, it will be rented out, so the market is responding very well. And 30 percent of it is going to be rented to Conde Nast, and you know, the publisher of Vogue, et cetera. And Conde Nast was a very important force in rejuvenating Times Square, which is where it is right now. And more important to our subject, Conde Nast is going to be visited, as it always has been, by immensely important and probably rather touchy people who will expect to be very well treated. So that means that the owners and managers of One World Trade Center will have to be thinking right now about security that works and that is also unobtrusive and polite.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yet those are new buildings and, as you say, they can be designed with security in mind. There are things - if you own the World - the Empire State Building, obviously the other iconic skyscraper in Manhattan, you're going to have to do some things - can you retrofit your building?</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Well, you know, that's really an interesting question, and interesting that you bring up the Empire State Building. I was just in there yesterday. It is such a wonderful building. It's actually just as open to the public as it's ever been. So you know, you have to go through security to go to the upper floors, but you can walk to that magnificent lobby. You can go from one entrance to the next. And you know, to the naked eye, it looks like 9/11 never happened.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Julia Vitullo-Martin about militarized urbanism and the design of our centers and the proliferation of Jersey barriers to protect buildings and redirect traffic. What's happened in your city? 800-989-8255. Let's go to Mike. Mike's on the line from Ypsilanti in Michigan.</s>MIKE: Hello.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Go ahead, please.</s>MIKE: I'm wondering what you think about sousveillance and surveillance, closed circuit, as architecture and how you consider that possibly as architecture.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Well, we have a whole lot less surveillance in this country than they have in European cities and in Asian and Middle Eastern cities. So that's point number one. Point number two, surveillance in London, for example, I think has been quite a good thing because it has enabled them to put up new buildings and still give - for example, on the waterfront, on the Thames - and still give tremendous public access because their, what we think of in America as very aggressive use of CCTV and all sorts of surveillance technology, unobtrusive for the most part, that has allowed them to permit public access onto private property without being worried about increases in crime.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So you're talking about Canary Wharf, for example.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: You know, I wasn't talking about Canary Wharf. I was really talking about South Bank, but Canary Wharf is a very nice example as well. You know, you can walk all over Canary Wharf. Yeah.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Mike?</s>MIKE: Yes.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Does surveillance bother you?</s>MIKE: No. There's actually the new movement of what's called sousveillance which is open-source closed circuit. I'm picking my kids up. I apologize.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That's all right. You don't have to apologize for picking your kids up. We're all in favor of that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much for the call. We'll let you deal with your immediate situation there. Julia Vitullo-Martin is our guest, and she is director of the Center for Urban Innovation at the Regional Plan Association. She joins us from our bureau in New York on the opinion page this week. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION coming to you from NPR News. And let's see if we can get Daniel on the line. Daniel with us from Savannah.</s>DANIEL: Hi there. I'm calling (unintelligible) Savannah, Georgia. I spend half my time in Toronto and Tel Aviv. And obviously the buildings in Tel Aviv are under tremendous scrutiny in regards to security because of the nature of where it's located. But what I was shocked to find is the influx of security in Toronto, in Canada where I live.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And is there a way to repair it, do you think?</s>DANIEL: It's a really good question. In this post-9/11 world, I would have to say that it's going to take a long time. Time heals all wounds, I'd say, but the security phenomenon that has sort of taken over since 9/11, it'll be here for a while, I think.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Can I ask what you're talking about in particular? What is it that bothers you the most?</s>DANIEL: I really - it really bothers me, just shopping malls, going out, having to be around security guards all the time. That sort of thing is - can be aggravating, especially in Toronto. We're used to it more in Tel Aviv, as I'm sure you can appreciate.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this is concern for suicide vest explosions, that sort of thing?</s>DANIEL: Oh, in Tel Aviv, absolutely. The season of the suicide bomber happened - 9/11 happened amidst the season of suicide bomber, where security in Tel Aviv was stepped up, so...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Right. Daniel, thanks very much. This is a situation which is - the surveillance may do some of that, but uniformed security officers are going to be part of that for the foreseeable future. I think he's right.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Well, he's absolutely right. There are also things that - there are modifications in behavior that uniformed security officers can do to help us all. And, excuse me, and one is to - we really need security officers to be very well trained in dealing with the public and in being courteous.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: So, for example, at New York City Hall, Mayor Bloomberg, who had reopened City Hall Park to the public - you can walk through that again, anybody can walk through it, which is very nice, lovely park, Mayor Bloomberg has nonetheless left security on access to City Hall itself. But it is very polite and unobtrusive security, and the NYPD cops who man the kiosk are just as polite and as elegant as you could ask for from anyone, and I think especially in routine security that's really important.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Email from Jim Turner in Rocklin, California: I live in the Sacramento area. After 9/11, the road that led past the Folsom Dam was closed, resulting in the loss of miles of lakeside parks, closure of dozens of businesses that had no customers, and it has still not reopened. And let's see if we can get Caroline(ph) on the line. Caroline with us from Anchorage in Alaska.</s>CAROLINE: Yes. Good morning. In Alaska, it'd be almost impossible to build those kind of barricades. People are so independent. But I'm wondering if it's beginning to look in some cities like East Germany and in Russia. And a follow-up is real quick, the encouragement of people to move out of cities, did that drive land prices down and be a benefit for those who had the money to purchase?</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Well, to start with the last question, absolutely not. Land prices in New York have just skyrocketed since 2001. And that has also happened in LA, Chicago, Miami, Boston, London, Paris. So alas, no. Let me jump to Sacramento, though, for just one moment and the dam question, because that particular issue - maybe they were right to close the street, to close the road past the dam. But these decisions all need to be rethought and rethought often and the impulse on the part, especially, I think, of the federal government, is to close streets, close roads, close access, close public parks, and then never even consider the reopening of those, never considered the possibility that maybe circumstances have changed and something should be reopened. And I'm sorry. The - what was the other question on Alaska?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The question is whether - well, she said it would be unlikely to be able to put up barriers there because people are so independent-minded but...</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Yes, and good for independent Alaskans. That's really an important point. We have to fight for our cities, and our mayors have to fight for our cities. And it's very good to be independent and to question every single Jersey barrier that goes up in your neighborhood.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: I'd like to particularly point out Mayor Daly in Chicago, who, you know, he was the mayor of one of the most beautiful cities in America, and he made it even more beautiful, and there was no way he was going to let property owners, public or private, push him around and make his city ugly after 9/11, so he really fought hard to make sure that security measures were as unobtrusive and as good looking as possible, and that makes the difference.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Caroline, thanks very much for the call.</s>CAROLINE: You're very welcome. Excellent topic.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And, Julia Vitullo-Martin, thank you very much for your time today.</s>JULIA VITULLO-MARTIN: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Julia Vitullo-Martin joined us from our bureau in New York. There's a link to her piece "Militarized Urbanism Chokes U.S. cities" at our website. Go to npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. Tomorrow, the debate over single-sex classrooms picks up again. We'll talk with teachers. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. |
The U.S. is faces uncertainty during the government shutdown. Britain can't seem to agree on how to leave the EU. NPR's Melissa Block speaks with Sebastian Mallaby of the Council on Foreign Relations. | MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: This is a time of profound government dysfunction on both sides of the Atlantic. Here in the U.S., we've been mired for weeks now in the shutdown with Democrats and Republicans unable to agree on how to fund the government. In Britain, they're still tangled up in Brexit, unable to agree on how to extract themselves from the European Union. Sebastian Mallaby joins me from London to talk about the implications of both these stalemates in the U.S. and the U.K. He's a senior fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Sebastian Mallaby, welcome to the program.</s>SEBASTIAN MALLABY: Great to be with you, Melissa.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: When you think about the broader forces that are at play here, immigration is a big factor on both sides. Right here in the U.S., we've seen divisions over immigration and border security becoming the sticking point in funding the government. Where you are, in Britain, a lot of people who voted for Brexit, to leave the EU, said that the main reason that they voted that way was to gain control over their borders.</s>SEBASTIAN MALLABY: That's right. It was a combination of resentment of immigration and a vague sense that sovereignty had been diminished. And I guess both of those things apply to the U.S. And along with there is a sort of nostalgic nationalism. So take back control, the U.K. Brexit slogan, reminds me a little bit of make America great again - because again is that nostalgic we used to be great. We're not anymore. We want to get back to where we were.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: As I mentioned, you're talking with us from London. How much anxiety is there about what is going to happen? Because there doesn't seem to be a clear way out.</s>SEBASTIAN MALLABY: Yeah. There's a lot of anxiety. I think it relates both to the sort of substantive stakes - I mean, there's this sense that if Britain does crash out of the European Union without a deal at the end of March, that means that all kinds of things that one takes for granted - like the ability of aircraft to take off, the ability of medicines to come across the border without being stopped for customs checks - all those things are in question. People are starting to stockpile medication if they have a medical condition that, you know, they're worried they won't be able to get their drugs. And so there's that sort of anxiety.</s>SEBASTIAN MALLABY: And then I think it's compounded by the fact that this isn't just a political mess that, you know, you get through it. This is a once-in-a-generation decision to unhook yourself from a deep version of globalization - in other words, connections with the European neighbors.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: So much more fundamental about identity. I mean, here in the U.S. ultimately, presumably there will be an end to the shutdown. People will get backpay - at least, some of them will. But there, where you are in Britain, we're talking about a total transformation if this does go through.</s>SEBASTIAN MALLABY: Absolutely. I mean, you cross the Rubicon, you leave the European Union, you won't be allowed back in. One of the cartoons in the newspapers today which I think captured the sentiment shows this sort of annoyed cat owner saying to his cat, listen, if I let you out, don't tell me you want to get back in here in five minutes.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: (Laughter).</s>SEBASTIAN MALLABY: And I think that's very much the sentiment in Brussels - that they're sick and tired of dealing with the Brits who can't decide whether they want to leave, what terms they might want to leave on. And so once leave does happen - barring the outside possibility that it somehow gets derailed - it's going to be very difficult to imagine going back in.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: That's Sebastian Mallaby, senior fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations talking with us from London.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Sebastian, thank you so much.</s>SEBASTIAN MALLABY: Thank you, Melissa. |
Marc and Chris, the founders of Maniac Pumpkin Carvers, share tips on how to bring your pumpkin to the next level this Halloween. Their pumpkins, which go for between $150 - $400, rarely end up on stoops. You are more likely to find them in Tiffany's ads and in window displays. | IRA FLATOW, host: Up next, Flora Lichtman is here with our Video Pick of the Week.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Hi, Ira.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Seasonal?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Seasonal, less controversial than our last topic...</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: ...because this week's video pick is about pumpkins.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Pumpkins. How could you not like a pumpkin?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: I know.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: How could it be controversial, a pumpkin?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Well, I don't know if it can be controversial, but these actually are no ordinary pumpkins. This is not your sort of typical jack-o-lantern. We are talking jack-o-lantern 2.0, designer pumpkins, call them what you will. These are really fancy pumpkins. We went and talked to master carvers. Now, these two guys are living in - or they're working in Bushwick in Brooklyn. And in their basement they have 50 pumpkins. They're carving hundreds of pumpkins every fall, and they end up as real - as works of art.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah. And they gave you some hints about how to carve a pumpkin, what to do the right way?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Yes. So - OK. So there are a few things that we learned that I thought that kind of, you know, blew my pumpkin out of the water, a lot of things that I took for granted in carving.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Such as?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: For example, when you are taking - when you're scooping it out, don't carve off the stem. Why? Because apparently the stem is providing the pumpkin some nutrients. So if you actually carve that hole where you're going to scoop out the seeds and stuff from the back, your pumpkin will last longer. So they don't carve the stem.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Don't get rid of the stem, and don't pick it up by the stem so it breaks off, right?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Another tip. They said they see it all the time, people picking it up by the stem. Don't do that.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR, here with Flora Lichtman, our multimedia editor, talking about our new Video Pick of the Week. It's up on our website. Gorgeous pumpkin carving. It's artwork really.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: It really is art.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Science and art on this one.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: It really is science and art. I mean, there are portraits. They have a very spectacular Michael Jackson portrait on one of the pumpkins that you can check out on the video.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And they have (unintelligible) Michael Jackson. They have a special one related to the program.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: And if that's not enough, they even have a SCIENCE FRIDAY pumpkin for us...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: There you go.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: ...that they've carved on the spot. So let me give you some more tips...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: ...because, you know, people are getting ready.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yes. Absolutely. This is the season.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: So one thing that they do - they don't really carve through the pumpkin. They etch, actually, and they keep the pulp there. So they carve - first they sort of etch it out and it's going to be the photo negative, right, or the negative of this.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Mm-hmm.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: So where they go deeper, it will be brighter. And one thing that they do is they carve first and then scoop, and this is sort of another prolonging the lifespan. But this is my favorite tip. They - and this is one that you can do after you've carved the pumpkin.</s>MARC SORIA: There's little tricks that you can do to rejuvenate your pumpkin too. You know, sometimes if you're making a salad and you have some limp lettuce or something in the fridge, you can shock it in some ice water. You can do that with a pumpkin. If it's starting to look a little sad, you fill a big bucket or tub with water and ice and plunge the pumpkin in there. If you leave it in there for a few hours, it will really perk back up, and it's kind of awesome.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: That was Marc from Maniac Pumpkin Carvers. He's one of the founders, along with Chris. So I never knew that.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: No.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Not that, I mean, most people feel that strongly about keeping their pumpkins.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Right. What do they say, what kind of light - you know, people put candles in there. They put light bulbs. What's the best thing?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: This is truly a geek moment. They use candelabra CFLs. There's actually a wire coming out of the back of the pumpkin, and these gives them not only more light - but they've tried incandescents, and they said that when they put the incandescent in, it got really hot. And so it starts to smell like pumpkin pie, which was pleasant but the pumpkins would just dissolve after a few days.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Very Benji.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Very, very Benji.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Boy, that's a word that - in case new people aren't catching that, that's a word we've coined on SCIENCE FRIDAY for geek...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah. Much better than geek.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: ...at Benjamin Franklin.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yes. Right. Right.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Yes. So it's very Benji.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And so they gave you more hints? Any more hints?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Any more hints. One thing they do is they seal their pumpkins with Vaseline. I mean, this is really taking it to the next level.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: This is geek. This is pumpkin geek, serious geek stuff, man.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: And the reason that they - that this has become important to them is because these pumpkins aren't cheap. I mean, each pumpkin is a couple hundred bucks. And so they don't really end up on the stoop. Usually they're in advertisement. Tiffany's did an ad with a $3 million diamond in one of their pumpkins.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Whoa.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: I know.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I hope they took the seeds out.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: High/low, you know? It's very in. And they end up in Yankee Stadium and on album covers. So these are, you know, not your sort of typical thing, but I'm excited to go home and carve.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah. And if you want to see our Video Pick of the Week, you want to see how these pumpkins are carved and what to do to prepare it, to keep it fresh...</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Give it a bath.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Give it a bath?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Another tip.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You need to wash it, right?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Because it could get infected. Just like if you're doing surgery on anything, you want to clean it first.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: That's right. It's up there on our website, @sciencefriday.com. You guys laugh now...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...but you'll laugh even more when you see this video...</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Yeah. That's right.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...at SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: The laughing has just began.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And it's funny, but it's also very geek and very - and it's so gorgeous. The artistry in this is amazing.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: No. I mean, we should say, I - when I saw this, I was blown away. I definitely wasn't - I think what they do is really amazing. These guys are professional illustrators who basically turn their time - turn their medium to pumpkin when October rolls around, and they do this mostly because they want to have an artistic project. It doesn't sound like they're, you know, making huge bucks.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And the photo - if you're on Facebook, the scifri Facebook page, you can also see the photo up there of the pumpkin, and a special added photo of yours truly in the pumpkin coming up on the website.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Thank you, Flora.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Thanks, Ira.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Flora Lichtman, our Video Pick of the Week. |
Kenyan officials blame the Shabab militant group, which allied itself with al-Qaida, for a recent spate of kidnappings in Kenya. The government in Nairobi suggested troops might pursue targets up to 100 miles inside Somalia. Shabab promised on Monday to attack Kenya's capital city in retaliation. Jeffrey Gettleman, East Africa bureau chief, New York Times | NEAL CONAN, host: As of last weekend, Kenya became the latest African nation to send troops into Somalia. Hundreds of Kenyan soldiers crossed into the drought and famine-stricken country with helicopters and tanks. The avowed goal is to push al-Shabab militants away from the frontier, but some Kenyan officials suggest their troops may push deep inside Somalia. On Monday, Shabab vowed to attack Kenya's capital city in retaliation.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: New York Times East Africa bureau chief Jeffrey Gettleman joins us from his home in Nairobi. Nice to have you with us again.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: No problem.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And how far have Kenyan troops pushed into Somalia thus far?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: About 50 miles. But there's a lot of concern in Kenya that Kenyans are going to get drag into this ugly war inside Somalia, and that one of the repercussions could be terrorist attacks in return in Kenya. And there's a real kind of sense of gloom right now in Nairobi with people talking about staying away from shopping malls and populated areas because there's just this, you know, growing fear that the Shabab could attack here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The Shabab, of course, al-Qaida's franchise now in Somalia, who demonstrated the capacity to attack outside the country when they launched an attack in Uganda last year.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: That's right. And a lot of people think Kenya's playing with fire, here. The Shabab are a problem inside Somalia. They have blocked Western aid groups at a time of famine. They have instituted a brand of Islam that's incredibly harsh. They've stoned women to death. They've chopped off hands. They've banned the soccer, music, even bras. So there's not a lot of fans of the Shabab here in Kenya, but they haven't really affected life in Kenya yet. There's been a few kidnappings along the Kenya and Somali border. The Kenyan government immediately blamed it on the Shabab, but most people don't think it was the Shabab. They think it was, maybe, a Somali pirate gang that was doing this.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And that included the French woman who died, I guess, just earlier this week.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: That's right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: As these go on, we've heard about the cautious reaction there in Nairobi. What about in Somalia?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Well, it's interesting. There's a deep history here. Part of Kenya is ethnic Somali. The northeastern part of Kenya is populated predominantly by Somalis. So there's always been this long-standing tension between Kenya and Somalia about whether this part of Kenya should actually be part of Somalia. So right now, inside Somalia, many Somalis are very worried. They see the Kenya troops coming into their country, and they're suspicious that maybe Kenya has designs on other parts of Somalia, and that this is part of a grander scheme to seize Somali-speaking territory.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And there was a war some years ago, as some Somali irredentists try to liberate that Somali-dominated part of Kenya.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: That's right. In the '60s, part of the Somali government's policy was to try to free up all the Somali-speaking areas in East Africa. There's the Ogaden Desert in Ethiopia. There's Djibouti, and then there was this part of Kenya. So the Somali government sponsored rebels to stir up trouble and to fight the governments in these areas, and it didn't really work. But those feelings have never died. The Somali nation is a very homogenous group of people. They speak the same language, have the same culture, same religion. It's divided into clans, but it's a group of people with a strong sense of nation, even though that sounds kind of hard to believe with all Somali's problems on display. So those feelings are strong, and I think it's just not clear where this is going to go.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: And to add, in 2006, the Ethiopian military stormed into Somalia to fight an Islamic movement. And they stayed for three years, lost hundreds of men. And Ethiopia is a country with an enormous military that's fought several wars in the region. Kenya has not been involved in a serious conflict since the '60s.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And its army is not regarded as among the best in East Africa, which is not saying a lot. And it - why, then, is Kenya, as you suggest, playing with fire?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Well, I think they really felt like they had to do something in response to these kidnappings. The, you know, whether it was the Shabab or not, I think the Kenyan government felt like they were getting humiliated by these kidnappings inside Kenya, and the Shabab is a threat to Kenya. They're right along the border. They've shown that they can do suicide attacks, like in Uganda. They have destabilized this whole part of Africa. So the Kenyan government made this calculated decision that we can go in there. We can push them back from the border. Maybe we can even help take them out.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: But the problem is, when Ethiopians tried this a few years ago, yes, they took out this Islamic group that was in control Mogadishu, but what that created was the Shabab, which was more brutal and ruthless and dangerous than the previous Islamic administration. So the worry is, yes, maybe the Shabab are going to be defeated in the next few weeks, but they're just going to go underground and something else is going to pop up.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Jeffrey Gettleman, East Africa correspondent for The New York Times. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There is also the United States, which has been taking attacks at al-Shabab leaders and al-Qaida leaders in Somalia, drone attacks for the most part. The Kenyan military is trained and, to some degree, supported by, not just the United States, but Britain. Is there some suspicion that they are working hand-in-glove?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Well, that's what we originally thought. We thought there's no way the Kenyan military could have sent all this firepower into Somalia without the American government at least knowing about it, and for all we know, maybe the American government was even helping them covertly. But the information that we've been given in the last couple of days from a number of independent sources is that the American government was taken by surprise and that they probably wouldn't have approved this operation.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Now, that may be hard to believe. There's a huge embassy in Nairobi. There are hundreds of American diplomats here. It's a big operation. They've cooperated with the Kenyans before. So we're not exactly sure, you know, what the Americans knew, but we've been told by several different American officials that they didn't know about this operation. The Somali government didn't know about this operation, and it appears to be something that Kenya did on its own.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: As you said just a moment ago, the Somali government, the Transitional National Council now, it does not control a lot of Somalia. It doesn't control a lot of Mogadishu, in fact, just a few blocks, really. There are African Union peacekeeping troops there that sustain its authority in that very small area. But they weren't told, either?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: They say they weren't told, and they even have some spokespeople going on TV on Monday night after it was very clear that Kenyan troops were inside Somalia. And the Somali officials were saying, no, we insist that they're not. They're just along the border. But here's the thing. It gets a little complicated, but Kenya has been working with these militias, clan-based militias, along the Kenya-Somali border. They are allied with the transitional government in Mogadishu, but just barely. What unites all these groups is an antipathy toward the Shabab. That's about it. So Kenya has been sort of meddling in Somalia over the last a couple of years, not sending in their own troops, but arming these proxy militias. And I don't think the government in Mogadishu like that at all.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: So it makes sense that Kenya may have told their local proxies they were planning this operation, but not told the government in Mogadishu. And like you said, this government is really a government in name only. They control very little territory, and they only control that because of African Union peacekeepers who are helping them.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You reported in the paper that military movements in the region have been bogged down by rains. On the other hand, of course, rains are, I'm sure, a blessed relief. This is a drought-stricken area. How is this going to play into efforts to bring aid to people in southern Somalia who are suffering famine?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Well, my feeling is, in the short term, it's not going to help at all. Whenever you have a conflict, you displace people, which makes them even more vulnerable. You're pushing very poor, malnourished people to then leave their homes suddenly and run away from the conflict. That's not going to help the situation. And then if the conflict is sustained in some of these famine areas, aid workers aren't going to be able to go in there. They can't, you know, just kind of, you know, slip through the warring parties in the middle a firefight. That's not going to happen.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: But maybe in the long term, if the Shabab are uprooted, aids groups will be able to work in these areas, because part of the Shabab's policy has been - they're so anti-Western. They won't even let Western aid groups bring food to starving people at a time of famine.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There's another point that one of the people you interviewed made, and that is that even though Shabab is widely unpopular, maybe young Somalis will now join this organization as the way to defend their territory against an invader.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Well - and this goes back to what I was saying about Somali nationalism. It's still there, even though Somalia is one of the most failed states in modern times. It hasn't had a government for 20 years. There's no signs in horizon that there's going to be a stable government anytime soon.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Somalis feel very strongly about being occupied by other countries, by being interfered with by other countries. So the worry is that this - that the Shabab were kind of getting weak over the last few months. They had pulled out of Mogadishu. Their areas were struck by famine, which means that a lot of people didn't have the resources for the Shabab to tax, and they were a dying force, and that this could be, you know - the Kenyans going in could be a real injection for them. It could be a recruiting bone for them. I don't know if that's going to happen, but a lot of people were telling us that, in Mogadishu, that there's a possibility this could play straight into Shabab hands.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Jeffrey Gettleman, thanks very much for your time.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Glad to help.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Jeffrey Gettleman, East Africa bureau chief for the New York Times, with us from his home in Nairobi. Stay tuned to NPR News for the latest developments out of Libya after the death of Moammar Gadhafi. This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan, in Washington. |
As the partial government shutdown drags on, more people, organizations and entire state governments are feeling the pain. The trickle-down in places like Texas blossoms as the shutdown continues. | MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: With both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Trump seemingly locked into their positions on the government shutdown, state leaders are increasingly grappling with the shutdown's impact. NPR's Wade Goodwyn reports now on the shutdown's trickle-down effect on Texas.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: It's probably not the first thing that pops into one's mind when asked to name a couple of the biggest impacts the shutdown has on the economy. You might think airline travel or the national park system. But one of the biggest economic effects has to do with information, research that the federal government produces monthly or quarterly.</s>PATRICK JANKOWSKI: My biggest concern right now is that with the - so many federal agencies shut down, we're not getting the data we need to understand what's going on with the economy.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: Patrick Jankowski is the senior vice president of research at the Greater Houston Partnership and the chief economist for the fourth largest city in the country.</s>PATRICK JANKOWSKI: If you're trying to make hiring decisions and you want to find out whether the economy is expanding, contracting or what rate it is expanding, you need the regular reports to understand that.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: The impact of the shutdown on the economy radiates out from the absence of federal employees. For example, more than $200 billion a year in trade moves through Texas seaports. But without the review of important paperwork by the Coast Guard - for example, the required certificates of financial responsibility - that ship's not coming into U.S. waters.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: Switch gears. Texas has a hundred billion-dollar-a-year agriculture sector. Right now is the time when farmers decide what crops and how much of each crop to plant. Luis Ribera is a professor and agricultural economist at Texas A&M University.</s>LUIS RIBERA: The different agencies in USDA - they collect a lot if information, which - we use it to analyze and forecast. They're very reliable. They're unbiased.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: Ribera says it says if farmers are now playing poker blindfolded. They're going to have to make their bets, but they have to guess what cards they're holding. Take soybeans, for example. Texas is the largest producer, and soybean farmers want and need to know how much China's been buying or not buying.</s>LUIS RIBERA: Usually, the Foreign Agricultural Service data comes about two months behind, so we should've gotten information by the first week in January. Well, we didn't. So we really don't know. By October, we were down by quite a bit. But now, we have a truce, and we wanted to see how much more soybeans we're sending. And, of course, that's going to impact the price of the products, not only soybeans, all different products.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: The oil and gas industry in Texas remains sound. Projects under review have been slowed. But, with the cost of a barrel of oil in the low 50s, producers are making money. With both American and Southwest Airlines based in Dallas-Fort Worth, the state is host to two powerhouse carriers. And analysts agree the industry's weak point in relation to the shutdown is TSA airport security. It's one of the lowest-paying federal agencies, and a second missed paycheck is certain. Joseph DeNardi is the airline's analyst for Stifel Financial.</s>JOSEPH DENARDI: Yeah. I'm sure, at some point, you can't expect people to show up for work if they're not being paid. That would be the biggest risk, that, at some point, you have staffing challenges at some of the agencies that directly affect customers' ability to fly. I don't think we're seeing any of that yet.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: Delta announced it would lose $25 million in revenue in January. The industry is expected to have another excellent year. Maybe it will. Maybe it won't. The length of the shutdown could decide.</s>WADE GOODWYN, BYLINE: Wade Goodwyn, NPR News, Dallas. |
Thousands of IRS workers have been called back to work without pay. NPR's Melissa Block speaks with Danny Werfel, acting IRS commissioner during the 2013 shutdown, about a shutdown's effect on operations. | MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: As the longest government shutdown in history drags on, it's affecting Americans in all sorts of ways. And one question is, how will it affect this tax season? Under a new contingency plan, the IRS has decided to call back about 57 percent of its workers, who have been furloughed. They'll help process tax returns when filing season starts at the end of this month, but they'll be working without pay. Well, my next guest, Danny Werfel, was the acting IRS commissioner during a government shutdown in October of 2013.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Welcome to the program.</s>DANNY WERFEL: Good to be with you, Melissa.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: If the IRS is calling back about 60 percent of its workers, won't things slow down? Will people have to wait longer if they're getting a tax refund?</s>DANNY WERFEL: I think that's certainly a risk or a possibility because the IRS workforce has not been in seat doing all the things necessary to get ready for such a large event. And with a lot of complex logistics as tax filing season, yeah, I think there's certainly risk. At the same time, having worked with them before, the IRS workforce is an impressive group. And I would not be surprised if they're able to effectively mitigate some of those issues and minimize some of those disruptions. But I would be surprised if there aren't disruptions.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: We also have a new tax law in effect. There are going to be a bunch of changes in the tax code. A lot of people are going to have questions, and it doesn't look like they'll be able to get much assistance by phone. The walk-in centers are going to be closed, too.</s>DANNY WERFEL: Yeah. I mean, that's something that the IRS leadership will look at as the situation evolves in terms of what are the things that are going to absolutely stay closed as they're running through tax filing season and what they're going to potentially trigger and reopen. But, as a general principle, the IRS workers will be working to process refunds, be it taxpayer services, walk-in centers, the call centers. There'll likely be a much lower level of service than during a normal filing season.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: And what about for the workers, the IRS workers, who'll be working without pay? What does that do to morale? You had to deal with this when you were the acting commissioner.</s>DANNY WERFEL: Well, I used to have this saying - you know, when you're at the IRS, we're unpopular because we're the tax collector. And so - and we're going to take a lot of criticism. But that's in the brochure. You kind of sign up for that, and you wear that with a badge of honor. But working without pay is not in the brochure. And that's something that's really difficult to get people motivated on.</s>DANNY WERFEL: But I think what you do is you remind people of how important the tax system is to the functioning of government and that if they're not there to do it, then the country will ultimately suffer for it. It's a really important organization with a really important mission. But I don't know that there's a way to fully deal with the morale issues of people that are losing a paycheck unjustifiably.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: That's Danny Werfel. He was the acting IRS commissioner during the last government shutdown in 2013. He's now a partner with Boston Consulting Group.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Mr. Werfel, thanks so much.</s>DANNY WERFEL: Thank you, Melissa. |
Every high school chemist has no doubt fiddled with a Bunsen burner—but where did the apparatus get its name? Science historian Howard Markel talks about the German chemist Robert Bunsen, and why his experiments necessitated the invention of the gas burner still in use today. | UNIDENTIFIED MAN: The alphabet has only 26 letters. With these 26 magic symbols, however, millions of words are written every day.</s>FLATOW: Ah, that music means it's time for our monthly episode of Science Diction, where we talk about the origin of scientific words with Howard Markel, professor of history of medicine, University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Welcome, Howard.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Hi, Ira. How are you?</s>FLATOW: What word do we have today?</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Well, it's a great one. It's the Bunsen burner.</s>FLATOW: Oh, the Bunsen burner.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: And we all know what it is. It's the iconic symbol of high school chemistry. But how many people know who Bunsen was?</s>FLATOW: You're right.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: And he was a brilliant chemist, Robert Bunsen was his name. And he was a graduate of the University of Gottingen where his father was the chief librarian. But he actually created with some laboratory assistants the Bunsen burner or the gas burner in 1855. Now, chemistry - these chemists have arguing for years over who deserves the credit. Bunsen and a colleague named Henry Roscoe actually wrote it up in 1857.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: But, you know, there were prototypical gas burners even before that, from the 1820s on. But those earlier forms used to produce diffuse and flickering light, and they also would - they were very flammable, no pun intended, and if you didn't put a metal wire over - a mesh, the flames would get all over the place, but that introduced artifactual colors and soot and all other things like that.</s>FLATOW: Mm-hmm. And was it really basically the same one we have today? No...</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Pretty much. I mean, there's been a few, you know, tweaks here and there. But, you know, it's kind of neat. You know, all great laboratory equipment is the result of doing experiments. And Bunsen and his colleagues were trying to look at the spectral analysis of elements and compounds. They had a theory that each compound or element had a fingerprint if you lit it, if you burned it. And you could measure that through a prism.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: So that was really novel, but they didn't have a good source of heat to do that. These earlier flames would just be, you know, not sufficient. And they figured this out one day when they - I'm sure you remember doing this in eighth grade - they burned a piece of magnesium. You remember that?</s>FLATOW: Oh, yeah. Pretty hot.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: I can still see that bright light, that bright white light. And then they said, well, maybe other compounds have this as well. So they needed the right type of heat source. And you know, the great unsung heroes of science, I think, are the apparatus beakers, you know, before there, you know, Erlenmeyer flasks. Someone had to blow those and make them. And the same thing with the Bunsen burner was a very neat guy named Peter Desaga. And this - he toyed with the length of the tube and the width of the tube so that created a colorless, sootless flame. It was very hot. It didn't flicker, and it didn't need that wire mesh, so it didn't introduce any artifactual colors.</s>FLATOW: And there you have it. Thank you, Howard.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Thanks a lot, Ira.</s>FLATOW: Always a pleasure. Howard Markel, professor of the history of medicine, University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, also director of the Center for the History of Medicine there. |
In a new book writer Debbie Nathan digs into archived material documenting the experiences of a patient known as "Sybil," who reportedly suffered from multiple personality disorder. Ira Flatow and guests discuss MPD, and its modern equivalent—dissociative identity disorder. Debbie Nathan, author: "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind The Famous Multiple Personality Case" (Free Press, 2011), New York, N.Y. Paul McHugh, University distinguished service professor of psychiatry, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. Bethany Brand, professor of psychology, Towson University, Towson, Md. | IRA FLATOW, host: Up next, a look back at a famous case of multiple personality disorder. In the 1970s, you might remember that sensational story of Sybil, captured the attention of millions of Americans. First it was a book and then a TV movie and then - remember that two-part miniseries, which was supposedly based on a true story? Sally Field played Sybil, a girl who suffered terrible abuse at the hands of her mother.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And to cope with the trauma, she developed multiple personalities - as many as 16. And after the book and the movie came out, the diagnosis of multiple personality disorder, well, you can guess it skyrocketed in the U.S, from less to 100 to thousands.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: But was Sybil's story really true? A new book, "Sybil Exposed," suggests that Sybil, whose real name was Shirley, pretended - she pretended to have multiple personalities, in part to please her therapist. Joining me now to talk more about it is Debbie Nathan, the author of "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case." She joins us here in New York, at our studios. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Hi.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: This is an amazing story. Tell us first about the book and the movie "Sybil," for those youngins' out there who didn't see it.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Sybil was supposedly a young woman who as a small child, had been horribly, sadistically, violently sexually abused by her psychotic mother. And that mistreatment had caused her consciousness to split into many different personalities to hold the trauma, so that she wouldn't be aware of it.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: She was unable to function, though, in a day-to-day way. She had all kinds of neurotic symptoms, and she went to a psychoanalyst, and the psychoanalyst was skillful enough to uncover the secret and spent many years thereafter trying to figure out what, exactly, had happened to her.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: So the book is kind of a whodunit, you know, of trauma. And finally, the mother's abuse is uncovered as the personalities start to reveal. And the young woman reintegrates all the personalities and becomes a happy, functional person again. So it's a very heroic story.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Now your book, "Sybil Exposed," tells a whole different story about what happened.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: It does, yes, because "Sybil" was marketed as nonfiction, which I think was about 99 percent of its appeal. It started a craze in this country, sold millions of copies within a few years, started that huge increase in cases that you mentioned. But I spent a long time in an archive in New York City that includes thousands of pages of Sybil's therapy records, and the records of the doctor and the journalist working on the book. And what I found was that the story is sort of a mishmash of fantasy, of lies, of confabulations, of confusion; certainly, should be called fiction rather than nonfiction; and that in fact, it was the - a very suggestible patient and a very demanding doctor who essentially, demanded the behavior from the patient.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Some people have called the story, after reading your book, a fraud. Would that be going too far to say that Sybil was a fraud?</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: No, I think a more helpful way to think about this is that Sybil herself surely was an extremely fantasy-prone child, very highly hypnotizable, went into trances probably spontaneously, very emotionally needy so that if she picked up on the idea that the psychiatrist wanted multiple personalities, I don't think she was always conscious at all of producing them. In fact, they produced a lot of pain and sickness in her. The psychiatrist, I don't think, was aware of how suggestible the patient was, and how bad the therapy was. The journalist had her own problems. She sometimes wanted to believe these enchanting stories, sometimes realized that they weren't true but couldn't go back because she was already halfway through the book. So a fraud? I don't - they didn't set out to perpetrate a fraud.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: It's just a perfect storm of all those situations...</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: That's exactly right.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...coming together. We're talking with Debbie Nathan, author of "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case." Our number, 1-800-989-8255 if you'd like to talk about "Sybil," or you'd like to talk about multiple personality disorders.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You can also tweet us @scifri, @-S-C-I-F-R-I. You can go to our website at sciencefriday.com and join the discussion there. We're going to take a short break. When we come back, we'll talk more with Debbie Nathan, author of "Sybil Exposed"; take your calls and your tweets. Stay with us. We'll be right back after this break.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. We're talking with Debbie Nathan, author of "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case." Our number, 1-800-989-8255. Debbie, let's talk a little bit about the doctor involved here, Connie Wilbur.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Connie, before she was a psychiatrist, was a chemist, and she came from a family of inventors. When she became a psychiatrist in the '30s and the '40s, she was very into - extreme sort of physical interventions. She got involved early on in chemical shock, electroshock of mentally ill people, procedures that were later shown to be very unscientific.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: She did some of the first lobotomies, and she also began injecting people that she called hysterics with intravenous barbiturates, to try to get them to talk about things they couldn't talk about. She did not understand when she did this that these kinds of drugs can make people fantasize like crazy.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: She also discovered a very early interest in multiple personality disorder. She became interested it in the '30s and the '40s, when very few psychiatrists were interested anymore.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Didn't Sybil come to her and say to her - according to your book - I'm making all of this up?</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: She came to her after she'd been in therapy for the second time for about three years. She'd been getting sicker and sicker. She was addicted to some of the drugs that she was being given, and she wasn't getting any better. She seemed to be getting worse.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: So she did write a very long letter and bring it to the psychiatrist - to Dr. Wilbur - saying: I made this up. I don't have multiple personalities. My mother never abused me. I want to really do real therapy. Please help me. Let's really start talking about the truth.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And what happened after that?</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: And the doctor used the rationale - which was so common at the time - the psychoanalytic word: resistance. She said, you just don't want to go further and deeper into the therapy. You're resisting your real problems. And the message was: Get with the program, or I'm not going to treat you anymore.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: And Sybil, or Shirley, was extremely dependent upon Dr. Wilbur by then and really couldn't give her up, and so she re-recanted.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And what about the writer who wrote the book? Was she in on - at this time, and knew about the holes in the theory?</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Well, she got involved with the writing in the mid-'60s, and her mistake was that she spent about five years writing before she started fact-checking. When she started fact-checking - for example, going to the town where Shirley was from, finding the recantation letters - she was very upset. She couldn't find any evidence of abusive activity by the mom in the town.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: So - but, you know, that was five years after she started working on the book, and she had a contract by then, and she had an advance by then. It was almost like trying to - she couldn't turn the Titanic around.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah, I understand. Our number, 1-800-989-8255; talking with Debbie Nathan, author of "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case." She's right here with us in New York. And Sybil's story made multiple personality disorder a household name. Did it also change the way therapists treat patients?</s>The disease now goes by another name: dissociative identity disorder, DID. But some mental health-care professionals argue it's time to do away with the idea of multiple personalities. Joining me now to talk more about it are Paul McHugh, he is University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore; he joins us from WYPR in Baltimore. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Good afternoon.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Good afternoon. Bethany Brand is a professor of psychology at Towson University. She joins us from WTMD in Towson. Thank you for being with us today.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Thank you, Ira, I'm pleased to be here.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Dr. Brand, you treat patients with dissociative identity disorder. What do you think of this, that the case of Sybil was something perhaps more fraudulent than we were led to believe?</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: I actually do treatment and research on dissociative disorders. What I think about it is that case studies such as "Sybil" are really interesting to read. They grab the public's attention. But neither this book nor the original book have any bearing whatsoever on science.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: They're media portrayals. No single person's story, even if it's accurately portrayed in a popular press book, generalizes to a whole group of patients. So even if Sybil was a factitional case or a malinger case or something in between, whether it was genuine DID or not, it doesn't tell us about all the - whole group of patients who have dissociative disorders, nor does it actually inform us at all about what is being done in treatment today.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: We would never see, for example, the kind of dual relationship that seems to have occurred between Dr. Wilbur and Sybil - or, you know, that was her book name. And being in that kind of dual relationship - where they had a personal relationship, and they were out, you know, making a movie and a book together - that alters the course of treatment.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: So her outcome does not at all generalize to the outcomes that can be obtained and empirically, that we show are obtainable if somebody has a well-trained therapist using currently empirically supported treatments that follow the standard of care that have been established by experts on a consensus model.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Dr. McHugh, do you believe, do you think that Sybil actually had this dissociative identity disorder?</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: No, I don't believe she had identity disorder, multiple personality or anything. I think she did have an intensely suggestible personality, and she was in a situation where she was open to the suggestions - looking, as she was, for help for the conditions that she suffered from.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: And the imposition of this idea upon her was a kind of method that she could have to keep the attention of the doctors and the others around her, and see her as a victim.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Would you have challenged her on this if she were your patient?</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Not only would I have challenged her, but I would've - like a coherent therapist and doctor would today in the evaluation process - done what Ms. Schreiber did, go and use - find out whether these claims of hers, that her mother abused her, were in fact correct.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: I mean, the real problem with cases of this sort - most of the cases with DID, for that matter - is that they're meaningfully sensible, but they aren't causally sensible. No one bothers to look and find out whether this abuse that is claimed to be behind this manifestation is correct.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So Dr. Brand, you would disagree with this?</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Yes, I would. There's a great deal of research now that shows that DID is strongly correlated with early, chronic history of trauma. So for example, in a study of death-row inmates - none of whom were aware they had DID, none of whom were trying to use it to get out of the legal ramifications of their actions - the authors, after scrupulous investigation into their backgrounds, found evidence, like Department of Protective Service evidence and school records, that documented in 17 out of 20 cases that in fact, they'd had horrible exposure to very severe trauma.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So you would - how would you treat a patient like Sybil if she showed up in your office?</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Well, first I would start with a very thorough assessment, using the current standardized measures that we have available to us that assess for the range of dissociative disorders but the whole range of other psychological disorders, too. I would need to know what I'm working with, and I'd be very careful and make my decisions slowly, based on data about what she has.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: And furthermore, with therapists who are well-trained in dissociative disorders, we do keep an eye open for suggestibility. But that research, too, is not anywhere near as strong as what the other two people in the interview are suggesting.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: It shows - for example, there's eight studies that have a total of 11 samples. In the three clinical samples that have looked at the correlation between dissociation and suggestibility, all three clinical samples found non-significant correlations. So it's just not as strong as what people think. That's a myth that's not backed up by science.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Dr. McHugh?</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: I think that's rather shabby science. The whole point about this craze that crested in the 1990s and was really, a total misdirection of psychotherapy and of psychiatry, was refuted by all kinds of evidence dominated by claims of science behind it and ultimately, collapsed as a misdirection of conception.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Now certainly, if you go to death rows - inmates and find that they had abuse in their childhood, it's hardly a surprise. That they have DID, though, is in my opinion, the kinds of things that get imposed upon them by therapists that are interested in finding that enterprise.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: The Sybil issue, really, generated all this interest in multiple personality and DID. It was a central case and Cornelia Wilbur, for a long time, was celebrated amongst the people interested in this conception of trauma. And only, really, with the work of people like Robert Reiber and others, and now wonderfully depicted here by Debbie Nathan, have we seen that this was a case that was factitious in its beginnings, and destructive in its force today.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: We see lots of patients at Johns Hopkins who claim to have DID, and we discover that behind their problems are not only therapists that make the suggestion that this is a viable thing and call upon science, but that they've been turned into invalids, sick people, because the real problems of their lives, the kind of problems that got these people on death row that Dr. Brand is talking about, have other natures to them and need those natures directly treated.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: One-800-989-8255. Talking about Sybil - the case of Sybil and - based on "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case," written by Debbie Nathan. Debbie, whatever - what was the fate of Sybil and her doctor?</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: She - Sybil had a job - when she finally finished therapy and got away from the doctor, which didn't happen 'til the late '60s, she got a nice job as an art teacher at a small college in the Midwest. But as soon as the book came out - within months - she'd been recognized by people in her hometown, and by her colleagues in the art education world. And the book was so nonfactual that she had to flee. She literally left her teaching job almost overnight; abandoned her house; moved to Lexington, Kentucky, where Dr. Wilbur was living and teaching; and was - and lived in her shadow without a job.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Really, for the rest of their lives, they were together. Dr. Wilbur died earlier. But Shirley never had an independent life after "Sybil" came out. And the movie portrayed her as being free and professional and teaching. It wasn't true. It was a lie.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: One-800-989-8255. Let's go to Patrick in New York. Hi. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: Oh, hi, Ira. This is Dr. Suraci, and I'd like to commend you. You did have the right idea of how this develops. It develops from a fragmenting of the person's identity and personality - not as Ms. Nathan said, a fragmenting of consciousness. It is a fragmenting of identity, and that's why it's called dissociative identity disorder. And let's pick up what Ms. Nathan just said about the end of Shirley's life. She didn't know Shirley. I knew Shirley. I knew Flora Schreiber, the writer. I knew Dr. Wilbur, the psychiatrist.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: What happened after the cure, after the end of the first book and the end of the movie, Shirley did live in Lexington, Kentucky, and she painted. She was a prolific artist. Her company was called Mason Incorporated; her name was Shirley Mason. And I have 30 paintings of her book - of her - that she did after her cure, in my book. And her cousin Naomi Rhode(ph), in Phoenix, Arizona, has hundreds of paintings.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: And we have a record of all the galleries around the country that have Shirley's paintings. She led a full life. She went to the theater. We have a psychiatrist who lived in Louisville, Kentucky, Dr. Leah Dickstein, who knew both of them. She went to the theater with them. She went out with them. They were good friends with Roddy McDowall, the actor. This is not true, what Ms. Nathan says, because she never knew Shirley.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: She doesn't know what happened after the first book.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK. Let me just remind everybody that I'm Ira Flatow, and this is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Ira, could I address the allegation that treatment makes people worse - because there's science behind that, too.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Well, I wonder if I could answer the call.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let - yeah - let Debbie answer the caller.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Dr. Suraci met Sybil, or Shirley, long after the treatment ended, long after the book came out. He refused to talk to me, actually, and told people not to talk to me while I was researching my book. He looked at very limited portions of the archive, which I researched, in fact was not even aware that there are documents in the archive regarding him. I don't think that the knowledge that he has of Shirley, or any of the other people that he's talking about, are relevant to these issues.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right. Let me just remind everybody again, I'm Ira Flatow, and this is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR. And Dr. Suraci, I'll give you one chance to answer.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: Her page 99 in her book - that Dr. Wilbur crawled into bed with Shirley to give her electric shock treatment. And I went back and read where she cited she got this information - from box number 38 in Flora Schreiber's archives - and there is only one reference to electric shock that Shirley makes, when she says this was one of the treatments she had, along with sodium pentothal. There's absolutely no statement that ever says that Dr. Wilbur crawled into bed to give her the electric shock, which is outrageous and defaming against Dr. Wilbur.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Debbie Nathan?</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: There is no box 38, and Dr. Suraci needs to really go back and...</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: She - quoted it, in your book.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: ...carefully look at the new documents.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: It's in the back. Look at the notes of page 99.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: It's...</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: ...you quoted - I'll read it right here to you.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: It's box 37, Dr. Suraci.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: Chapter eight, number 38, Flora Schreiber's box 37, files - I'm sorry. You're right. It was Flora Schreiber's box 37. It was your note number 38. You said files 108 (unintelligible)...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: ...(unintelligible) 124.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK. Dr. Suraci...</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: I looked at it (unintelligible)...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I'm going to have to let you go here.</s>Dr. PATRICK SURACI: ...(unintelligible) verify that with a special collections librarian at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: 1-800-989-8255. Dr. Brand, did you want to jump in there? You said you wanted to say something.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: I would love to. So let's go beyond one sensationalistic story, and go back to science. The field, at this point, has developed consensus-based treatment models of best practices, including evidence-supported treatment strategies for dissociative disorders. So a group of us a couple of years ago did a meta-analysis, which combines treatment studies across different teams, across countries, samples. And what we found is, across eight different studies, that there were significant improvements in almost all domains looked at.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: And most of these were what researchers called large effects. Then, most recently, a group of us - have done the largest study to date on treatment outcome, using 280 patients with dissociative identity disorder, or a related disorder called DDNOS, in patients from 19 countries. We had both their - the patients and their therapists complete measures prospectively over time, over the course of 30 months of treatment. And once again, we found that in every - this is a little bit advanced, in every continuous measure we looked at - that means the most rigorous measures we used - every single one was statistically significant in terms of improvement.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: There was improvements in occupational and social functioning, increasing socializing. We just do not see this kind of decline when we look at large studies. Now that, of course, doesn't mean that individuals don't sometimes decline, but that can happen for any disorder.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right. We have to take a break. We'll come back and talk more about the story, "Sybil," with Debbie Nathan, Paul McHugh, Bethany Brand. Our number, 1-800-989-8255. Stay with us. We'll be right back.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. We're talking this hour about multiple personality disorder - or dissociative identity disorder, as it's now called, with my guests, Debbie Nathan, author of "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case"; Paul McHugh, University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore; Bethany Brand, professor of psychology at Towson University. Our number, 1-800-989-8255. Debbie, you said you wanted to react to what you've been listening to the last few minutes.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Yes. Professor Brand's description of the studies about the effect of therapy, I mean, certainly, everyone knows that when people come in with problems, psychological problems, no matter how they're diagnosed, if they're treated, they tend to get better regardless of what was wrong in the first place. So I don't think that any of those studies are particularly significant regarding the validity of DID.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: But, you know, speaking of getting better, I was at a conference of the organization that you're active in, the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation. And I know that you gave a talk about a patient that you had treated for 14 years. And I believe you're still treating her, which seems like an unbelievably long time to be treating anybody and certainly, raises some of the same questions that were raised in Sybil's lifelong, almost, treatment.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Yes. And I'd like to say the same thing. The - or in another way. All these reports of so-called successful treatment to DID are always being done by believers in DID, and they never have the same patients or sample of those patients being treating by other therapists who have other ideas about the nature of the problem. And so they're talking to each other about these matters. And ultimately, yes, I think patients get better from all kinds of kindly related therapists, but not from the ideas that are being generated and which have been pretty well discredited in coherent psychiatry today.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Dr. Brand?</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Due to my ethical obligations, I can't reveal anything about a particular patient, but what I will say is that I don't publish about them. But I will say that I've also seen patients who've made significant progress. If I don't see patients making progress in treatment with me, we address that. We talk about it. We see if there's something we need to alter in their treatment. If we can't make it better in our work together, I refer them to somebody else. And I have, occasionally, had patients where I felt that they were too wed to their diagnosis.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: And I talk to - eventually, gradually, over time, if they didn't put in more effort into improving, then I terminate a treatment with them. I wanted to throw out there - I know there are patients out there who are listening and who are sufferers, and clinicians who are wanting to get more training in how to treat dissociative disorders. So I did want to just refer back to what Ms. Nathanson was talking - Ms. Nathan was referring to. It's the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Their website - I think Ira has gotten on the website there at NPR. There are a number of frequently asked questions. There are free, downloadable treatment guidelines for adults, as well as for children and adolescents. It's a great source for training for clinicians.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Let me speak...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: It's on our website at sciencefriday.com if you want to ...</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: You can look there, but you should look at the history of this and the founders of this organization, and the kinds of troubles that they've had when their cases were brought up before courts where they had mistreated and people like Miss - Dr. Brand and other people who are now discredited. This is an organization that is really, no longer properly thought of as a coherent scientific organization, but one that is promoting an ideology.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Well, a while ago, Dr. McHugh had said that the dissociation was kind of collapsing in on itself. I wanted to address that because DID, and a number of other dissociative disorders, continue to be recognized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, which means that it has passed peer review at multiple levels. In the last year, (unintelligible) task force, there were skeptics about DID who were included in that task force, and the science was overwhelming enough that the top level of reviewers kept the dissociative disorders in, including DID. Furthermore, if you now go...</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Well, let me...</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: If you go to an academic search engine...</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Let me say, there's about - let me...</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: ...called site - let me finish, please.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Dr. McHugh, let her finish.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: OK.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: If you put in the search engine - in psych info - dissociation, you come up with 16,000-plus hits. At this point, the most used self-report measure of dissociation - that is, the dissociative experience scale - has been used in over 3,000 studies. There are epidemiology studies from around the world, from three countries. They're finding consistent results across research groups using different methodologies, different measures. It's not collapsing in on itself.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: In fact, in the upcoming version of the DSM that's currently being worked out, it appears the word dissociation will be showing up in post-traumatic stress disorder as well. The dissociative disorders will remain in. And there is a great deal of other researchers who've not previously been looking at dissociation, who are now adding measures of dissociation because it looks like, from preliminary research presented as recently as at the American Psychological Association Conference in August, that even amongst normal treatment for just regular PTSD, that if you look at the patients with high levels of dissociation, they have altered treatment outcome. So we need to be assessing, in all of our trauma samples, for levels of dissociation and then treating accordingly.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: It's always hard to get a word in edgewise with these dissociative enthusiasts. This is scientism, pure and simple. And someday, maybe SCIENCE FRIDAY ought to talk about DSM and what, really, it represents as a classificatory system, and the problems that have been generated by it. But look, the issue of dissociative identity disorder and multiple personality disorderswas shamed a long time ago in the courts of this country, where people who claimed to be scientists, and claimed to be psychiatrists and psychologists, were shown to have abused their trust with patients in all kinds of ways. And huge sums of money were awarded to them in malpractice claims.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: This is, fundamentally, a dead end in psychiatry. And it started off, in a disturbing way, by the Sybil case and the celebration by the dissociative groups of Cornelia Wilbur.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: The same could be said for how we, at one point in our field, viewed schizophrenia and the causes that schizophrenogenic mothers, cold, distant mothers, causes schizophrenia. But research and science has changed our opinion and treatments.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: You're welcome to belong to that group, too.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: No. I listen to the science, and I follow the science, Dr. McHugh.</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: One-800-989-8255 is our number. Meredith in Chicago. Hi, Meredith.</s>MEREDITH: Hi, Ira. Nice to talk with you.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Thank you.</s>MEREDITH: I am a member of the ISSTD, and I've been a trauma therapist for quite a few years. I still do many, many trainings, though, because it is a very complicated disorder and requires a lot of peer and colleague review on these sorts of things. But I would like to say that it sounds - I mean, very much so sounds now that there's a sense, maybe, from Miss Nathan's book and also from the psychiatrist from John Hopkins, that DID does not exist whatsoever. And that is fairly insulting to many of us who work very, very diligently in training and education and working with these clients, who we clearly see have very many different parts and problems. So I thank Dr. Brand for your explanation of everything. And I'll take my comment off the air. Thank you.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Thank you. So there is - it'd be safe to say this is a giant - a very controversial issue in...</s>Dr. PAUL MCHUGH: There's a controversy only in the sense that - these kinds of statements about people saying it doesn't exist. We say it does exist, but exists as an artifact and an artifact being generated and supported by these enthusiasts in the same way Sybil existed as an artifactual product of Cornelia Wilbur.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: We...</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: I have some more science about that, Ira. Could I share a study about that?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Sure. Go ahead.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: A study that was the award winner for the best publication last year in the Journal of Trauma and Dissociation. A group of researchers went to China, where dissociative disorders are not in their equivalent of a diagnostic manual. So there have been no cultural influences there - not from therapists, not from the media. And they used these systematic ways of assessing dissociation - they've been translated, of course, the different measures and interviews. And they've found, in fact, that dissociative disorders existed there. So it can't possibly be just suggestibility, or just these socio-cultural influences, that are causing dissociation. In fact, they found histories of trauma that were consistent with the diagnoses of dissociative disorders.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let me end - we have a very - few seconds ago, where I began. Let me ask Debbie Nathan. What is the takeaway message of your book?</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: The takeaway message, I think, is that not just for this particular issue in science but for a lot of other ones, and certainly other diagnoses - depression, DID, and any number of diagnoses - what we really need to do is be very cautious when claims are made, especially when they're new and when they're very dramatic. And we need to look at the limitations of the culture that's creating the claims. We need to look, for example, what are the politics of the pharmaceutical industry that might be pushing some of this stuff? What are the politics of gender relations that might be pushing an entrancement with a certain diagnosis? We have to realize that scientists are just as much subject to the prejudices and limitations of the culture as everybody, and be very cautious and skeptical.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I want to thank you all for taking time to be with us today. Debbie Nathan, author of "Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case." Paul McHugh, Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore. Bethany Brand, professor of psychology at Towson University. Thanks again for taking time to be with us today.</s>DEBBIE NATHAN: Thank you, Ira.</s>Dr. BETHANY BRAND: Thank you. |
A top North Korean Diplomat Kim Yong-chol met with President Trump Friday. NPR's Mary Louise Kelly speaks with journalist Jean Lee of the Wilson Center about the diplomat's background. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: We want to take a closer look now at the man who met with President Trump today - Kim Yong Chol. For that, we are joined by Jean Lee, who opened the Pyongyang bureau of The Associated Press and who is now at the Wilson Center. Welcome, Jean Lee, to our studio.</s>JEAN LEE: Great. Glad to be here.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: So I have seen Kim Yong Chol referred to - we just called him the top negotiator. I've seen him referred to as the former spy chief, as a diplomat. I noticed the BBC just had a profile of him calling him Kim Jong Un's right-hand man. Who is he?</s>JEAN LEE: All of those titles apply.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: That's a whole lot of titles.</s>JEAN LEE: Exactly. We should remember, though, that even though he's here as Kim Jong Un's chief envoy, he is a man with an intelligence background, a military background and wears many, many different hats inside North Korea. But one thing that I pay attention to is the bulk of his career has been in intelligence and in the military and overseeing some of the strategy related to reunifying the Korean Peninsula. And when I see Kim Yong Chol, it brings to mind that he has a certain mission, and that is probably to really press the point that North Korea wants to have some sort of discussion about this peace declaration.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: This is something North Korea really wants - to formally end the Korean War.</s>JEAN LEE: Exactly. And there are several different reasons for that. I do think that Kim Jong Un does need to tell his people that they are ready to move past this Korean War that has been unresolved since 1953. Remember that they signed a cease-fire with the United States and the United Nations.</s>JEAN LEE: And that ideology of the Korean War being a central fight and focus for the North Korean people has been such a preoccupation. And I do think that he wants to move past that. And it's a way to perhaps decouple the U.S.-South Korean alliance. And so there are pros and cons to whether this is a good idea. But I do think he has multiple reasons for why he wants to move past this and turn his attention to North Korea's economy.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: To pick up on something else you just said, his intelligence background. This is a guy with military intelligence in his background. He was director until fairly recently of the General Reconnaissance Bureau, North Korea's spy agency. Which struck me, how remarkable is that to have a North Korean spy sitting down with the president in the Oval Office of the White House?</s>JEAN LEE: Absolutely. And he oversaw some extremely destabilizing incidents, including the 2010 sinking of a South Korean warship, the Cheonan, that killed 46 South Korean sailors and really compelled South Korea to institute what are the toughest bilateral South Korean sanctions on North Korea, the May 10 sanctions. And, of course, some of the cyber warfare that I think is a very dangerous arm of North Korea's asymmetrical military tactics.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: There were reports that he was involved with the hacking of Sony Pictures.</s>JEAN LEE: He certainly would have been aware and overseen elements of that operation. But we could also point out that we too have a former spymaster, Mike Pompeo...</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Who was at the table today. Fair point, indeed. You do know whether he is actually empowered to speak for Kim Jong Un? How close are these two, do we know?</s>JEAN LEE: Oh, he certainly does go way back with Kim Jong Un. He has close ties to the Kim family. I think, you know, I also think of him as somebody who's tough. And in my dealings with the North Koreans, there was always somebody I called the bulldog. There was somebody who was charming, and there was always a bulldog. He's the bulldog in this equation. He's the tough guy.</s>JEAN LEE: And it's interesting because obviously he is - the one thing we didn't mention is that - his diplomacy background. He is not a diplomat. And certainly we have other people that we've been dealing with who are very seasoned, very worldly - he is not.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Well, he certainly extracted something that North Korea wants today, which is a second sit-down between President Trump and Kim Jong Un that appears to be on. Just briefly in the moments we have left, how much of a victory is that for North Korea?</s>JEAN LEE: Is it a victory. Of course, another summit would help propel this process and give Kim Jong Un another opportunity for that kind of propaganda and the legitimacy that he craves and the chance to really move this process forward. But the challenge - what I'm focused on is more that the challenge lies for the working-level group, for the working - the negotiators to nail down that road map that we heard earlier. That's the challenge.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: We will see what happens there. Jean Lee, North Korea expert with the Wilson Center. Thanks so much.</s>JEAN LEE: Thank you. |
For the third time since President Trump's inauguration, women have gathered in Washington, D.C., for the Women's March, bringing attention to social justice issues. | MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Earlier today, thousands of progressive women and their allies rallied in Washington, D.C., in New York and elsewhere for the third annual Women's March. The group, which organized the first march in 2017 in response to President Trump's election, has been plagued by internal divisions and accusations of anti-Semitism against some of its leaders. But the march went on today despite the controversy and the damp, cold weather. NPR's Sarah McCammon was at the march in that damp, cold weather here in Washington. She joins me here in the studio.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Sarah, welcome.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: Hi, Melissa.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Go through a bit about what these allegations were all about and how the leaders of the Women's March have been addressing them.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: Well, several of the leaders have faced accusations of anti-Semitism in part because of ties to the Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who's made multiple anti-Semitic remarks in the past. And those ties prompted several groups, including the Democratic National Committee this year, to pull out from being listed as a partner for the Women's March. One of those leaders, Tamika Mallory, addressed this during the rally today.</s>TAMIKA MALLORY: And to my Jewish sisters, do not let anyone tell you who I am. I see all of you.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: This, Melissa, isn't the first time that these issues of race and identity have come up at the Women's March. The first year it was organized, right after the 2016 election, there were a lot of concerns, really from the right and the left, about whether the march was inclusive enough both of conservative women and of women of color.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: And when you talked to the marchers about all this, what did they say?</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: Well, obviously those who came today were not disturbed enough by these allegations of anti-Semitism to stay home. Several told me they'd heard about the controversy, but it wasn't their focus. For example, Christine Betters (ph) came to the march with her daughter from Takoma Park, Md.</s>CHRISTINE BETTERS: And I know there's some controversy around this march, but for us, it's not about the leaders. We don't know their leaders' names. We don't know anything about them. And we, frankly, don't care. We're here to be - as we say in our house, we're here to be one with the sisterhood. So here we are. And we're excited.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: And I did speak with one woman who described herself as a Jewish feminist. She said she had second thoughts about coming to the women's march in light of the controversy but felt it was important to stand in solidarity with other women for racial and economic equality.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: Sarah, if we think back to the first Women's March right after President Trump's election, are the issues that we're hearing about in this march the same as they were back then?</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: You know, this has been a challenge for the women's march to sort of define itself and shape its identity. And there have been disagreements about what that should be. They've always tried to address a lot of issues - immigration, poverty, racial inequality among others - along with more traditional feminist concerns like reproductive rights. And that last one was on a lot of people's minds this year with the newly configured Supreme Court, which now includes two Trump nominees, including most recently, of course, Justice Brett Kavanaugh. I talked to Ellie Hackney (ph) of Pasadena, Md. She says she's very concerned about the future of women's rights.</s>ELLIE HACKNEY: It's actually a very scary time for women and for reproductive rights. We just support candidates who are pro-choice. We also really support Planned Parenthood. But, again, it's a very, very scary time.</s>ELLIE HACKNEY: And, Sarah, this march is coming on the same day of - that President Trump addressed the nation about the government shutdown and plans for border security. Were you hearing from people at the march that that was on their minds?</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: Right. This was just before he was expected to speak. And, of course, the Women's March is a very anti-Trump crowd so, not surprisingly, a lot of people I talked to today in D.C. were angry. They blamed the president for keeping the government from reopening. A few told me they hoped to see some compromise and some progress but, at least as of a few hours ago, weren't feeling too hopeful about that. And a couple of people, Melissa, here in D.C. said they were federal workers, and they were very frustrated to be without pay. But they didn't want to go on the record because they're worried about their jobs.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: OK. NPR's Sarah McCammon - thanks so much.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: Thank you. |
NPR's Mary Louise Kelly speaks with Karen Tumulty of The Washington Post and Politico reporter Eliana Johnson about a report from BuzzFeed News that Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress, the feud between President Trump and Speaker Pelosi, and the second summit between Trump and Kim Jong Un. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: All right. We have a lot of ground to cover today in our Friday Week In Politics chat. Truly, it is never a dull moment. So let's hop right in with Eliana Johnson of Politico and Karen Tumulty of The Washington Post. Welcome back, you two.</s>KAREN TUMULTY: Great to be here.</s>ELIANA JOHNSON: Thank you.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: All right. Let's start with where Ryan Lucas just left off and this bombshell report, if true, from BuzzFeed. Karen, you first. Of the gazillion bombshells that have dropped having to do with Trump and his personal - his former personal attorney and Russia and all the rest of it, how big a deal is this one?</s>KAREN TUMULTY: If it turns out to be true, it's a very, very big deal. We're now in a situation now where I think every news organization is pursuing this, but nobody has been able to confirm it. I mean, there's an old joke in journalism - the worst thing you could possibly have is a scoop that stays a scoop.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: That nobody's proven or disproven, right.</s>KAREN TUMULTY: Right. Obstruction of justice is a difficult crime often. And again, there's a question of whether the president can be accused of a crime while he's in office. But it is often difficult to prove because it is sort of a state-of-mind crime. You have to prove intent. So the question would be, is there in fact this corroborating evidence out there, these text messages or whatever we're talking about? That could just change the whole ball game.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: And just to be clear, we're told - BuzzFeed hangs their article on these two anonymous sources, law enforcement officials. Again, anonymous. They're not named. But they say those officials had access to documents and text messages and all kinds of other things that corroborate it. It's not just a - what they're saying. Eliana, what do you think? I mean, NPR - again, we should state - has not confirmed the BuzzFeed reporting. But BuzzFeed argues that this is a big deal because it would mark the first known example, if proven true, of the president explicitly telling a subordinate to lie directly about his dealings with Russia.</s>ELIANA JOHNSON: I agree with Karen that if this is true, I think it is the worst thing for the president's prospects of staying in office that has come out yet. We know that special counsel Robert Mueller was investigating obstruction of justice already, but that was for the president's firing of former FBI Director Jim Comey. And that would be a far harder thing to argue is obstruction of justice than would be the president's instructing a subordinate to lie to Congress, which is subornation of perjury and obstruction of justice. Recall - that's what Bill Clinton was impeached for in the late '90s, and that was something that Republicans by and large supported.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: And this is prompting fresh talks. Speaking of impeachment, it's prompting fresh talk on Capitol Hill.</s>ELIANA JOHNSON: Exactly. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi already under pressure from her caucus to impeach the president. If this is true, it will be a far easier case for her - not only for her to make to her caucus but for Republicans in the Senate to go along with and convict the president of the House's charges and I think push him out of office because Republicans are previously on the record as supporting the impeachment of a Democratic president for doing the same thing.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Let me turn you both to something we do know is true, which is that this is Day 27 of the partial government shutdown, a shutdown - the chances of which - the chances of it ever ending do not seem to be improved by this feud that we are witnessing escalating this week between the president and Nancy Pelosi. To briefly recap, Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House, wrote to the president suggesting he not deliver his State of the Union address this year. He wrote her back yesterday denying her a plane to travel to Afghanistan. And it seems as though things went downhill from there, Eliana.</s>ELIANA JOHNSON: That's right. At this point, at - well, the base of both parties supports each leaders. Democrats support Pelosi, Republicans support Trump. There is frustration - there's beginning to be frustration within each party at the positions of each leaders. Many Democrats feel Nancy Pelosi shouldn't have said that building a wall is immoral, that she's boxed herself in now because any sort of compromise with the president makes her look like she's supporting something she has said is a moral abomination.</s>ELIANA JOHNSON: Republicans - frustrated with Trump who have said he won't compromise on anything relating to border security short of a physical barrier on the U.S.-Mexico border. So I think we do see signs that support for each leader is bubbling up, but certainly no movement yet to end this standoff.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Karen, worth noting there is plenty of precedent for a president not to deliver a State of the Union address in Congress. You wrote a column this week, the headline of which was, "What Would Thomas Jefferson Do?"</s>KAREN TUMULTY: Exactly. For over a century of our history, presidents did not - not only did they not deliver the State of the Union in person, they did not even deliver speeches in person. Thomas Jefferson mailed his in. Interestingly enough, one of the big things he discussed in that 1801 State of the Union letter was the question of immigration, of citizenship. So it's - the president is constitutionally required to periodically deliver the Congress a report on the State of the Union, but the sort of television spectacle that we are all used to is not stipulated.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Meanwhile - all right. So we have government shutdown on Day 27 and no sign that it's going to reopen. We have this feud unfolding between Trump and Pelosi. We have new bombshell reporting dropping about what the president may or may not have ordered his former personal lawyer to do. And the White House today announced that on the foreign policy front, we are maybe looking at a second summit with Kim Jong Un. So let me ask you each what your expectations for this summit might be. Karen?</s>KAREN TUMULTY: I think that - you know, after the first one, essentially, the talks got stalled. So I think what the president is going to be looking to do is both, in this meeting, to give some credibility to his negotiating team and also to get some more clarity from Kim Jong Un on just what exactly, for instance, he means by denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Right, the stated goal of what the U.S. wanted to get out of the first summit in Singapore. And we have not really seen any concrete progress of that happening from North Korea's point of view. Eliana, what do you think?</s>ELIANA JOHNSON: I think it would be wise for the president to do all of those things. I was at the first summit. And I actually expect something of a repeat. I think the president's far more interested in the media and international spectacle of it all than he is in getting results. We really haven't seen any movement toward denuclearization from North Korea, so you wouldn't really expect the president to schedule a follow-up. But I think he wants - he likes these events for their own sake. And I think we'll see something that resembles very closely what we saw the first time around, though little movement towards denuclearization or progress diplomatically, though I'm prepared to be surprised, as with everything in the Trump presidency.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Always ready for a surprise. That's Eliana Johnson, national political reporter for Politico, and Karen Tumulty, political columnist for The Washington Post. Thanks to you both. Happy Friday.</s>ELIANA JOHNSON: Thanks.</s>KAREN TUMULTY: Thank you. |
NPR's Ari Shapiro speaks with Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois about the lengthy government shutdown and the nomination of William Barr to be attorney general. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Well, despite the shutdown, one piece of government business that did take place this week was the confirmation hearing of President Trump's attorney general nominee, William Barr. Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin was one of the senators questioning Barr. And as one of the Senate's Democratic leaders, he's also working on trying to find a bipartisan solution to the shutdown. Senator Durbin and I spoke earlier today about the shutdown and Barr's nomination. Senator Durbin, welcome back to ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.</s>DICK DURBIN: Good to be here.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: To start with the attorney general nominee, have you decided whether you'll vote to confirm Barr?</s>DICK DURBIN: No, I'm taking a look at - it closer look at his answers to questions. I would tell you that the Mueller inquiry was front and center for obvious reasons. We may be facing a constitutional crisis soon, and the attorney general will play a pivotal role. Two questions were asked of him. One, he was very clear and decisive. Would he interfere with Mueller's investigation? He said no and said it repeatedly. I think where there's some weakness in his reply was what he would do with the results of the inquiry. After what we've been through for the last two years and who knows how much longer, I think at the end of the day, we would have all liked to have heard him say that he's going to make a transparent, full disclosure of the results of that inquiry.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Well, he did say he would like to make it public, consistent with the law. What concerns you about that answer?</s>DICK DURBIN: Well, of course, he's a good lawyer. And he erected a little shelter for himself there by talking about the requirements of the law. He has, I think, wide discretion and authority to disclose to the American public. And I'd like to hear him indicate in a more fulsome way that he is dedicated to as much disclosure as legally possible.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Beyond the Mueller investigation, you also asked him some questions about immigration. The last attorney general, Jeff Sessions, made being tough on immigrants one of his signature issues. Do you think William Barr would take the same hard line approach on policies like separating children from their parents and trying to keep asylum-seekers out of the country?</s>DICK DURBIN: Ari, the honest answer is I don't know. And I'll have to tell you, when General Kelly did his exit interview with the press, they talked about Jeff Sessions. And he said one of the reasons he was asked to leave was the zero-tolerance policy. But I never really put it, you know neatly, on Jeff Sessions' doorstep. I really thought this reflected what the president thought, what Steve Miller, his adviser on immigration, thought.</s>DICK DURBIN: And so if the attorney general is going to play that kind of seminal role in immigration policy, I was looking for some indication that he's even close to the center stripe. He was very careful to endorse the wall over and over again even when it didn't apply. He didn't really break from the Trump approach on immigration. That troubles me.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: To turn from the attorney general confirmation hearings to the shutdown, the president met with some centrist lawmakers of both parties yesterday, not with congressional leadership. Is it your impression that any movement came out of that meeting?</s>DICK DURBIN: No. And I think the problem, of course, is the president has said the shutdown continues until he gets some sort of an agreement from Democrats as to how to we move forward. That's absolutely unacceptable. This is the first time ever a president of the United States has initiated a shutdown. We elect a president to lead and manage, not to shut down the government and create a real problem and suffering for hundreds of thousands of federal employees.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: You've said that the president is being intransigent. And I also want to ask about the position that Democrats have taken. Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, has framed this as a moral issue. She has said she would give no more than one dollar to funding a border wall. If the expectation is that the two sides will negotiate, have Democrats painted themselves into a corner here?</s>DICK DURBIN: Let's remember where we started. We offered $1.3 billion for border security. Now, where did the Democrats come up with that number? Well, we came up with it from President Trump. We gave him his request. It was only afterwards, after some negative reaction from some of the right wing about his signing a temporary spending bill, that he decided to dig in, shut down the government. If we're going to get back to the table - and we should - open the government, the negotiations will start immediately.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So is it your position that the shutdown has to end before there is an agreement on border security? As you know, the administration says there needs to be an agreement on border security before the shutdown ends.</s>DICK DURBIN: Yes, for two reasons. First, it's totally unreasonable. The president has said he takes pride in the shutdown. And certainly I don't understand why when we have federal employees going to food pantries now to try to make it through this month. And second, this president and his chief of staff who's voted for previous shutdowns have to understand this is not the ordinary course of business. We shouldn't wonder what's going to be in the February shutdown if we solve the January shutdown.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: The last government shutdown lasted 13 days, less than half as long as this one. And by one estimate, it caused $24 billion in lost economic output. The president is asking for $5.7 billion for his border wall. At some point, is it worth just paying that price because the shutdown costs the economy so much more?</s>DICK DURBIN: And then what happens in February? Do we face it again on the next issue, whatever it happens to be, the president's favorite? We have to reach the point where we grow up in Washington and discount the notion of shutting down the government and harming innocent people just because the president wants his way.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: With respect, that doesn't sound like the Washington we've been living in for some time now.</s>DICK DURBIN: It doesn't. But most Americans said in the November 6 election they want change. And what you're seeing now is a Democratic Party in the House and many in the Senate. And I might add some Republican senators who are trying to say to this president, for goodness sakes, this is not an appropriate way to deal with an important issue.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So I know how you would like this shutdown to end. What is your realistic expectation of how this shutdown actually will end?</s>DICK DURBIN: Well, conversations continue. I don't think they're particularly productive at this moment. I hope they continue at every level. And most importantly, I hope that the same Republican senators who come up to me on the floor and say they're fed up with the shutdown will tell Mitch McConnell that. If he calls the spending bill which Nancy Pelosi passed, and it passes the Senate, I think the president will understand it's time for the shutdown to end.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Democrats have been attacking the president far more than they have Republican leaders in Congress. But because you mentioned Mitch McConnell, I have to ask, much responsibility do you think he bears for this? Could he end it if he wanted to?</s>DICK DURBIN: Yes, he could. And I think if he looks at the Constitution, which we all swear to uphold and defend, it spells it out. We have the authority to pass legislation. If the president chooses to veto it, under the Constitution, we can override the veto. If it's necessary to follow that course, we should.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So why do you think McConnell hasn't done that?</s>DICK DURBIN: I think he doesn't want to brook the embarrassment of this president, having his Senate Republicans turn on him. That's why the president showed up for the Senate Republican lunch last week - to keep the troops in line. But they're getting restive. They want to see an end to this, and they want it soon, and I hope they do.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois. Thank you for joining us again.</s>DICK DURBIN: Good to be with you. |
NPR's Ari Shapiro speaks with Jeremy Cliffe, Brussels bureau chief for The Economist, about how the European Parliament is reacting to the failure of the British Parliament to approve the Brexit deal. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: This week, British lawmakers handed a stunning rejection to British Prime Minister Theresa May's plan for taking the U.K. out of the European Union. Brussels is the seat of the European Union. And so to find out how politicians there are reacting, we've reached Jeremy Cliffe, Brussels bureau chief for The Economist. Welcome.</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: Good to be with you.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: When British parliament overwhelmingly voted down this deal that Theresa May had worked out with the EU, how did EU leaders react?</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: They weren't happy about it. This has been dragging on for almost two years now. The two-year period in which Britain is supposed to be negotiating its exit from the EU is almost up. And I think there's a real concern, first of all, that Britain will leave the EU without a deal, which will have knock-on effects spreading widely across the continent, but also that this issue will continue to drag on in Brussels and take up more time that EU leaders would rather spend on other priorities.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Another - a number of British lawmakers said, we can get a better deal from the EU. Go back and re-negotiate. Is that realistic? Is that the view in Brussels?</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: It's not realistic within the U.K.'s existing red lines. Theresa May said, for example, that she won't tolerate free movement of people between Britain and the rest of the EU after it's left. And that makes it impossible, for example, to the EU to accept British full membership of the European single market. There's a real gap between, I think, what many people in London think they can get and what the Europeans are willing to give.</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: In reality, though she's made some tactical errors, Theresa May got the best deal out of the EU that she was going to get in the circumstances. It's not going to get any better than this unless she changes her red lines.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Well, after that deal was overwhelmingly voted down, Parliament took a no confidence vote. And she narrowly survived. Do you think most people in Brussels were disappointed or relieved that she remains prime minister?</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: They may not have any great affection for Theresa May, but in Brussels, I think there was relief at that result. They do not need more uncertainty and instability in London. And there was certainly a concern that she might, if she lost, be replaced by a even more hardline Brexiteer who would be even harder to negotiate. So there was - there were very few people here hoping for a no confidence vote.</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: But there is an impatience, as I say, a sense that the ball is back in Britain's court and that Britain needs to decide what to do next and, in many cases, I think something like despair at the Brits ever making their mind up about this.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Yeah. Well, as you said, there is fear that this could drag on. What are the chances that it could drag on past this March 29 deadline when the U.K. is scheduled to leave the EU? How likely is it that this could be extended?</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: That's right. March 29 is when the two-year official period for negotiating an exit is over. And if nothing changes between now and then, Britain will leave regardless of whether it wants to or not. That's automatic - unless, that is, the remaining 27 governments of the EU agree unanimously to let it extend that period. And I think they'd say yes to that. If Britain couldn't make its mind up by then, they would give it another couple of months.</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: The real hard deadline is the European parliament election in late May. And many people here don't want Britain to stay in beyond the start of the new parliament session, which is in July, simply because then you'd have the question of what do you do with - do you give British politicians seats in that new parliament, or does Britain somehow sit in the EU without having representation in its legislature? That would be messy, and I think people would try and avoid that if possible.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So you're saying even if there is an extension, it's an extension of maybe a couple months, not much more than that.</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: Most probably. It's not completely inconceivable that Britain could extend its membership and extend the negotiating period beyond the start of the new parliament, which might mean having British members of that European parliament sitting for the remaining period of the negotiation. It might mean Britain accepting that it doesn't have representation in that parliament. It's not really clear how you'd find a fix to that. But I think it's more likely that the extension would be limited to that, the remaining period of the current parliament, so up till July.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Jeremy Cliffe, thanks so much for joining us.</s>JEREMY CLIFFE: Thank you.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: He is Brussels bureau chief for The Economist. |
M. Night Shyamalan's new movie Glass is the third part of a trilogy that nobody knew was a trilogy until a few months ago. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: To talk about the new M. Night Shyamalan thriller "Glass," we need to go back to the year 2000.</s>SAMUEL L JACKSON: (As Elijah Price) It has begun.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: At Samuel L. Jackson in Shyamalan's thriller "Unbreakable." And exactly what had begun was not entirely clear back then. In 2017, it became a little clearer in his movie "Split." Well, our critic Bob Mondello says now the question is, can the movie "Glass" make it as clear as, well, glass?</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: Actually, I'll get to "Glass" in a moment. First let's talk a little about trilogies, three connected works that collectively form a new work. The Greeks did it with tragedy. In literature, there's "Lord Of The Rings" written as a single book and broken into three because the publisher didn't expect it to sell very well. And in film, trilogies are everywhere, as a character in "Scream 3" points out when other characters think they're just in the sequel.</s>JAMIE KENNEDY: (As Randy Meeks) If you find yourself dealing with an unexpected backstory and a preponderance of exposition, you are not dealing with a sequel. You are dealing with the concluding chapter of a trilogy.</s>DAVID ARQUETTE: (As Dewey Riley) Trilogy.</s>JAMIE KENNEDY: (As Randy Meeks) That's right. True trilogies are all about going back to the beginning and discovering something that wasn't true from the get-go. "Godfather," "Jedi" all revealed something that we thought was true that wasn't true. So if it is a trilogy you are dealing with, here are some super trilogy rules.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: Yeah, well, we'll dispense with that. But he's right about how trilogies differ from, say, the James Bond or Marvel sequels. Trilogies work together as self-contained units, which means that from fairly early on, they're planned that way, as in the "Back To The Future" movies or the trilogy of trilogies that "Star Wars" turned into. "Glass," on the other hand, is the conclusion of a stealth trilogy, one that nobody knew was a trilogy for 17 years. The big reveal was a coda at the end of the second film, "Split," when Bruce Willis, the good guy who was unbreakable in "Unbreakable," showed up as the public was just learning about James McAvoy, the bad guy who was split in "Split."</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #1: (As character) Because of his many personalities, he is being called The Horde.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #2: (As character) This is like that crazy guy in the wheelchair that they put away 15 years ago. And they gave him a funny name, too. What was it?</s>BRUCE WILLIS: (As David Dunn) Mr. Glass.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: As in the Samuel L. Jackson character in "Unbreakable" who, instead of a super power, had a super weakness - bones that chatter easily. And at that point, we all knew that M. Night Shyamalan had been playing a long game, even longer than the one he played in "The Sixth Sense" where he saved his big reveal for the final minute. Seventeen years is a seriously long game. And in "Glass," his task is to bring us along.</s>SARAH PAULSON: (As Dr. Ellie Staple) Maybe this will all make sense if I explain who I am.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: OK, go for it.</s>SARAH PAULSON: (As Dr. Ellie Staple) My name is Dr. Ellie Staple, and I'm a psychiatrist. My work concerns a particular type of delusions of grandeur. I specialize in those individuals who believe they are superheroes.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: Clear enough, and she's collected three such individuals in her asylum. So how to get the game started - perhaps by bringing in the unbreakable guy's son and Mr. Glass' mom and the split guy's victim for a superhero roundtable.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #3: (As character) Did you know the first Superman couldn't even fly. And Metropolis is actually New York City. And what about all the coincidences in what I was reading?</s>SARAH PAULSON: (As Dr. Ellie Staple) Comic books are an obsession. Have you ever been to a comic book convention?</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: Sorry - sliding off track here, doctor. Bring us back.</s>SARAH PAULSON: (As Dr. Ellie Staple) Your dad is trying to fight her abductor. Your son is trying to best his dad. He's the anarchist. He's the brains. He's the reluctant hero. This all sounds very familiar, doesn't it?</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: Well, yes, but that's not really a selling point if we've been kept waiting for almost two decades. You go to a Shyamalan movie looking for the twist which fits nicely with a trilogy's need to give you something at the end that wasn't evident at the beginning. But "Glass'" twist requires so much explaining it doesn't end up feeling all that twisty. Shyamalan does get sharp performances, especially from McAvoy, who'd better be getting paid more than his co-stars 'cause he's certainly working harder with all those personalities.</s>JAMES MCAVOY: (As The Horde) I'm Mary Reynolds. Por favor, Senor. We almost got you, bro.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: But the fact is that where "Unbreakable" was ahead of the superhero curve in 2000 - Shyamalan was actually urged to downplay its comic book aspects - "Glass" is now behind the curve. And no amount of directorial pointing and saying, look; I made a comic book movie...</s>SAMUEL L JACKSON: (As Elijah Price) This is where they would paint you with big eyes and bubbles of confusion above your head.</s>BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: ...Is ever going to be enough to fix that. I'm Bob Mondello. |
On Tuesday, British lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected Prime Minister Theresa May's plan for how Britain would leave the European Union. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: In London today, British lawmakers dealt a massive defeat to Prime Minister Theresa May's plan to exit the European Union.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MP: The ayes to the right, 202. The noes to the left, 432.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: May's defeat in Parliament now creates huge uncertainty. Britain is set to leave the EU on March 29, deal or no deal. The concern is that without some kind of an agreement, there could be disruption at the borders with Europe and a lot of economic pain.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: For more on today's developments, we're joined by NPR's Frank Langfitt at Parliament in London. Hi, Frank.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Hey. Hi, Ari.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: The fact the Parliament defeated this was not a surprise. The scale of it was shocking. Why did MPs vote so overwhelmingly against this Brexit plan?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Well, there were a lot of things in this plan for a lot of members of Parliament to dislike. The key thing, I think, Ari, was many were concerned that it would keep the United Kingdom in the grip of the European Union perhaps for years to come with no way to actually get out. There was also a lot of people who want to remain in the EU, and they felt that this was worse than the current deal that they had. And that's one of the reasons I think you saw such huge numbers here.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Well, what did the prime minister have to say after this massive defeat?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Well, she - she knew it was coming, I think. She acknowledged it was a huge defeat. And she pointed out, I think, importantly that there isn't a majority in Parliament right now, it seems, for any solution to Brexit. And here's what she said.</s>THERESA MAY: The house has spoken and the government will listen. It is clear that the house does not support this deal. But tonight's vote tells us nothing about what it does support.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: OK, Frank, so there are clearly questions about the future of the U.K.-EU relationship. But there are even more immediate questions about the future of Theresa May. Can she survive this as prime minister?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Well, the opposition Labour Party intends to test that and find out. Just not long after the prime minister spoke, a Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, of the opposition, he spoke up, too. This is what he had to say.</s>JEREMY CORBYN: I have now tabled a motion of no confidence in this government.</s>JEREMY CORBYN: And I'm pleased - I'm pleased that motion will be debated tomorrow so this house can give its verdict on the sheer incompetence of this government.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Frank, this defeat comes after more than a year and a half of negotiations with the European Union leading to this deal. You have covered the back-and-forth and back-and-forth. Now that it has been shot down, what happens next?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Well, it's going to be very interesting to watch. You know, tomorrow, she will face a no-confidence vote. She's actually - and this is extraordinary to say this, Ari - she may well survive. Her party seems willing to back her. She has the Democratic Unionist Party that's propping up her government, giving it a small majority. They think that people will vote with her.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: And so then after that, on Monday, she's got to come up with a plan B. But it's hard to know what she's going to come up with because she's really stuck now between a parliament that hates her deal and the European Union that said, you know, we've been through this now for a really long time. We're tired of negotiating.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: It's also kind of hard to imagine - even if she went back to Brussels, what would she bring back here that would turn around such a massive defeat? So it's very hard to see where it goes right now.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: The people who voted against her today include both hardcore Brexiteers and people who don't want to see the U.K. leave the European Union. Is there any chance of another referendum on this?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: You know, I was asking that question from members of Parliament leaving right now, and one that I spoke to said there just is not the votes for that at the moment. And there are members of Parliament who would like to seize control of this process and push it to another referendum.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: There were huge crowds outside today, tonight yelling for referendum. But at the moment, we don't see it coming yet. This is kind of a day-to-day process, Ari, and we're just going to have to see how this unfolds in the next few days.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: That's NPR's Frank Langfitt speaking with us from Parliament in London on this dramatic day. Thank you, Frank.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Happy to do it, Ari. |
The chancellor at the University of North Carolina announced that the rest of the Silent Sam Confederate monument is coming down. She then announced her resignation as chancellor. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: For more than a century, a Confederate monument known as Silent Sam stood at the entrance to the campus of the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. Last year, protesters tore it down. But its pedestal and placards remained in place until today. Debate continues over what to do with the toppled statue - and complicating matters, the resignation announcement of the university's chancellor yesterday. Lisa Philip has been covering all of this for member station WUNC in Chapel Hill.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Hi, Lisa.</s>LISA PHILIP, BYLINE: Hi.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: So I said the pedestal and all the signs were still there until today. What happened?</s>LISA PHILIP, BYLINE: Yeah. So it's been a roller coaster these past 24 hours. Yesterday, in the same email that the chancellor announced her resignation, she also authorized the removal of the pedestal on the plaques for the Confederate monument. And that happened at - it had wrapped up by about 3 a.m. this morning. The move apparently took state university officials by surprise. They convened an emergency meeting this afternoon, and they voted to move up the timeline for the chancellor's resignation. In her announcement yesterday, she said she was planning on sticking around past graduation this spring. But they decided that they would move that up to the end of this month.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: So just to be clear, the chancellor's resignation is connected to the Silent Sam controversy or not?</s>LISA PHILIP, BYLINE: She would say otherwise. She told reporters on a conference call this morning that the two were not related. They just happened to take place at the same time - that, like, matters brought these two things together but they were not connected.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: I'm guessing her critics might say otherwise. But let me ask about Silent Sam. The statue, is it any clearer where that's going to end up, where it will be kept?</s>LISA PHILIP, BYLINE: Not really. So just to give some history on the statue - it was put up in the early 1900s, and supporters say it's to commemorate those students who died fighting for the Confederacy. But the statue was dedicated with a pretty problematic speech that praised white supremacy. So after events in Charlottesville, students and faculty were crying louder and louder for its removal from campus. And last August, protesters took matters into their own hands and tore it down. And then that led to campus officials coming up with a plan to build a $5 million university history center on campus to put the statue inside of that. And of course, no one was happy with that plan. Students and faculty were very upset by it. And...</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Arguing that money could be spent elsewhere, I imagine. Yeah.</s>LISA PHILIP, BYLINE: Yeah, exactly. And then there were people who were upset by the fact that the statue wasn't going back where it had once stood.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: That's Lisa Philip, a reporter with member station WUNC in Chapel Hill, N.C.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Thank you, Lisa.</s>LISA PHILIP, BYLINE: Thank you so much.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: And we should note - the University of North Carolina holds the broadcast license for WUNC, but the station's newsroom operates independently. |
Federal workers are growing increasingly frustrated with the shutdown and political mess in Washington. Some have found other jobs temporarily. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: It's Day 27 of the partial government shutdown. An Ipsos poll done for NPR finds that three quarters of those surveyed are frustrated or angry with the government. NPR's David Welna finds that many in government are pretty angry, too.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: It's noon at Pork Barrel BBQ in the Washington suburb of Alexandria.</s>BILL BLACKBURN: Hey. Bill Blackburn - appreciate you coming in.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: I'm met at the door by the restaurant's owner. Blackburn says he's offering free food to furloughed federal workers just as he's done during every shutdown for the past five years.</s>BILL BLACKBURN: If we're open and we have pulled pork, they can get a free pulled pork sandwich. The plan is to do it until the shutdown is over. So if they're out of work, we'll give them a sandwich.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: The place is thronged with idled feds, including a woman who says she's not only a scientist...</s>UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: I'm a fed-up fed, yep. I'll say that. Yep (laughter), yeah, I am. It's just ridiculous at this point.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: She prefers to remain unnamed for fear of reprisals. That doesn't stop her from fuming about the border wall President Trump wants.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: It's a hundred percent political. I mean, a wall is a very simple solution - a nonsolution for a very complex problem. To think that something that that's complex could be solved with simply a barrier is ridiculous.</s>STEVE CODA: How are you?</s>UNIDENTIFIED CASHIER: How you doing?</s>STEVE CODA: Doing well. Thanks. Can I do the pulled pork sandwich?</s>UNIDENTIFIED CASHIER: Pulled pork sandwich.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: A large man with a beard claims his freebie.</s>STEVE CODA: Thanks so much.</s>UNIDENTIFIED CASHIER: I hope y'all back at work soon.</s>STEVE CODA: I hope so. Thank you so much.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: On a more normal workday, 30-year-old Steve Coda would be managing a program at the Transportation Security Administration, making more than a hundred thousand dollars a year. But he's been idled without pay for weeks.</s>STEVE CODA: My co-workers - you know, we've discussed about other jobs that we may get just during this period. I haven't done that yet. But if this goes into next week, that may be something I start looking into, whether it's substitute teaching or whatever it is.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Others are already at it.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: In the Uber I catch outside the restaurant, the guy at the wheel tells me apologetically it's his first day on the job.</s>JOE SANTANELLO: I'm just trying it out to see how comfortable I am with the app and make sure my phone works. And (laughter)...</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Joe Santanello is an Earth scientist at NASA. Normally he does computer modeling of satellite data to improve weather forecasting. But he is now furloughed and moonlighting.</s>JOE SANTANELLO: The shutdown has been going on longer than I anticipated. I'm running out of disposable income and income for bills.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Other federal workers not getting a paycheck still have to show up for their regular jobs.</s>MEGAN FITZSIMMONS: I get up every day, and I walk into work in a prison.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Thirty-four-year-old Megan Fitzsimmons teaches GED courses at a federal prison in Lisbon, Ohio. She and her husband, who also teaches there, do guard duty as well. Both are working without pay. Fitzsimmons, who's an Air Force veteran, says promises of back pay once the shutdown is over don't help much now.</s>MEGAN FITZSIMMONS: I mean, I don't trust anybody who's making me work without pay. And I'm not sure how they can make me whole because paying someone back later on doesn't make them whole. No one loans you money for free, for a start. I can't go to a bank and ask them for a loan and have them go, oh, sure, just bring me the money whenever you can.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: In Vero Beach, Fla., Kenneth McDonald is a biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He says he spent four months last year fighting ISIS in Syria as an Army National Guard Reservist.</s>KENNETH MCDONALD: When I got back from Syria, I was on the job for two weeks and then furloughed.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: He's not the only one.</s>KENNETH MCDONALD: This particular shutdown, it actually impacts veterans greatly, like myself. Thirty-one percent of us are veterans, many still serving in the Guard and Reserve.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: With six children ages 19 to 2, McDonald plans to collect unemployment and find a job where he won't be furloughed. He, too, is fed up.</s>KENNETH MCDONALD: Very fed up (laughter), very fed up. The government is supposed to work. That's what the people expect. It's why they pay their taxes. They expect us to be at work and doing our jobs so they can do theirs. So yeah, I'm very fed up.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: One more fed-up fed with no end in sight. David Welna, NPR News. |
Brazil's far-right President Jair Bolsonaro signed a decree significantly expanding the public's right to bear firearms in the belief that this will help reduce the crime epidemic. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Brazil's new president, Jair Bolsonaro, is a retired Army captain from the far-right. He's been in office for about two weeks and just took what may be his biggest step so far. He's made it a lot easier for Brazilians to have guns. NPR's Philip Reeves reports.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PEOPLE: (Chanting) Mito, mito, mito, mito, mito...</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: When he was campaigning to be president in front of crowds, Bolsonaro had a signature gesture. He'd hold his hand aloft and make his fingers into the shape of a pistol. That's how he symbolized his campaign promise to give Brazilians far greater access to guns. Brazil leads the world in the total number of homicides. That promise did a lot to help get Bolsonaro elected.</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: Today, Bolsonaro took a step towards keeping it. Brazilian law already allows people over 25 to possess firearms under certain conditions. One was that they had to prove why they needed a gun. That sounds easy. In practice, the police frequently turned them down.</s>JAIR BOLSONARO: (Speaking Portuguese).</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: Today in a televised ceremony, Bolsonaro signed a decree that changes that by removing the need to prove necessity. It only applies to guns at home.</s>AXL SATIER: (Speaking Portuguese).</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: Axl Satier co-owns a gun shop in Niteroi, a high-crime city bordering Rio de Janeiro. Satier would like Bolsonaro to go further. He also wants to be allowed to carry.</s>AXL SATIER: (Speaking Portuguese).</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: But he thinks it's good this decree tackles the red tape blocking gun ownership. His clients are increasing, as is the number of Brazilians interested in gun clubs, says Alexandre Coelho, who's an instructor in one.</s>ALEXANDRE COELHO: It's growing and growing and still growing.</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: For many Brazilians, this is about self-defense, says Coelho.</s>ALEXANDRE COELHO: It gives me a chance to fight. I think the criminals will think twice to enter your home, to break in your home and harm you and your family.</s>ROBERT MUGGAH: The evidence is - is that having a gun in the home actually increases by a significant statistical percentage the likelihood of you or your spouse or your child being a victim of gun violence.</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: Robert Muggah is co-founder of the Igarape Institute, a Brazil-based think tank specializing in security issues. Today's decree by Bolsonaro is just the beginning. Muggah says more measures are planned. Brazil's pro-gun lobby and its Congress, which supports Bolsonaro, is working on a bill that will enable many more Brazilians to carry guns.</s>ROBERT MUGGAH: Which means that we'll see taxi drivers, civil servants, lawyers, doctors, all manner of citizens walking around with guns, concealed weapons. And this is extraordinarily dangerous in a country that obviously has a serious problem with gun violence.</s>PHILIP REEVES, BYLINE: Philip Reeves, NPR News, Rio de Janeiro. |
NPR's Mary Louise Kelly talks with Financial Times political editor George Parker about what the vote against British Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit plan signals for the path ahead. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Let's bring in another voice now to help us try to make sense of this dramatic day - as Ari just said, this dramatic day unfolding in Britain. George Parker is political editor of the Financial Times. He is on the line from London. Hi, George.</s>GEORGE PARKER: Hi there.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: If I asked you for one word to sum up what just happened, what might that word be?</s>GEORGE PARKER: Momentous, I think, probably. I mean, this is not just a crushing defeat on an epic scale. It's actually the biggest defeat suffered by any British government ever. I mean, it's absolutely off the scale - 230-vote defeat. And it's left the whole sort of question of Britain's exit, Britain's future relationship with Europe, up in the air. It's a absolutely enormous occasion.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: You used the word momentous, but let me put to you the question that we just put to Frank Langfitt. What on Earth happens next?</s>GEORGE PARKER: Well, that's the - that's the - really, the question we all need to be asking tonight because what we do know is that the House of Commons doesn't like the deal that Theresa May has put together. We also know that Parliament doesn't want Britain to leave the EU without a deal because that'll be extremely disruptive for business. It'll create lots of legal uncertainty, including for the rights of citizens and EU citizens living in the UK and vice versa.</s>GEORGE PARKER: What we don't know is what Parliament actually wants from Brexit. And that's the big question, as Theresa May was pointing out in that clip you played earlier. She said, well, fine. I know what you don't like, but what do you like? And then you've got as many answers almost as you've got MPs. It's a very uncertain picture.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: I mean, among the ironies here is that, had we interviewed you yesterday, you would have told me it was really uncertain what happens next. What does today's vote actually change?</s>GEORGE PARKER: Well, I think what it means is that Theresa May's deal is on life support. And I think, you know, any idea that she can get away with just tweaking this a bit and getting some new assurances from Brussels about the operation of the deal, whether that would be enough, I think that's now been blown out of the water by tonight's vote. So it's going to require a lot more work.</s>GEORGE PARKER: I think the big question is how imaginative or bold is Theresa May prepared to be? Is she prepared to go for a much softer form of Brexit, leaving Britain in a much closer orbit to the EU in the future? Now, that would alienate many of the right-wing Eurosceptics in her party. But it would be more likely to bring on board opposition MPs and form some sort of cross-party consensus.</s>GEORGE PARKER: So that's the question - how bold is she prepared to be?</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: And I wonder what your answer to that would be. I mean, how do you rate Theresa May's chances of being prime minister a month from now?</s>GEORGE PARKER: Well, I think one thing we know about Theresa May is boldness is not necessarily one of her characteristics. And I think she will - her instinct will be to try to patch up this deal and try to - try to keep it going.</s>GEORGE PARKER: Can she still be prime minister in another month's time? Well, look, it seems unlikely, you know, given what's just happened. But I would say that - if I was putting money on it, I would say the answer to that is yes, simply because of this - Theresa May may not be an inspirational prime minister, but lots of conservative MP fear what would happen if you removed her because then you'd plunge the country into even greater chaos.</s>GEORGE PARKER: There'd be a prolonged leadership contest in the conservative party if they chose a new prime minister. The new prime minister might be a Brexiteer, for example, someone like Boris Johnson. And then what would happen next? He would go to Brussels, try to negotiate a better deal, wouldn't get one and we'd be back to square one.</s>GEORGE PARKER: So for all of Theresa May's problems, her weakness is almost her strength - that people are frightened to remove a fear - for fear of what might come next.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: The possibility of going back to Brussels and trying to get a tweak or trying to ask for more, Brussels has said over and over, we gave you our best deal. We're done. (Laughter) So does today's vote change anything?</s>GEORGE PARKER: Well, I think Brussels was always prepared to come back with a little bit more. I think they were reluctant to give Theresa May everything she wanted before this vote because they knew that Mrs. May's critics would simply bank the concession and come back for more. I think there has been some discussion in Brussels about giving some sort of legal undertaking that the backstop arrangement for the Irish border, which May Tory MPs don't like because they think it could be...</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Which has been a huge sticking point.</s>GEORGE PARKER: ...Trapped in the customs union. That would be a - really would be a temporary arrangement only. I think that could still be forthcoming. But Theresa May's problem will be if Parliament demands much more sweeping concessions from Brussels, Brussels might just say, well, look, we spent the last year and a half negotiating this. We're not going to rip it all up now. It's your problem, not ours.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: in the moments we have left, which is just 30 seconds or so, how worried are you? As a longtime watcher of UK politics, how worried are you about the future of your country?</s>GEORGE PARKER: Well, I am worried. I'm worried about the future of the economy. I'm worried about the state of public discourse in this country, which is becoming much coarser. I'm worried about the possibility that Britain is deadlocked. And what I'm just very sad about is the loss of British influence and credibility in the world. I think it's a very sad moment for our country.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: George Parker. He's Financial Times political editor speaking to us from London. Thank you. |
Gannett, the owner of USA Today and some 100 other newspaper properties has received an unsolicited bid from another newspaper group, MNG, known for imposing severe cost-cutting measures. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: One of the nation's largest newspaper companies, Gannett, is facing a hostile takeover bid from a company known for acquiring and then gutting newsrooms. Gannett owns USA Today and about a hundred other papers across the country. Digital First Media owns more than 50 papers, including The Denver Post and The Boston Herald. It is offering nearly 1.4 billion to buy Gannett.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Well, the deal is raising concerns. And to find out what those concerns are, let's bring in NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik. Hey, David.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Hey, Mary Louise.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: So we have here one big newspaper group trying to take over an even bigger newspaper group. A lot of people are really not so happy about this. Why?</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Well, particularly journalists and perhaps those who are served by the newspapers that Digital First already owns. Digital First, it's worth pointing out, is actually controlled and majority-owned by a hedge fund in New York called Alden Global Capital. And its plan, when it takes over companies that are newspaper companies and newspaper properties, is generally to cut it back. Take The Denver Post, which is where Digital First's notional headquarters is.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Right.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: That's a company that is about as third as large as it was in 2012. Their executives came to them and said, look, we can move you out of the historic old headquarters in Denver to - after a round of layoffs to the suburbs and the printing plant. They'll forestall future layoffs. The unions and employees agreed to that because they said, let's keep the staff as best we can. And then a few short months later, another third of their staff was let go.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: So this is - has - a company that has a tradition of cutting and cutting and then cutting some more, maintaining significant profit margins to apparently help support investments in other places.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Right. I mean, there seems to be some evidence to support the argument that this is a company that acquires and then guts newsrooms.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Strong evidence.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Yeah. A spokesman for Digital First, to give - to give them their say, has put out a statement. They told The Wall Street Journal, we believe these publications need to survive, but they need to have their costs come into line with their revenues. Costs in line with revenues seems hard to argue with.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: It seems certainly unobjectionable. In no place does there seem to be any notion of growth or of solving, you know, their real problems affecting the newspaper industry and that Gannett itself has been suffering along with many others. There's no sense that this is a question of, we have a strategy to persevere and to survive. It's a question of, how do we cut and cut and cut?</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: And let's be clear. Gannett is a company that's been famous within the newspaper industry for cutting. It's just that Digital First does so to a much greater degree. They've been - they have condemned Gannett's leadership for making certain kinds of digital investments, some of which have not panned out.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: And they say, we think we can do this better by just paring back the expectations of readers and of staffs - need to be not so significantly high. And at the same time, we think we can eke out enough in print and digital subscriptions to make this valuable as an investment.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: All right. I mean, the historical irony will not - will not escape a lot of people listening that Gannett was once known as the big guy that gobbled up smaller local papers and cut staff. How is Gannett to responding to this offer?</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Gannett says it will look at it. Gannett has been, you know - is not in the position...</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Do they have much choice?</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: I think they have to do it. They're being offered a premium of, you know, nearly a quarter over what they were going for on the market just a few short days ago. Although, their stock had been valued at more in the last year than what's been offered.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Gannett's got to look at it. But it's looking at it warily. It was hoping not so long ago to take over the Tribune Publishing newspaper chain. It had sought to maybe consolidate with others to try to survive and ride out this huge storm.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Right.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: And yet, we're going to see if it turns out to be one of the minnows rather than one of the whales.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: All righty (ph). Thank you, David.</s>DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: You bet.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: NPR's David Folkenflik. |
In this week's "Hanging On" series about the American middle class, NPR's Rachel Martin speaks with business owners Manolo Betancur and Zhenia Martinez. They own Las Delicias Bakery in Charlotte, N.C. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This is Hanging On, our continuing series about the American middle class. Today we go to Charlotte, N.C., where we visited Las Delicias Bakery. It's on the East Side of Charlotte, which is home to many of the city's Latino immigrants, including a man named Manolo Betancur and his wife, Zhenia Martinez. They own the bakery, which sells churros and tres leches cakes to grocery stores across the state. Betancur is from Colombia. Martinez is from Mexico. They have both been American citizens for years. But for them, in this moment, the American dream feels fragile.</s>MANOLO BETANCUR: I came to his country just with two pants, two shirts, my pair of shoes and $100 in my pocket, and I didn't even speak any English. And I was able to get my college degree here, and I was able to become American citizen. And now we own this business. And, you know, we never thought that we will have our cakes in one of the biggest and coolest supermarkets here in Charlotte and in North Carolina. So yeah, the American dream is still there. It's maybe harder to find now. You got to work a little bit harder to find it. But also there is the feeling that American greed is taking over the American dream.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So you've gotten everything you wanted?</s>MANOLO BETANCUR: (Laughter) That's a good question. Depends what you mean with that. You know, if you - I got everything that I wanted, you know, if you mean about happiness. Because, you know, the business, the car, the dollars that you put in pocket, it's nothing compared, you know, to having my kids around. You know, that's the love of our lives. So you meaning that, yes, I got everything I want, you know?</s>MANOLO BETANCUR: If you mean, like, in an economic way, well, it's getting better, yes - better than many countries around the world. But if you mean it, like, anger and everything for the government and for the politicians, no, I'm not. I'm not, you know, because I hate that feeling that the government is just always helping and being nice with big corporations. And everybody, they feel so proud. We help the small businesses, you know? Go to Bank of America or Wells Fargo, these huge corporations and get bail out from the government. How easy it is for us to get a loan from them? It's very hard, you know.</s>ZHENIA MARTINEZ: I want to say that I think - I think happiness is within. So I think I have gotten what I want. But I think as a community and as a country, we could do so much better because I think it's the working class that's been forgotten. You see a lot of people that can't even pay their bills. And that's just - it's sad. I mean, as a mother I can't imagine what they have to go through. And it's just not something that should happen when you have CEOs that are earning millions of dollars, as simple as that.</s>ZHENIA MARTINEZ: You know, it's - overall, the working class - more companies are moving to having part-time jobs basically because it benefits them financially. You know, if they have part-time positions, they don't have to provide health care. They don't have to provide retirement. Something needs to change in that perspective. We need to start focusing more on the people that do everything and make the country move as a whole and step away from focusing on the greed that has taken over.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I asked Manolo Betancur and Zhenia Martinez how they're doing now, if they feel like they are on good footing financially. Manolo said the recession was hard on them. Their family had to close three bakeries. No one was coming. It took a while to recover, but now they sell their breads and pastries in a major grocery store chain around the state.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: As we talk, their 6-year-old daughter fidgets in Manolo's arms. He brushes her long brown hair from her forehead. He tells me he became an American citizen in 2008.</s>MANOLO BETANCUR: Yeah. I'm very proud. Don't take me - don't take us wrong. We love this country. We are very happy that our kids are born in this country, are raised in this country. We work hard, and we love this country. But, like, that doesn't mean that, like any place around the world, there are things that we can do better.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That was Manolo Betancur and Zhenia Martinez. You'll hear more of their story on today's For the Record when we look at how immigrants in North Carolina are thinking about their presidential choices. |
NPR's Mary Louise Kelly speaks with former White House interpreter Stephanie van Reigersberg about the possibility of Congress subpoenaing an interpreter or their notes. | MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: All right. Let's stay with Trump and Putin and these questions about what they have said to each other in private talks. As we just heard, the Washington Post is reporting that Trump seized his own interpreter's notes after one meeting, the Trump-Putin sit-down in Hamburg in 2017. Last year at the Helsinki summit, the only other person in the room with Trump on the American side was a career State Department interpreter, Marina Gross. Well, some Democrats in Congress are calling again for her to be subpoenaed to testify.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Our next guest served 18 years as head of interpreters at the State Department. She was in the room interpreting when U.S. officials sat down with Fidel Castro, with Augusto Pinochet and many others Stephanie van Reigersberg, welcome to ALL THING CONSIDERED.</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: Thank you.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Is there any precedent for interpreters to be subpoenaed to testify about what they've witnessed?</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: No, it is something that I never imagined could happen.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: In your view, is it a good idea to start now?</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: I don't think it's a good idea at all. There is an ethical rule that governs the work of interpreters as it does the work of lawyers and doctors. And if interpreters were forced to violate professional secrecy, I can't see why anyone would ever trust an interpreter again. You have to believe that your interpreter is good and faithfully conveys what you're saying, but you also have to trust that the interpreter is not going to go and talk to anybody that asks for a readout.</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: And the other reason is the kinds of notes that interpreters take in order to do consecutive interpretation differ radically from the kinds of notes that substantive officers take when they are the official note-takers. Our interpretation notes are based on our short-term memory. They're full of little symbols and squiggles and arrows.</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: Basically, what interpreters do when they're taking notes is they draw a kind of road map through the material they're hearing. They are immediately thereafter able to reconstruct this piece of material. But if you show them those notes in two or three weeks, their eyes would glaze over and say...</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: (Laughter).</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: ...I really don't remember (laughter) what this was about.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: The other thing I'm curious about that has come up here is, afterwards, is it common practice for an interpreter to brief senior aides? You know, regardless of whether there's public testimony before Congress, would an interpreter come out and share with the president or whoever - the secretary of state's - most senior aides, this is what we talked about?</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: I can't give you a 100 percent answer. If there is a note-taker in the room, which there always should be, in my humble opinion...</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Aside from the interpreter.</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: ...Then what frequently happens is that the note-taker will sit down with the interpreter and say, this is what I got. Is this what you recall? But it's not normal for some third party who had nothing to do with the meeting to call you and say, hey, why don't you give me a readout of the bilateral between President - I don't know - Clinton and someone else? That would be crossing a line into what we would all consider to be unethical.</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Can you imagine any scenario where the national security interests of the country should override what you've described as the importance of the sanctity and confidentiality of these conversations?</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: Well, if I really try to push this to an extreme position, I suppose I can imagine such a thing. But my question would still go back to my second facet of this whole conversation, which is what would the interpreter's recollection be worth? How can someone who interpreted at a meeting six months ago go before a committee of the House or the Senate, speak under oath and absolutely be sure that he or she is remembering correctly, given the kinds of notes we take?</s>MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST: Stephanie van Reigersberg. She's former head of the interpreting division at the State Department. Thanks so much for taking the time to talk.</s>STEPHANIE VAN REIGERSBERG: Thank you for having me. |
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's trip to the Middle East started with controversy over U.S. plans to withdraw from Syria and ended in discussions about the killing of Saudi columnist Jamal Khashoggi. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is headed back to the U.S. after an extensive trip to the Middle East. His travels took him to the heart of several ongoing regional controversies. He is returning from this trip a day early because of a death in the family, skipping a planned visit to Kuwait. The controversies that have dogged him during this trip include the killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi last October at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Pompeo talked about that this morning when he met with the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. U.S. intelligence believes Salman was behind the killing. We're joined now by NPR's Michele Kelemen who has been traveling with Pompeo. Hi, Michele.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Hi there, Ari.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: What can you tell us about the discussions that Pompeo and the prince had about the Khashoggi killing?</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Well, you know, it was actually the second time that they've met since the Khashoggi killing. I was here in October when we came, and it was kind of an odd picture, all smiles and everything. Today seemed a little bit more subdued though Mohammed bin Salman said he hopes to add some positivity to the discussion. After the meeting, Secretary Pompeo said that he did raise the case of Khashoggi. He again called for accountability for anyone responsible for his death. And he also said that he raised the cases of women activists who have been jailed in Saudi Arabia. Let's take a listen to what he had to say.</s>MIKE POMPEO: The Saudis are friends. And when friends have conversations, you tell them what your expectations are. And I think the Trump administration has made clear our expectation is that all those involved with the murder of Khashoggi will be held accountable. So we spent time talking about human rights issues.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: What he's expecting is a full accounting of the killing of Khashoggi, some due process for these women that are in jail. But I didn't get the sense from listening to him that he got very far on any of that.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Of course, the death of this Washington Post journalist has caused outrage around the world, including in the U.S. Congress where senators, including Republican senators, have said the prince is responsible for the killing. Based on the tape we just heard, it doesn't sound like this visit is likely to address those concerns.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: I don't think so. I mean, it sounds like they're stuck in where they were before. Pompeo himself has never gone on record saying that he endorses this idea that Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince, ordered the killing. In fact, we asked him again today, does he believe the U.S. intelligence assessment? And he just said, I don't comment on the U.S. intelligence assessment.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: The other problem that's of concern in Congress, of course, is how the Saudis have waged this war in Yemen. The U.S. has backed the Saudi-led campaign to restore to power a government that was ousted by Iranian-backed rebels. And millions of people in the country are on the brink of famine. And that's another issue that the secretary has been trying to press both sides - the Iranian-backed rebels but also the Saudis, of course - to end this conflict.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Just to take a step back, we've been hearing reports from this entire trip, as Pompeo went to Jordan, Iraq, Egypt and more. What has his overarching message been?</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: His big message is building up a coalition against Iran. The problem has been, of course, that, you know, he wants to paint this picture of the Middle East as Iran being the destabilizing force, and all the U.S. Gulf partners are the stabilizing force. But when you have things like the war in Yemen or the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, it raises questions about what U.S. partners are doing.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: And there have also been things that distracted from his message, like the U.S. troop withdrawal in Syria - lots of questions about that.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Yeah, lots of questions about that. He was trying to reassure everyone that just because the U.S. is pulling out U.S. troops from Syria, that doesn't mean they're backing off in the fight against ISIS or containing Iran. He also had to deal today, for instance, with a tweet from President Trump who said he wanted to devastate Turkey's economy if Turkey goes after the Kurds in Northern Syria. The Kurds have been allies of the U.S. in the fight against ISIS. Turkey sees them as terrorists. Pompeo says he'd like to deal with both sides so that Turkey feels secure from terrorism but also that the Kurds, who backed the U.S. in Northern Syria, also feel secure.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: NPR's Michele Kelemen traveling with the secretary of state. Thanks, Michele.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Thank you. |
Rachel Martin speaks with Fahim Rahim, a doctor in the largely Mormon town of Pocatello. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This past week, more than 1,000 people gathered at the quad on the campus of Idaho State University in the town of Pocatello, Idaho. They weren't there for a pep rally or some kind of graduation event. Businesspeople, community leaders, students and teachers gathered there in an effort to hold their community together, because for the past couple of years, the city of Pocatello has been locked in an intense debate over diversity - in particular, over how to integrate the hundreds of Muslim students who've come to ISU from countries like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Pakistani-born doctor Fahim Rahim has lived in Pocatello since 2005 with his family. And he has found himself at the center of this conversation. Dr. Rahim joins me now on the line. Thanks so much for being with us.</s>FAHIM RAHIM: Well, thanks for having me on the show, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I saw pictures on Facebook from the event. And there was a picture, Rahim, on your feed, with people carrying signs that said, I love my Muslim neighbor. Why would that sign be necessary?</s>FAHIM RAHIM: You know, at times, we have to stand for what really makes a difference. The reason why most of the community came out is they wanted to show the world that we are not intolerant. We are not racist. And yes, there has been some incidents of some hate crimes, which was really, really sad to happen in our community. And they wanted to show their support.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What were some of those incidents? Can you detail what happened?</s>FAHIM RAHIM: So a couple of incidents that happened in the community - some notes were left on the cars saying that, you know, you camel-riding Muslims go back to your camel country. Some signs said, you know, raghead Muslims, why are you here? And there was some breaking into the car, some burglaries around the community. And sadly, you know, it's like a snowball effect. You start with some small incidents, and sometimes the things, you know, take a wrong turn. And the idea was to revert it back to what it should be.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: If we could back up, Eastern Idaho is a long ways away from Pakistan or Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, where many of these students and community leaders like you have moved from. What has attracted this diverse group of people to this corner of the world and this corner of Idaho?</s>FAHIM RAHIM: You know, many things - there many parts of the United States where there are good opportunities - low cost of living, education. Most of the students that moved here came because of education. I moved here 11 years ago from New York City, where I lived for seven years and trained, because I was looking for the quality of life - the outdoor life, the low cost of living and the community itself.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: As I have been following this, it seemed that a lot of the controversy stemmed from an effort by some of these students - Muslim students at ISU - to build a mosque. What did the debate look like in Pocatello over that decision? And we should say, the mosque eventually was erected, but not without controversy.</s>FAHIM RAHIM: Right - yes. University students and the Muslim community slowly grew here. And when they grew, they felt like they had a need to have a central Muslim community center which can also be identified as a mosque. So a lot of these kids rallied with the community members - raised the funds to build the mosque. The problem is, Rachel, we are fearful of the unknown, right? We fear that don't know. And as the Muslim community grew in this isolated, small Eastern Idaho community, there are some cultural clashes. I mean, if you wake up one day and you see a bunch of women with hijab or burqa, and you see that people look different, and there's no interaction on a personal level, then we will be fearful. And that was pretty - understanding of any community that grows. Many parts of the United States have, in the past, grown like this.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I read now that several of the Muslim students at ISU are thinking about leaving. What can you tell us about that? Is that true?</s>FAHIM RAHIM: So I spoke with a lot of students. Yes, there are few students who are going to leave. There are a few students who are going to transfer to other universities. But a big majority students are going to stay. And they want to stay. And they have the same feeling that, yes, they have not been persecuted or been a victim of intolerance. So that is a little bit of a, you know, clarification that needs to happen on both sides.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Dr. Fahim Rahim of Pocatello, Idaho, thanks so much for talking with us.</s>FAHIM RAHIM: Well, thanks for having me on the show, Rachel. |
Rachel Martin talks with Cindy McCain, wife of Sen. John McCain, about her efforts in trying to end sex trafficking for the last decade, an extension of her humanitarian work at the McCain Institute. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This is WEEKEND EDITION from NPR News. I'm Rachel Martin. Brazil hosts the summer Olympics this year, and officials are preparing for a flood of visitors from around the globe. With all those people often comes a surge in demand for prostitution. It's a demand frequently met by children sold into sexual slavery. The problem of human trafficking is everywhere and not just at major sporting events.</s>CINDY MCCAIN: Unfortunately, most people in the United States still believe that it takes place only overseas, which couldn't be further from the truth.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That's Cindy McCain of the McCain Institute, which she and her husband, Sen. John McCain, founded. The organization focuses in part on anti-human trafficking. She says the problem is a global one.</s>CINDY MCCAIN: These are little girls, home grown, right here. Once you get outside the borders of the United States, it's in every country. I think some of the larger countries - like Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, the Middle East - are very notorious for this as well. They're notorious for selling their children. It begins in poverty. It begins in great distress. Nobody wants to sell their child, but what they wind up doing is selling their child to be able to support their family.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So walk me through a case study of how this would transpire in the United States. I mean, I think people will hear this and think, how could that be happening within our borders?</s>CINDY MCCAIN: Most generally, these are kids that are on the edge. They're either in foster care, or they're in troubled homes, or they're runaways. And somebody, for instance, in a mall, maybe a 20-something-year-old man, will come up and say, you know, you're really beautiful. Can I buy you a cup of coffee or a - you know, a Coke or something? And they begin this kind of relationship where the young lady believes that he really loves her. And indeed, he's just farming her for the sale of sex.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You have been working on humanitarian issues for a long time. But what happened to bring sex trafficking into your consciousness?</s>CINDY MCCAIN: I had an experience. I saw it. And this was in Calcutta, India, some years back. I saw it, but I didn't realize what it was.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What happened?</s>CINDY MCCAIN: Well, it was - I was in a kind of a little kiosk. I was buying some sari material for our youngest daughter who is from Bangladesh, as you know. And I could hear this kind of rumbling coming from below the floor. I asked the man who I was buying the sari from what it was. And he said, oh, it's just my family. You know, they live down there. It's just my family - very conceivable, you know, in a place like Calcutta, that a family would be living below this tiny shop. And as I began to, you know, pack up and kind of pay the guy and get out of there, I - there were kind of open slats. You could kind of see through the floorboards a little bit.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yeah.</s>CINDY MCCAIN: And I looked down and I could see dozens and dozens of sets of little eyes. And I realized that there were - I assumed little girls, at the time. I did not know that trafficking was predominantly little girls at the time. But not only did I not know what to do, I was afraid to do anything. And I walked away. And so ever since then, we've been working on this issue and trying to combat it, and make sure that people understand what is and not make the same mistake I did.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What's the strategy for fighting this? You testified on Capitol Hill earlier this year. Is there actual legislation you're trying to push that would make a difference?</s>CINDY MCCAIN: Oh, absolutely. There are several pieces of legislation. They have passed and are pending within the United States Senate and the House of Representatives. It's kind of like the perfect storm right now. People are beginning to know there's a problem. They may not be completely sure, but the message has been pumped so hard into the public that I believe people are starting to pay attention to it.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I'd like to pivot to presidential politics, if I could, which is something you've had a lot of experience with.</s>CINDY MCCAIN: And I'm glad we're not doing it this time. I'm thrilled.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I mean, our audience will know Sen. McCain ran for president in 2000 and 2008 As someone who has endured the rigors of tough campaigns, how are you watching all this unfold, besides being relieved that you're not in the center of it all?</s>CINDY MCCAIN: (Laughter) Well, relief being the largest part of this for me, you know, I always watch it because, you know, it's a very small club. So my eyes - I say I don't necessarily watch the candidates. But I do watch the families because I know that the effect on the family is - it's life-changing, and not always for the good, either.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yeah. You and your family had your own run-in with the GOP front-runner earlier in the race. Donald Trump said that your husband is not a war hero because he was captured. You have thick skin. I imagine you've been through tough personal politics and attacks before. Did that feel different you?</s>CINDY MCCAIN: Yes, it did. It did. You know, it's always toughest on those who really can't say anything, and that's myself and other spouses. So all too often we have to sit there and kind of just take it. Not only does Donald Trump not understand the sacrifice that my husband and all the other men that were captive during those years and what they had to endure, but it was shallow and stupid. So, you know, my husband takes it in stride. He's - that's why he's good at what he does. I, on the other hand, like to kick the door occasion.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Donald Trump carried your state in the primary last month. If he wins the nomination, will you support him?</s>CINDY MCCAIN: You know, I - who I support really doesn't matter in all this. What matters is that our country is strong and respected and safe. We really are, you know, a very good country. We make our mistakes, but we're also very, very strong. And so I don't know. You know, I hold grudges. But I do believe in the process. With all my heart, I believe in the process. And I believe in our country. So ask me later, OK?</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I will.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Cindy McCain, thanks so much for sharing your thoughts with us.</s>CINDY MCCAIN: Thank You. |
The Epidemic Intelligence Service, the "disease detectives" of the Centers for Disease Control holds their annual meeting this week. Rachel Martin asks EIS director Josh Mott how they do their work. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The Centers for Disease Control have confirmed the first U.S. death associated with the Zika virus. The victim was a Puerto Rican man in his 70s infected with Zika. He died from a rare autoimmune complication. That news comes as the CDC's Epidemic Intelligence Service meets in Atlanta, EIS as it's known. The members are America's disease detectives. And this week's gathering is their annual one where they share findings and best practices and welcome the new class of investigators. Josh Mott is the director of the EIS. He'll be there in Atlanta with about 80 new disease detectives.</s>JOSH MOTT: In the incoming class, there's about 37 physicians. There's also nurses, veterinarians and nonclinical doctoral scientists, each bringing their own unique set of skills to bear in the increasing complicated world of emerging threats.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So can you walk me through a case or something that could illustrate how you go about tracking a disease that perhaps hasn't risen to epidemic scale yet or is not even on the mainstream radar yet?</s>JOSH MOTT: What they do is use tried and true investigative techniques in whatever investigation scenario that they're in to do this.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Tried and true like what? Can you walk me through some of the basics of doing this work?</s>JOSH MOTT: Sure. I think really what's tried and true about EIS is when we've been able to go in and gather evidence to make a change that leads to a policy change to improve public health. It might be looking at a cluster of illness in women that ended up being toxic shock syndrome. And when we went and investigated and looked at all the commonalities across those cases, we learned that it was a particular brand of product that needed to be pulled from the shelf.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That happened?</s>JOSH MOTT: That happened. That was a high-profile investigation in the '70s. It happened about the same time that we were looking at clusters of illness in children where we learned that prescribing aspirin following a viral infection can lead to Reye's syndrome. And that led to changes in our doctors' prescription patterns. But it's the rapid investigation using the evidence that you have at hand that they are trained to do to go in and make quick decisions that can ultimately prevent further disease and indeed save lives.</s>JOSH MOTT: In other situations, such as following Hurricane Katrina, as the city of New Orleans was repopulating itself, we had to help establish surveillance systems to look for all kinds of possible illnesses and conditions and to track that. And we had to do it in such a way that we could be confident that if there were something there, we would see it. So sometimes their work is just as important in helping to confirm that the absence of a particular problem in a situation.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Josh Mott - he is the director of the CDC's Epidemic Intelligence Service or EIS. Thanks so much for your time.</s>JOSH MOTT: Sure. Happy to. |
NPR's Rachel Martin talks with John Matthews in Tokyo about the earthquake in Kumamoto, and the race to find survivors. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: We're following earthquake activity on two continents today, a major one in rural Ecuador last night that we're still just getting initial reports on and two devastating quakes over the last few days in Japan where they're struggling to find survivors. The prime minister there, Shinzo Abe, said rescuers are in a race against the clock as bad weather has made a dangerous situation even worse. Reporter John Matthews joins us now just outside Tokyo via Skype. John, thanks for being with us.</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: I'm very happy to be here.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What do you know about how the rescues are going?</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: They're getting trickier and trickier by the day. Last night was the big challenge. There was very, very heavy rain overnight which complicated things. It's a very mountainous area in southwestern Japan, Kumamoto and Oita Prefectures, which is a part of the southwestern main island of Japan. And as the rains intensify, landslides get worse. Landslides get worse, more people are trapped. More people are trapped, it's harder to find them.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Japan gets a lot of earthquakes, no?</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: On the Ring of Fire, that's something you kind of have to expect.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This is significant in that you're talking about doing these rescues in these difficult conditions. Do you know any more about what the extent of the damage has been to the infrastructure and otherwise?</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: I don't know. I couldn't give you exact numbers on how many buildings have come down or how much has been destroyed. I can tell you that a lot are under evacuation. The - both of the prefectures have a total population of about three million. And about 170,000 of those, if not more at this point, I believe, are under evacuation orders. So the threat is not insignificant to people. A lot of these areas are hard to access as well. So if one road is out from a landslide - which there are 50-plus places where there are landslides right now in these two regions - then even reaching - they're basically the self-defense forces, Japan's version of the National Guard, has to send helicopters to pick these people up and rescue.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Of course, we all remember the earthquake in 2011 that caused the nuclear power plant at Fukushima to melt down. That quake was a magnitude nine. Are these quakes going to complicate that recovery which is still ongoing?</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: Geographically, no, not a chance because they're very far away. Kumamoto to Tokyo is about 500 miles - 550 miles-ish (ph). And you have to go another few hundred miles north to get to the Fukushima Daiichi Plant and to Sendai and to all the areas that were affected and hit by the tsunami, which, by the way, that was the bigger cause of devastation than - more so than the earthquake. The tsunami is what killed so many people. I mean, you're talking death toll about 10,000. We're looking at 40, 41 I think was the last number I saw for southwest Japan. There was no tsunami, which is, without question, a blessing in this case.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Did you feel this earthquake in Tokyo?</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: The initial earthquake was a 6.4 on Thursday. And then we had the 7.3 late, late Friday night, early Saturday, about 1:30 in the morning. We felt both of those in Tokyo, about 500 miles away. But it wasn't - it - we knew something - we all knew that something had hit somewhere. But when you're in one location, you don't exactly know where it hit or how strong it was until we actually saw the news.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Any sense on how the government has responded, whether or not the population feels like the government is responding in a quick and efficient manner to this latest earthquake?</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: Well, put it this way. It's been how may days now? Three. Almost, I think, three hours - 72 hours, excuse me - since the earthquake happened. Criticism might come later on. Right now people are trying to stay alive and trying to be rescued right now.</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: There are 25,000 troops that should be on the ground in the next day or so. I think there are already 20,000 right now, so they're upping that in the next day or so. So there is a response, and the response is very vocal from the government. The prime minister's office is always very vocal about responding to disasters. So we might see criticism down the road, but I haven't heard anything big right now.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Reporter John Matthews on the line from Tokyo. Thanks so much for talking with us.</s>JOHN MATTHEWS, BYLINE: Thank you very much.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This is NPR News. |
Pennsylvania's capital, Harrisburg, has filed for Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy. The filing is being contested in court. It's the sixth city to file for protection in 2011, and raises questions about whether Harrisburg can afford to continue to provide the expected level of services to residents. Michael Corkery, staff reporter, Wall Street Journal Marc Levinson, lead bankruptcy counsel for Vallejo, Calif. Phil Batchelor, interim city manger, Vallejo, Calif. | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan, in Washington. We all know about the debt problems of the federal government. Many states are squeezed, as well. Now more and more cities are in trouble. Harrisburg, the capital of Pennsylvania, petitioned for bankruptcy last week. That filing is being contested in court right now, and it may be weeks before we know how this all shakes out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But Harrisburg is the sixth city to file for protection under Chapter 9 this year, and, depending on how things play out, we may see the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history later this week in Jefferson County, Alabama, which includes the city of Birmingham.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And when city budgets suffer, sometimes essential services can fall through the cracks: Bridges and roads don't get repaired, budgets for firefighters and police get slashed, teachers laid off, and in a new development, bondholders can get paid off before pension checks go out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: How's this playing out where you live? 800-989-8255. Email: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Later in the program, an evangelical professor on the anti-intellectualism of many fundamentalists. But first, Michael Corkery joins us from Harrisburg. He covers municipal finance for the Wall Street Journal. Nice to have you with us today.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: Hi. How are you?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I know you're working on a story about what a city in bankruptcy looks like. What are you hearing today?</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: That's right. So it's another interesting day in Harrisburg. The governor has just - the governor of Pennsylvania has just signed legislation that would effectively result in the state takeover of the finances of Harrisburg, which is Pennsylvania's capital. And this comes after last week's bankruptcy filing by the Harrisburg City Council becoming, you know, one of the latest cities to declare bankruptcy this year.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And what would bankruptcy mean?</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: Well, it's - one, it's unclear, in part because it's contested. The city council has filed bankruptcy, but the mayor opposes it. The state also opposes it, and they're trying to get it thrown out of bankruptcy court. But it will be weeks before we see a resolution on that question.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: In the meantime, you know, police are being paid, teachers are being paid, bondholders are being paid. So it looks like a normal, functioning city. But, you know, sort of symbolically and the reputation of the city has certainly been tainted, you know, particularly because it's Pennsylvania's capital, and it's declared bankruptcy.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And a lot of the cities are in - that are in trouble are in trouble because of some great, big project that they started that they hoped would help things along. And in Harrisburg's case, it was a generator, a trash-burning generator for electricity.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: Right. That's right. Harrisburg had an incinerator that it had hoped would be self-sustaining and would generate enough revenue that it would actually make the city money. But, of course, after some problems with the construction and after they borrowed $300 million to try to fix it, many, many refinancings, they found themselves way overloaded in debt. And it's something they just cannot pay, which is what brought them to this moment.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: And essentially the city's insolvent, and it needs help.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The irony is that trash-burning plant is now actually making money - not enough to pay off the debts, but it is actually making money. In Alabama, the problem is a big sewer system, and that's the city of Birmingham. That's rather a larger place, too.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: That's right, same - very similar situation. Birmingham had a sewer system. They did a big upgrade, you know, in the beginning of the last decade, borrowed way too much money, took on all sorts of complex swaps and derivatives that ended up going south on the county. And again, they, you know, took on too much debt.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: You know, it's definitely a theme with these two cities and in others, where, you know, cities essentially try to get ahead of themselves. You know, they try to take on complex businesses or enterprises that they're just not equipped to do. They mix on, you know, in the case of Jefferson County, some very complicated financing schemes brought to them by Wall Street bankers, and you have a financial disaster.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And maybe $3 billion in bankruptcy later this week - again, there's a vote later this week. Boy, it's complicated. But that would be the biggest in American history. It is interesting: Obviously, in better times, a lot of these problems can be papered over if you're still getting a lot of tax revenue.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: That's right. So these problems are hitting where cities are facing the problems that states and the federal government are facing. You know, revenue is down. You know, the housing market, I mean, you know, cities get their taxes from, you know, property taxes. Property values are way down.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: So they're kind of out of solutions. They're also - you know, cities and counties are getting hit. They're getting squeezed the most. You know, the cuts are starting at the federal government, pushed down to the states. The states are then pushing cuts in aid down to the local level. And it's the local level where the biggest squeezes are feeling. So that's - in the municipal world, that's where the biggest - weakest links are.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we see situations - I think it was Topeka, Kansas, voted a couple of weeks ago to decriminalize domestic violence and misdemeanors because of budget cuts. They didn't have the money to enforce these laws.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: Right. It's - they're going down to bare bones. I mean, they're cutting as much as they can. But, you know, in this case, it's - in Harrisburg's case, it's debt. They just can't find the money to pay for it.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: In many, many other places, it's things like pensions, where, you know, these are liabilities and promises that were made years ago that are getting bigger and bigger. And again, they're just - there just isn't the will to raise taxes or even the ability to raise taxes in this economy to pay for these things, which in another bankruptcy case in Rhode Island, it's the pensions that actually, you know, prompted the city to file for bankruptcy in the summer, hopefully trying to renegotiate some of those contracts with the retired city workers.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And an interesting law in the state of Rhode Island, they passed a law saying if there's a shortfall of income, the bondholders get paid off before the pensioners do.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: That's right. It's actually - it's a very groundbreaking law. It still has to hold up to legal scrutiny and a court test. But if it does, that could essentially be copied by other cities, because what it does is it takes away the biggest risk of bankruptcy, which is that, you know, that bond investors will no longer invest in a city's bonds because they're afraid, you know, you'll go into bankruptcy or default.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: This would essentially insulate them and allow a city to go into bankruptcy, sort of a strategic bankruptcy like we saw in the case of GM and Chrysler, deal with what they need to deal with - in many cases pensions - and at the same time still have access to the capital markets. I mean, it's sort of the best of all possible worlds if you're a struggling municipality. But again, there's some real legal issues.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: That law in Rhode Island was passed right before the city of Central Falls went into bankruptcy. I think the unions that represent the public workers there I think have a pretty strong case that, you know, this is potentially unfair. It's, you know, upholding one creditor over another.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So we'll have to see how that shakes out, as well. We've been talking a few individual cases, but Harrisburg is not alone in Pennsylvania, the situation in Alabama not unique. There are many places in California, other cities and municipalities around the country, that are - well, they're not in bankruptcy, but they're approaching the edge of it.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: That's right. I mean, bankruptcy, for decades, was something you'd never consider as a city. I mean, it was so taboo, the idea, the taint that it would bring, you know, to your city not only just in the bond market, but just generally, the reputation that it would - the harm that it would do to your reputation made it quite prohibitive.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: But we're seeing it. More and more cities, whether they're in it or considering it, it seems to be a viable option. And that represents a big change, I think. And I think there's a couple reasons for that. One is what we talked about, the problems are intractable, and there's just no way out. But I think two, I think there's just a shift in the mentality about default and bankruptcy, generally.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: I mean, we, you know, just went through a mortgage crisis where people did the unthinkable: They walked away from houses and mortgages and they defaulted. And I think, you know, the big B word is not such a taboo anymore, and you're seeing that on the municipal side, as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Michael Corkery, thanks very much for your time today. We look forward to your story tomorrow in the paper.</s>MICHAEL CORKERY: Okay, thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Michael Corkery covers municipal financial issues for the Wall Street Journal, joined us today from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which as he explained, is undergoing some difficulties.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Vallejo, California, filed for bankruptcy in May, 2008, as the housing boom collapsed and the city could no longer afford to pay its workers. A judge recently approved the city's Chapter 9 plan. In a couple of weeks, Vallejo should be out of bankruptcy. Marc Levinson is a bankruptcy lawyer in Sacramento and the lead counsel for the city of Vallejo in its Chapter 9 case, and joins us now from a studio in Sacramento. Nice to have you with us today.</s>MARC LEVINSON: Good afternoon, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And as we just heard, bankruptcy seems to be - obviously, it's a last resort, but Vallejo is very close to being out of bankruptcy, the city still, though, struggling. What's the lesson learned after you go into bankruptcy?</s>MARC LEVINSON: Well, you have to understand that Vallejo did not file a bankruptcy case as a strategy. It filed for bankruptcy relief because it ran out of money. It simply couldn't pay its bills. And its choice was to default on obligations and get sued and ultimately have to pay the money, or violate California law by borrowing from restricted funds to pay its general obligation debts, or file bankruptcy.</s>MARC LEVINSON: So it filed bankruptcy because it had no choice. Bankruptcy is always a bad choice, whether it's Chapter 11 or Chapter 9. But it becomes a very good choice when it's the only choice.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And that is, more and more, the situation of places like Harrisburg and other places?</s>MARC LEVINSON: Well, I can't speak to Harrisburg and Jefferson County other than what I read in the media or hear in the media. But what I can tell you is that Vallejo filed in May of '08, and there hasn't been a systemic failure of a California city since then.</s>MARC LEVINSON: And why is that? Because Vallejo has helped set some of the ground rules for what can and cannot happen in a Chapter 9 case. And cities and their creditors have been able to work out arrangements to avoid bankruptcy since. And that's the way it ought to work.</s>MARC LEVINSON: That's the way it works in Chapter 11, where you kind of know the ground rules, and you do your best, whether you're the debtor or the creditor, to avoid bankruptcy and the cost and the uncertainty and all the other parade of horribles that Michael talked about.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking about cash-strapped cities and what happens after a city or county files for bankruptcy and what pushes it to the edge. How's this playing out where you live? Give us a call: 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan. After the housing bust, a number of states struggle to pay their bills. The steep drop in property values meant less revenue from property taxes.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: It's a problem now playing out in many cities around the country, including a number that filed for bankruptcy protection. The drop in revenue raises a number of questions about whether cities and counties can continue to offer the services that residents expect. Bridges and roads don't get repaired, budgets for firefighters and police get slashed, teachers laid off, and in a new development, sometimes bondholders can get paid off before the pension checks go out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: How's this playing out where you live? 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. And you can join the conversation at our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. Our guest is bankruptcy attorney Marc Levinson, the lead bankruptcy counsel for the city of Vallejo, California in its Chapter 9 case. And I wanted to ask you: Is Chapter 9 such a dire prospect, that sometimes cities can use it effectively as a threat?</s>MARC LEVINSON: The short answer is yes. Bankruptcy benefits the city because it stops lawsuits. It enables it to reduce the payments that it has to make. But ultimately, it's very expensive, very time-consuming. And every dollar that's spent on the bankruptcy process - on people like me, on lawyers for the lenders - is a dollar that ought to be used to repair bridges and pay firefighters. There's no question about that.</s>MARC LEVINSON: So if the parties can sit down in good faith and negotiate a deal to avoid bankruptcy, that's intelligent. That's what ought to happen. And again, that's what has been happening in California.</s>MARC LEVINSON: The problem is that bankruptcy does not create revenue. It only enables the debtor - whether, again, Chapter 9 or Chapter 11 - to readjust - to adjust its debts. So when you have a revenue drain, as we do in California because of the housing bust, the bankruptcy cannot fix that. All it can do is try to adjust the debt to deal with the reduced revenues that are coming in.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We want to hear how this is playing out where you live. Let's start with Mike, Mike with us from Dunn County in Wisconsin.</s>MIKE: Good afternoon. I just turned on the radio here, on the wonderful show that you have here, unfortunately on a very unfortunate topic. But I was a police officer for 23 years in a town here in northern Wisconsin, a pretty good-sized municipality that unfortunately got involved in some very poor investments in some projects, construction projects and some developments that fell under.</s>MIKE: And they literally just laid off the entire police department and brought back those of us with seniority to work as security guards with less benefits and less wages. So after 23 years of being a police officer with this department, I now work a rotation, a Monday-through-Friday rotation, and weekends are covered by the county, as a security guard - basically underpaid or a security guard that makes substantially less than what I used to make.</s>MIKE: And we're fighting to maintain some of the benefits and the things that we had contractually obligated that were part of our, you know, our - what our benefits plan that we're trying to fight to keep, because we're in danger of losing most of that, as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The pensions in particular?</s>MIKE: The pension, yes, is one of them.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I wondered, Marc Levinson - and I know that the laws are different in different states. But if a city declares bankruptcy, can it get out from under its pension obligations?</s>MARC LEVINSON: Well, you've got it right, Neal. The laws are different in different states. All I can tell you is that in Vallejo, in our plan of adjustment, the city did not attempt to alter pension benefits, and that was a decision that was made for a number of reasons that are probably privileged.</s>MARC LEVINSON: But one of them that's obvious is that the city did, through its plan, adjust the health benefits that it was paying to its retirees, the so-called OPEB. And the harm to pensioners was great. Reducing the pensions would have been even greater, and there's only so far that the city would go to hurt people like Mike, who devoted their careers to the city. And some don't have the ability to re-earn the money.</s>MARC LEVINSON: But again, it is a matter of local law, and it will be the fight over the next three, five years throughout the country about the ability of local governments and state governments to reduce pensions to people who worked their lives in order to earn the pensions. That's the fight we'll see coming up.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Mike, thanks very much for the call, and sorry for your situation.</s>MIKE: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we can go next to - this is David, David calling from Tucson.</s>DAVID: Yes, hello, Neal. I'm past a president of Service Employees International Union with Pima County government. I'm currently president of Pima County Association of Active and Retired Employees. And what we've seen is the consistent cost shifts from the state to Pima County government. We've watched our workforce go ahead and shrink by one-fifth.</s>DAVID: We've seen retirees thrown off the availability of a health care plan once they've left service. We've seen attendant care health - home health care attendant workers privatized. The county nursing home was just sold off to go ahead and add $6 million to the general fund. But simultaneously, the state wants to shift care of prisoners on low-level felonies to county government.</s>DAVID: So what workers have experienced is a loss of income due to rising health care costs as costs have been shifted to employees. We've seen state retirement contributions have to increase for county employees. And the folks are losing money. We're solvent, but a lot of this is done on the backs of the workers, the civil servants.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, David, thanks very much, appreciate that. And I think that's happening in other places, as well. We've been talking about Vallejo, California. Joining us now is Phil Batchelor, who was brought in as interim city manager there. Nice to have you with us today.</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: Thank you, Neal. Nice to join you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And would you recommend bankruptcy for anybody else?</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: No. I think bankruptcy is the last alternative. I think, you know, you need to look at what the ramifications are of going into bankruptcy. It's not just about money.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: What else is it about?</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: It's about the cost of the people that are involved in it. For example, what is it like once a city declares bankruptcy and they're under the banner of bankruptcy? What does the word bankruptcy equate to in most people's minds? You know, is it insolvency? Yes, but it's other things, too.</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: It is dysfunction. It is, you know, broken. And it's very difficult, not only for the citizens of the city to be living in a city that's considered to not be functioning properly, but the employees. The employees are caught up in this.</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: Once we declare bankruptcy, we're not suddenly off the hook. We then begin, as Marc indicated, we have to reduce the expenditure levels in the city. In 2008, when the city declared bankruptcy, filed for it - for Chapter 9, as Marc talked about - we then began a process of reducing our expenditure level to match the revenues. The expenditure level was at $83 million. The revenues were $65.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yeah. And is the answer sometimes to punt problems down the road, for example, maintenance on city facilities?</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: Absolutely. So what happens, we started to make reductions. Our fire department, we have eight fire stations. Three of them were closed. Four engine companies were disbanded. Our police department saw 47 percent decrease. We stopped paving most of the roads that we didn't have federal funds to pave.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And what does the future look like?</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: Well, we are in the process - we're just about out of bankruptcy, as Marc and the Orrick team have done a wonderful job working with us and getting us out of it. And it's just a matter of the technicalities to be out, but for all practical purposes, we're out, and we're beginning to rebuild.</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: We went to the federal government and said: What can you do to help us? They said: We've got our own problems. The state of California has multi-billion-dollar problems, also. So we're on our own.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Marc Levinson, you talked that Vallejo, unique in California, but obviously not elsewhere, as you read in the media. Is this going to be a growing problem?</s>MARC LEVINSON: You know, the commentators are split on this. Some people see the coming flood, and others say, no. This is a political issue that can be solved by legislatures and taxpayers. No one really knows. All of this is new, but what I do see is that cities are - and local governments generally are deferring infrastructure maintenance. They're cutting back on the workers. They've cut to the bone.</s>MARC LEVINSON: When Vallejo filed its bankruptcy case, it had already cut everything that was possible to cut legally. It wasn't funding library and museum services. It had reduced repairs on the police vehicles and the like. And sooner or later, that catches up to you.</s>MARC LEVINSON: I forget if it was you, Neal, or Phil who mentioned, you know, kicking the can down the road.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I think it was me. Yeah.</s>MARC LEVINSON: That's what governments have done, is that they've always been able to refinance. But now as they lack the revenue to refinance, they're making the cuts. And sooner or later, something has to give. And when you factor in the pensions that are getting - the pension obligations that are getting larger and larger and larger - and that's what threw Central Falls in. That's what threw Pritchard, Alabama, into bankruptcy. Sooner or later something has to give.</s>MARC LEVINSON: And either there have to be voluntary concessions, or there will be bankruptcies. Hopefully, the legislatures will step up and fix the problems, but, you know, I don't want to get political but I haven't seen the political will in state legislatures to help bail out the cities. Which, as Michael said earlier, are the recipients of the cuts and have nowhere else to turn because they're at the bottom of the food chain.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Marc Levinson, thanks very much for your time today.</s>MARC LEVINSON: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Marc Levinson, a partner in restructuring group for the Orrick law firm in Sacramento and joined us from a studio there. Phil Batchelor, good luck to you there in Vallejo.</s>PHIL BATCHELOR: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Phil Batchelor is interim city manager for Vallejo, California. In a moment, we'll be talking about some of the ramifications following the death, today, of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. |
Mississippi and North Carolina passed bills that have drawn controversy this week. Matt Sharp, of the Alliance Defending Freedom, backs both policies and explains why. | BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN: (Singing) Mister, I ain't a boy. No, I'm a man. And I believe in a promised land.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And that is, of course, the legendary Bruce Springsteen who was supposed to hold a concert in Greensboro, N.C., tonight. But late last week, he sent out a statement saying he's canceling that show because of a new law in North Carolina that he and other critics say is discriminatory. The law requires people to use bathrooms that correlate to the gender listed on their birth certificates.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: A whole string of corporations and city governments around the country have raised their collective voice against this law. The same thing has happened over a new law in Mississippi designed to protect the religious beliefs of people who do not support same-sex marriage. To talk more about both these laws - the law in North Carolina and one in Mississippi - we brought in Matt Sharp. He's an attorney with the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is an organization that backs religious freedom laws. Welcome to the program.</s>MATT SHARP: Thank you for having me.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Let's start with the law in North Carolina that's garnered so much criticism. Nikki Haley, the governor of South Carolina, actually said Thursday that there was no need for a similar bill in her state. Can you explain what has been happening in North Carolina that you believe made this bill necessary?</s>MATT SHARP: The primary motivation was the city of Charlotte passing an ordinance that would have allowed, in all businesses and public schools and other facilities, men to use the same restrooms as girls and women. That's violating their right to privacy. And so the North Carolina legislature and governor, seeing this and the impact this was going to have, took steps to reverse this and to make sure that across the state no individual would ever have to give up their right to privacy and be forced to share the same facilities as someone of the opposite sex.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And I'm sorry to get into things that are so intimate, but it's an intimate law about very private issues. When you're going into a woman's bathroom, everywhere around the world, you go into stalls. So there is no exposure to anyone's biological anatomy.</s>MATT SHARP: Well, I don't think that's necessarily the case because this also applies to locker rooms, changing areas and things like that where individuals are in a state of undress. They deserve to have their privacy protected.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Let's turn to the law in Mississippi, if we could. This law was passed to essentially protect the rights of people, of individuals, of business owners, who do not support LGBT people, to prevent them from having to serve a customer who might be gay. Is that a correct characterization?</s>MATT SHARP: Not at all. This law was passed in response to the Supreme Court's Obergefell decision creating this right to same-sex marriage. So what this is is a targeted response to make sure that these vulnerable religious minorities and those who hold traditional views of marriage are not compelled by the government to do something that violates their belief. This in no way is meant to allow the LGBT community to be denied goods and services. It simply does not cover that at all and would not allow that.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So can you walk me through a specific case?</s>MATT SHARP: Absolutely. So we represent Barronelle Stutzman. She's in Washington state. And she had one customer that, for 10 years, had served, Rob Ingersoll. She loved Rob. She knew he was gay and didn't care and was glad to serve him. But when Rob asked Barronelle to do a custom arrangement and to design and set up the flowers for his same-sex wedding ceremony, Barronelle politely declined and said, Rob, you know, I love you, but this would violate my beliefs. Because of that, she was targeted by the state. She was filed a lawsuit against her by Rob. All of her business assets are now at risk simply because she declined to do one specific ceremony.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: There are people who would say that same-sex marriage is a sin and that their religious convictions make it impossible for them to provide any service that would appear to be sanctioning that sin. But, I mean, religious people would say that every kind of customer who walks into their business carries sin to some degree.</s>MATT SHARP: It's not a matter of serving someone that they may disagree with their views. It's a matter of these individuals, these small business owners, these organizations being forced to be participants in a ceremony that violates their belief.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: But does the Mississippi law extend beyond this particular circumstance?</s>MATT SHARP: It's primarily in terms of sort of cakes and flower arrangements and whatnot. It is targeted towards wedding-related goods and services. Now, there are some other circumstances that are covered and a great example is government employees.</s>MATT SHARP: So we also represent Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran here in Atlanta that was fired because on his own free time, he wrote a personal devotional book for a men's Bible study expressing his views about marriage and sexuality, among other host of topics. And he was fired for that. And so this Mississippi law would also ensure that government employees can't be fired for their expression of their personal believes on their own free time, as was the case with Fire Chief Cochran.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: If I could ask you kind of a big picture political question because for the last several election cycles, gay rights has been part of the debate, and it's not in the same way this year in the 2016 presidential election. And mainly that's because the Supreme Court has ruled that same-sex marriage is legal. How does that affect you and the work you're doing? I mean, do you, as a conservative, as someone who is supporting this kind of legislation to protect religious freedoms, do you wish that candidates were talking about these social issues more?</s>MATT SHARP: I think what they're talking about reflects what's going on in our country right now and that a lot of people are recognizing that in terms of the gay rights movement, they've accomplished a lot of what they sought to do with the Obergefell decision and whatnot. I think what this legislation and why we're seeing a lot of it right now is we are seeing the fallout and the repercussions of those gay rights decisions.</s>MATT SHARP: And I think we have seen some of the candidates touch on some of these issues of religious liberty and the balance that we're trying to strike and make sure that an important group of people that just want to live out their faith are not being trampled on by government entities and by groups that want to compel them to do something that violates their faith.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Matt Sharp with the Alliance Defending Freedoms speaking to us from Atlanta, Ga. Matt, thanks so much for taking the time.</s>MATT SHARP: My pleasure. Thank you for having me. |
Mohamed Abrini, who was arrested Friday, confessed to prosecutors that he was "the man in the hat," seen in surveillance video before the deadly terror attacks in Brussels. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Investigators in Brussels believe they have answered an important question related to the suicide attacks there last month. Mohamed Abrini admitted to authorities that he is the so-called man in the hat. It's another link between those Brussels bombings and the November attacks in Paris. Reporter Teri Schultz has more.</s>TERI SCHULTZ, BYLINE: Brussels prosecutors say when confronted with the evidence they'd compiled, Mohamed Abrini confessed to being the much sought after (speaking French), the man in the hat at Brussels' Zaventem Airport. He's believed to have dropped off a suitcase packed with explosives on March 22, accompanying the two suicide bombers to their detonation points and then leaving the scene.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MAN: (Speaking French).</s>TERI SCHULTZ, BYLINE: That's a video police released Thursday, a compilation of security camera footage tracking the man now known to be Abrini as he walked for some two hours into central Brussels from the airport. In his confession, prosecutors say he told them he dumped his jacket along the way and later sold that hat.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MAN: (Speaking French).</s>TERI SCHULTZ, BYLINE: It's not yet known whether it was a tip from this video that led to Abrini's arrest Friday night, but even before the 31-year-old Belgian of Moroccan descent was the man in the hat, he was a wanted man. The search for him began just after the November attacks in Paris when surveillance video surfaced of him with his childhood friend, Salah Abdeslam, just days before the attacks. Abdeslam, believed to be the last living Paris perpetrator, was captured in March. Abrini's DNA was found in a car used by those attackers and in safehouses used by the network back in Brussels.</s>TERI SCHULTZ, BYLINE: Abrini's been charged with terrorist murders for that alleged role in the deaths of 130 people in Paris. And now, by admitting he was at the Brussels airport, Abrini provides a direct link between the two plots, connecting some of the dots Belgian investigators have been blamed for missing earlier. Belgian terror analyst Pieter van Ostaeyen says while these developments are important, they won't shut down extremist operations. Van Ostaeyen's been tracking terrorist recruitment in Belgium for years. And he says the prosecutor's announcement of an abrupt Abrini confession strikes him as strange.</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: No, I don't buy the statement.</s>TERI SCHULTZ, BYLINE: Van Ostaeyen says while Abrini may be the man in the hat, it's not Islamic State's style to confess. So this could just be to distract investigators.</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: I've been analyzing these guys' modus operandi in Europe since the beginning, and this is just off. There's no way that some guy like Mohamed Abrini would go out and say I was the guy in the hat. I sold my hat. And I'm going to tell you everything about my network. No way. No way.</s>TERI SCHULTZ, BYLINE: Three more men were charged Saturday along with Abrini, one of whom was filmed by security cameras buying the luggage used for the airport bombs. And then he was seen with a subway bomber in the Metro station. Van Ostaeyen says he believes there are more important operators out there still planning attacks. He thinks the Belgian government believes that too, and that's why they've decided not to lower the terror threat level from its current three out of a maximum four. That means the threat of an attack remains credible and possible. For NPR News, I'm Teri Schultz. |
T. Rees Shapiro, a Washington Post reporter who helped break the story, brings us updates on what's happened since the magazine retracted its story about a rape at the University of Virginia. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: There are new developments in the story of the widely discredited 2014 Rolling Stone article about campus rape at the University of Virginia. The piece centered around one woman, an undergraduate identified as Jackie. She had claimed to have been raped. But when other news organizations started picking apart the reporting behind the Rolling Stone piece, her account came into question.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The magazine retracted the story, partly due to the reporting of T. Rees Shapiro of The Washington Post. He told me that since then, there have been three lawsuits filed against the magazine, the most significant by Nicole Eramo, an associate dean at UVA.</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: She argued in her filing that she was portrayed as callous and indifferent to Jackie's claims that she'd been sexually assaulted. And she's sort of viewed in what she describes as sort of this villain in the piece which tries to show that the administration didn't do a lot in light of Jackie's claims.</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: So right now her lawsuit is still ongoing, and the latest development is that Jackie has been deposed for the case. And that means she had to answer statements under oath, in sworn testimony, that could possibly even be used at trial.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What has been the fallout for Rolling Stone, the magazine that published this piece in the first place? Did anyone lose their job over this?</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: One of the editors of the piece resigned, and that's sort of the most significant fallout. The writer of the piece, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, remains employed by the magazine. She was a contributing editor. And I don't know specifically why that would be, but I imagine that if she were fired or let go by the magazine, the other lawyers could argue that it clearly - the magazine clearly believed that she had some sort of fault in the publication. That's not the case, at least for now. More largely, obviously the magazine's reputation was damaged from its subsequent publication of the story they later had to retract. But other than that, its popularity doesn't seem to be diminished at all.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What about UVA? What's the vibe on campus? How do students feel about all of this?</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: It's a very tight-knit community. And even in the aftermath of the allegations sort of being shown to be untrue, there were still a lot of students on campus who rallied around Jackie and her cause. And there was even a, for a brief time, this sort of movement where they said, I stand with Jackie.</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: And they're torn because UVA students are not one to turn on each other obviously, but there is a lot of support on campus obviously for Nicole Eramo. She's a beloved figure. And so this is one of those strange moments where they're pitted necessarily against two members of the community.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And have you spoken with any members of the campus community who might work with victims of sexual assault about how this story and the complicated twists and turns of this, how it's affected that group of people, people who've survived sexual assault?</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: Actually right before I was beginning to do my investigation and to publish our first reports, I spoke with a number of advocates, students on campus who work in the, you know, sexual assault prevention sort of sphere, and they questioned me. You know, how will this affect us moving forward? Will this set us back a step, having to admit that perhaps, you know, the allegations that were described in Rolling Stone were false?</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: And false reporting about rapes, we know statistically, are extremely low nationwide. And these were survivors themselves coming to me. And they actually ended up answering the questions themselves. They came back and they said, you know what? No matter what, the truth is what matters the most. And I can tell just from my experience continuing to report at UVA that students are not coming forward at a pace any less. You know, it's not like all of a sudden women on campus don't feel comfortable reporting a sexual assault. That's in fact the opposite. If anything, it's created an atmosphere where they understand that it's OK to talk about it.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: T. Rees Shapiro, a reporter with The Washington Post who's been covering all this. Thanks so much for talking with us, Taylor.</s>TAYLOR REES SHAPIRO: Thank you. |
The regular basketball season ends next week with some dramatic, potentially record-setting games in store. Mike Pesca of The Gist tells us about the league's best and worst teams. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Time now for sports.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Time to talk basketball because the regular season is wrapping up and the drama is at an all-time high. Why, you ask? Because the rivalry between two teams is really intense. One team is poised to break the NBA record for most games won. Joining me now to talk about all this is Mike Pesca of "The Gist." Hey, Mike.</s>MIKE PESCA: Hello.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Everyone's talking about one particular match-up, two of the best teams in the league. I'm talking about the Spurs and the Golden State Warriors. The Warriors won Thursday night's standoff. The two teams play again tonight. So why is this rivalry such a gift to basketball fans?</s>MIKE PESCA: Gift is a good word because a lot of times when there's a great team, you feel almost like it's an undeniable force, they're a machine, how can we ever think about doing anything but beating, say, this Kentucky Wildcat team or this UConn Women team. But the Warriors are a joy to watch, an aesthetic joy. And the Spurs are too in their own way - slightly different way but a lot of passing the ball, a lot of teamwork. So it's really been a lot of fun.</s>MIKE PESCA: Now you said two of the best teams. Clearly the two best teams, and the Warriors do have this chance to set the record for most wins ever in an NBA season. But there are a couple records on the line. You know, San Antonio, they're hosting the Warriors. San Antonio has not lost at home this year. That's never happened in the NBA. So if they do indeed beat the Warriors - and by the way, the Warriors haven't won at San Antonio since early on in the second term of the Clinton administration. So if the Warriors win, they'll be breaking a great San Antonio streak.</s>MIKE PESCA: And there are some - there are some who look at statistics, and everyone's talking about are the Warriors the best team ever? They might end with the most wins ever. There are some who are saying, actually, San Antonio's better this year. If you look at things like margin of victory, you know, the Warriors have been blown out by losses, not so with San Antonio. So this is just fascinating and captivating and great basketball and also kind of a bonus because does it really matter? I mean, it matters a little if they set a record in the regular season. We get to experience it all over again in the playoffs.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: All right, so those are the best teams in the league. Let's talk about the worst teams 'cause why not? 'Cause you like talking about the losers.</s>MIKE PESCA: I'm as fascinated by the Philadelphia 76ers, a team who've - you know, they have barely double-digit wins. And their GM, Sam Hinkie, left. Now, this was a hated guy because he was overseeing a process whereby Philadelphia would lose and lose on purpose to get...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Why?</s>MIKE PESCA: Why? Because by losing, you put yourself in a position to get good draft picks and that's how you get better. And it doesn't seem as if Philadelphia has gotten better. But really they're in a better position. They're accumulating young talent. The thing is that they - Philadelphia management, much of it, just couldn't take Sam Hinkie anymore. He was the face of this lose-on-purpose strategy. And he issued a 13-page letter in which he quoted Abraham Lincoln, Warren Buffet, Bill James, Jeff Bezos and Atul Gawande. Now I have to say...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Wow (laughter).</s>MIKE PESCA: Yeah. He unburdened himself - lots of adjectives - but...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: But what did he say? He was just - he was...</s>MIKE PESCA: He laid out his philosophy. He talked about things, like there are some prerequisites to inventing. You have to be willing to fail. You have to be willing to think long term. And that is true. So many great men have failed. But you know who else failed? All the failures. So right now if you're a 76ers fan it's like, that's great, Sam Hinkie. I still got a 10-win team on my hands and that stinks.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Mike Pesca's podcast is called "The Gist." Thanks, Mike.</s>MIKE PESCA: You're welcome. |
Pope Francis is back at the Vatican this morning after his visit to the front lines of Europe's migrant crisis in Greece. Francis took 12 Syrians with him to Rome as a "humanitarian gesture." | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: In Italy today, three Syrian families are settling into new accommodations courtesy of Pope Francis. He invited the refugees, 12 people including six children, to leave with him after his visit this weekend to Lesbos, the Greek island off the coast of Turkey that has been inundated by migrants trying to make their way to Europe. Reporter Joanna Kakissis is on the island of Lesbos. She joins me now. Joanna, good morning.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: Good morning, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And we've also got NPR's Sylvia Poggioli. She has been covering the pope and she stayed behind in Greece to speak with us. Sylvia, thanks for being with us.</s>SYLVIA POGGIOLI, BYLINE: Thank you.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Sylvia, let's start with you. What do you know about these Syrian refugees and how this extraordinary invitation came about by Pope Francis?</s>SYLVIA POGGIOLI, BYLINE: Well, the pope said that one of his aides suggested the idea just a week ago. And he immediately agreed, saying it fit the spirit of his visit to Lesbos. They were apparently chosen by lottery, two families from Damascus and one from an area under ISIS control. The group includes six children. The pope was asked why the refugees are all Muslim. And he said that there was something missing in the documents of a Christian family that had originally been on the list. Now thanks to arrangements made with the Italian government by the charitable Sant'Egidio community in Rome, the three families will be given humanitarian visas and will apply for asylum. And last night, after they landed in Rome, they were given a festive welcome by a band of drummers and cheering crowds.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So Joanna, Lesbos has been this landing point for hundreds of thousands of people seeking entry into Europe. You've been covering this for a long time. What are you seeing on Lesbos right now? What did you see when Francis was there?</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: So you're not seeing many refugees on Lesbos anymore. The Greek coast guard's only picking up about a hundred asylum seekers a day at sea at most. And compare that to the thousands who were arriving daily just a year ago. And those who arrived after March 20 are held in a detention camp surrounded by an iron fence. That's happening because the European Union and Turkey agreed to a deal late last month that's focused on deporting migrants. The pope and Bartholomew I, he's the Ecumenical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church - they spent a couple of hours with asylum-seekers at this detention camp.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: More broadly, Joanna, how did the Greeks respond to the visit?</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: Well, as I mentioned, the Greeks really welcomed the pope's visit. They were cheering for him. And I met a woman named Vasiliki Stylianopoulos Moore just outside the port. She's a Greek-American from New Hampshire, and she's volunteering with refugees here now. And she sees Pope Francis as an ally.</s>VASILIKI STYLIANOPOULOS MOORE: So we're so encouraged to see him and the patriarch together and also for - as a symbol to the European Union and to all of humanity that we must welcome people and offer hospitality where we can.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: The Greeks really appreciate that Pope Francis supports the underdog. He spoke in support of Greeks as they've slogged through an economic crisis. And now he's standing by them as they managed the refugee crisis.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Sylvia, lastly, the pope's visit was clearly a powerful symbol, as was the act of taking in these refugees. But does that symbolism extend into anything pragmatic that could change something about this refugee crisis?</s>SYLVIA POGGIOLI, BYLINE: Well, it's too soon to say. The visit was triggered by that controversial EU-Turkey deportation deal. And EU officials are very happy that the number of arrivals here has plummeted since the deal went into effect. The Vatican insists the visit and the gesture to take the refugees back to Rome was humanitarian. But it was also clearly meant to prick the conscience of many European countries that are locking migrants out.</s>SYLVIA POGGIOLI, BYLINE: The pope said he was very shaken by the children he met at the deportation center. He showed a picture an Afghan child gave him of a sun weeping over a sea where migrants had drowned. The pope said if the sun is able to weep, so can we. A tear would do us good. And in their joint declaration, the pope and the two Orthodox leaders quoted a verse from the Gospel of Matthew - all will be judged by their actions.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: NPR's Sylvia Poggioli and reporter Joanna Kakissis reporting from the island of Lesbos in Greece. Thanks to you both.</s>SYLVIA POGGIOLI, BYLINE: Thank you.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: Thanks, Rachel. |
In a new weekly segment, we'll examine the increasing pressure on the middle class and how that's driving political discourse. This week The Atlantic's Derek Thompson talks to us about economic fear. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The recession in this country is long over. The economy has recovered. So why does it still feel so shaky?</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The labor market is gaining jobs. That's a fact. But income inequality is growing. And this economic anxiety, decades of lost manufacturing jobs and ever-shrinking middle class, all these issues are driving the political conversation right now and shaping the course of the 2016 presidential race. So every week up until the November election, we're going to talk about the increasing pressures on the middle class. It's a series we're calling Hanging On.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And today, we're going to get into the big picture with Derek Thompson. He's a senior editor at The Atlantic where he writes about the economy. He joins me now from our studios in New York. Hey, Derek, thanks for being with us.</s>DEREK THOMPSON: Hey, it's a pleasure to be here.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: As someone who studies the economy, writes about the economy and these issues, how do you define the middle class?</s>DEREK THOMPSON: When I think of middle class, I think of the median household between $50,000 and $55,000.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: OK, so before we dig into the pressure that we know exists on the middle class, let's talk about a little good news because there have been 73 straight months of job growth in the private sector in this country, which is huge. It sounds huge. Can you explain what's behind that?</s>DEREK THOMPSON: Sure. It's a really big thing. That is the most consecutive months of private sector job growth in American history, and that's fantastic. But what has to be taken into consideration are two other things. First, you have to think about where we're coming from. We're coming from one of the worst recessions in the last century. Second, you have to look at the kind of jobs that are being created. And there's a significant amount of evidence that a lot of the jobs that have been added in the last six years have been lower wage jobs.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So when we think about who has benefited from the recovery, are you saying that people who fall into the category who would work for - in these lower wage jobs, those people have benefited from the upswing?</s>DEREK THOMPSON: If the metric is more jobs, basically every single demographic you can think of has benefited in the last six, seven years. Jobs have grown for the poor, they've grown for the middle class, they've grown for the rich as well. The problem, however, the challenge is, all right, what kind of jobs are those? Well, often they're lower paying service sector jobs. Maybe they're retail jobs, cashier jobs, even home health aid-type work, which is notably often independent, so it's not given sort of employer subsidized health care. So this is work and any work is good, but a lot of it has been either low-paid or it's come often without the sort of array of benefits that we're used to expecting with work, whether that's employer subsidized health insurance or retirement packages.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So let's talk about the people who have been losing out or who have at least felt like they're losing out because I imagine those answers - those groups of people are different.</s>DEREK THOMPSON: Yeah, I think I like the way that you framed that. I think that right now it's important to know that if you live in a city, you are surrounded by considerable growth relative to the rest of the country. New York, San Francisco, Seattle, Austin - these sort of cities are bustling. Young people graduating from elite colleges are moving there. They're doing really well.</s>DEREK THOMPSON: But there's a part of the country that's not doing quite so well and hasn't done so well in the last decade and perhaps even longer, and that's this Rust Belt in Appalachia. And if you look at some of the demographics of, for example, Donald Trump supporters, they often live in this part of the country. They didn't go to college. They feel like they don't have a political or economic voice, that they've missed out on this recovery. And so I do think that this economic and political story is intertwined.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: But you say they feel like they've missed out on the recovery, but they actually have, right? They've - many of them anyway come from these places that have seen all these jobs shipped overseas. So when a candidate, be it Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders, talks about the perils of globalization, that means something to them in a very real way.</s>DEREK THOMPSON: Absolutely. And I think - you know, one way that I think about the appeal of revolutionary or outside-the-box candidates, there's an interesting theory from sociology called the Revolution of Rising Expectations, which is this idea that if you looks at revolutions throughout world history - the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution - the places, the pockets of revolutionary spirit, it wasn't those in abject poverty. It also wasn't those obviously who were aristocrats. It tended to be the middle class that recently felt shocked by some change in their - in reality relative to expectation. They thought things were going to keep getting better and then they didn't.</s>DEREK THOMPSON: And so this theory of the Revolution of Rising Expectations essentially says that sometimes revolutions come not because things are in the absolute so much worse than they used to be 40 years ago, but because reality isn't catching up with expectations. And certainly something that you see here with the Rust Belt, with Appalachia, is a part of the country that in the middle of the 20th century was absolutely going gangbusters. I mean, Youngstown and Flint, these were two of the richest cities not only in the country, perhaps in the world. And right now they are examples of cities that in the last 30 years have been essentially abandoned, both by their residents and by politics. So I do think that it's important to not only look at the numbers but also look at how the numbers compare to how people might have expected their lives to go, looking from the vantage point in the 1960s, 1970s.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Derek Thompson covers the economy for The Atlantic. Derek, thanks so much for talking with us.</s>DEREK THOMPSON: Thank you. |
The charity GiveDirectly announced plans to give 6000 people living in extreme poverty a guaranteed income for a decade. NPR's Rachel Martin speaks with co-founder Michael Faye about the project. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What if solving global poverty is as simple as just giving people money? That's the theory behind the charity GiveDirectly, which has spent much of the last decade providing no-strings-attached cash to the very poor in developing countries. Now, the organization wants to go even further and provide a guaranteed basic income to thousands of East Africans for at least 10 years. Here to talk to us about the project is GiveDirectly's cofounder, Michael Faye. He joins us from our studios in New York. Michael, thanks for being with us.</s>MICHAEL FAYE: Thanks for having me.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This seems, Michael, to go against most people's notion of how aid works. So explain what the process is.</s>MICHAEL FAYE: It is an unorthodox idea to give cash to the poor in order to make them less poor. For a long time, we assumed that the poor could not be trusted to make decisions for themselves. So we made them for them. And we sent them goats, and we sent them cows and food stamps and so on. And as it turns out, the poor are quite good at making decisions for themselves. And evidence actually shows that it's more impactful and more cost-effective than a lot of the other means of doing development or social programming.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And how much money are we talking about?</s>MICHAEL FAYE: So historically, we've been giving about one year's consumption per family, which is about $1,000, or about $200 per person.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Can you give us a sense of what people historically have used the money for?</s>MICHAEL FAYE: People have used it for a wide range of things. Capital investments - we saw an increase in people's income by about 34 percent. You saw kids eating more than they had before.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And you want to be able to make this longer, decade-long commitment to the people who you identify?</s>MICHAEL FAYE: There's an exciting idea which is being talked about a lot now, which is universal basic income, which is a form of cash transfer that actually provides everybody with enough money to live forever. So for $30 million, we're going to be providing cash transfers in East Africa to 18,000 people, of which 6,000 will be getting a full universal basic income for 10 to 15 years.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So you say you want to identify a community and pay them an annual salary - everyone in that community - for an entire year. You're going to do it for 10 years. But then you said ultimately, the dream scenario is you want to be able to subsidize this community forever?</s>MICHAEL FAYE: So we're going to make a clear promise at the beginning of the pilot to the poor on how long they will receive a transfer from because the promise of a guarantee - if it's for 10 years, 15 years or forever - today, may affect today's decisions. These are the questions that we'd like to answer. And to do it, we need to make a very clear commitment to the poor upfront, whether it's 10 years, 15 years or forever.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Is the implicit goal of the project to get people to be able to eventually make their own salaries?</s>MICHAEL FAYE: Is the goal to get people to make their own salaries? I think the goal is to improve welfare for the poor and improve their lives pretty dramatically. They're people that are looking to find their next meal, or debating whether or not they can afford to send their kid to school. And I think the outcomes of cash will be across the various dimensions of welfare, whether it's education, health, income-generating activities, assets and so on. So I think it's not as simple as one metric. It's really looking across the broad array of welfare.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Michael Faye is cofounder of the group GiveDirectly. Thanks so much for talking with us, Michael.</s>MICHAEL FAYE: Thank you so much. |
Brown University student Sunil Tripathi disappeared just before the Boston Marathon bombing, and was accused of being involved in the attack. A new documentary looks at the effects of the allegation. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The Boston Marathon is tomorrow. It has been three years since two explosions at the race killed three people and injured hundreds. Now a new documentary tells a part of that story that many have forgotten - about the young man who was wrongly accused of being one of the bombers. The film is called "Help Us Find Sunil Tripathi." Anders Kelto reports.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: Sunil Tripathi was a gifted student from a high-achieving family. His older sister Sangeeta says, growing up, he always surpassed her academically.</s>SANGEETA TRIPATHI: And did so effortlessly, in just an embarrassing way. So I was always very jokingly, you know, kind of spiteful of his - the ease with which he could pass through school.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: But in college at Brown University, Sunil began to struggle with depression. In March of 2013, he went missing. His family organized a massive search operation. And somewhat reluctantly, they used social media to help with the search.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: S. TRIPATHI: Despite how uncomfortable it was to take our personal childhood and smatter it across Facebook, we just knew that this is what we needed to do to get his story out.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: They received lots of messages of support. News organizations picked up the story. But three weeks later, they still had no leads. They were exhausted. So Sunil's brother and sister went to the Boston Marathon to cheer on a friend who'd been helping in the search.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MAN: All right. All right.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: And then at the race...</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: S. TRIPATHI: We were just all so shaken. And it just felt like tragedy on top of tragedy on top of tragedy for so many people.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: And this is where Sunil's story and the Marathon story became intertwined for one terrible night. Three days after the bombing, the FBI released photos of the suspects. On Twitter, a former classmate of Sunil said she thought one of the suspects looked like him. That was picked up by Reddit. And suddenly the Tripathis's Facebook page was bombarded with hateful messages, many saying that given his name and appearance, Sunil must be a Muslim terrorist. Here's his brother, Ravi.</s>SANGEETA TRIPATHI: This is not just one or two comments that would make Mom cry. It progressed to having as many laptops open as possible and deleting every single post. It almost felt like a - you know, a case study in mob mentality - in virtual mob mentality.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: Journalists saw the buzz on social media and started calling the Tripathis. Some retweeted the accusations. Others actually broadcasted them.</s>UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: We do have some names for you, some names to match those faces that the FBI gave us a little earlier. The first one - his name is Sunil Tripathi. He's been missing now for about three weeks. His family...</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: The Tripathis had been waiting for their phones to ring with information about Sunil. Now they were getting questions about his alleged involvement in the bombing. Between 3 and 4 a.m. on Friday, April 19, his sister Sangeeta got 58 calls from the media. News vans lined up outside their home and reporters were knocking on their front door. Then, at 7 a.m. that morning, the FBI released the names of the actual suspects, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Sunil's name was never mentioned. At that point, his brother Ravi says...</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: R. TRIPATHI: The endless phone calls and text messages that were still coming in from the night before stopped. And the only thing to do was to reach out and say - hey, we're people. And we're here, and we're actually still looking for Sunil.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: In 24 hours, Sunil had gotten from a missing person to a bombing suspect and back to a missing person. His family called every news outlet that had phoned the night before and asked for their help in finding Sunil. Most never returned their calls. And then, one week later, the Tripathis discovered what had happened to Sunil. His body was found in a river near Providence. He had died from suicide a month before the marathon. For the Tripathis, the false accusations only added to the devastation of losing Sunil. Still, the film's director, Neal Broffman, says there are important lessons here, including social media's potential for both harm and good.</s>NEAL BROFFMAN: During the early days of the search, the social media was incredibly uplifting and helpful. And then in a matter of an hour, it turned so fast and became so ugly.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: Since Sunil's death, the Tripathis have tried to separate his story from the Boston Marathon bombing. But his aunt Nina Taylor worries that may never happen.</s>NINA TAYLOR: For you to Google his name and know that they will always come up together - and it makes me so mad because he was such a private person. And we went public because it was our only shot.</s>ANDERS KELTO, BYLINE: For NPR News, I'm Anders Kelto. |
For the first time, scientists have scanned the brains of subjects taking LSD, and found that the LSD state mimics that of infants. NPR's Rachel Martin speaks with researcher Robin Carhart-Harris. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Picture yourself in a boat on a river with tangerine trees and marmalade skies. Now picture yourself as a baby. You gaze up at your mother. She's got those kaleidoscope eyes. Pretty trippy, right? Turns out in a new study of brain scans, that the minds of people on LSD function in a similar way to babies' brains. Dr. Robin Carhart-Harris from Imperial College London's Center for Neuropsychopharmacology joins us from the studios of the BBC to talk about this study. Thanks so much for being with us.</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: Pleasure.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So I understand this was the first time that brain scans like this have ever been done, looking specifically at the brains of people who have used LSD. How much LSD had your subjects taken? I mean, what were the prerequisites for a brain that you were going to scan?</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: Yeah, so they had to have had at least one experience with a psychedelic drug. So that includes LSD. It also includes magic mushrooms, other concoctions like ayahuasca, which is an Amazonian brew that has psychedelic properties. We gave them a moderate dose of LSD, roughly equivalent to what you might call a hit of LSD or one blotter of LSD if it was to be taken recreationally.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So what kind of vetting did you have to do of the participants in your study because we should say different people respond to LSD in different ways? There are risks associated with this drug.</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: That's quite right. All drugs have risks, and LSD's no exception. One of the risks is that you might recruit someone who has a psychological vulnerability. So we're very, very careful when we recruit our volunteers to ensure that they have a solid mental health background. They don't have any personal or family history of any psychotic disorders - so those are things like schizophrenia. We have a psychiatrist assess them. We also evaluate their health. So they are very thoroughly screened.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yeah. OK, let's get to the big revelation that apparently people who use LSD, their brain turns into baby brain. What does that mean (laughter)? And what does that look like?</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: So let's think. What is it like to be a baby? What's it like to be a child? Our emotions go up and down. We might be in a sort of happy, sort of ecstatic state one minute, giggling, finding everything funny and silly - similar things happen on psychedelics - and then the next minute there's a sudden shift and we're bawling our eyes out, you know? Similar kind of emotional sensitivities and hyper-imaginative processes occur with a psychedelic.</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: Also something quite intriguing is that sense of wonder, that sense of awe that you certainly see with psychedelics. Sometimes it's framed in a sort of mystical or spiritual way. But it's interesting if you look at some literature, particularly someone like William Wordsworth who talks about the infant state as being a kind of heavenly state where we're sort of closer to what you would call God, in a way.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What do you do with this information? Is it just interesting? What can you do with this knowledge now?</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: It is interesting. But we're not just doing it for the sake of finding out how LSD works in the brain. Let's think of psychopathologies or mental disorders. You know, we might think of something like depression or perhaps something like addiction. Certain patterns, certain configurations in the brain can become overly reinforced. And some of the range of brain activity becomes sort of narrowed and limited. If you have these very debilitating disorders, then perhaps you could introduce something like LSD, which works to introduce a kind of window of plasticity or malleability - conditions for change, essentially - to try and sort of dismantle these entrenched patterns.</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: And if done so with careful preparation, with attendant psychotherapy and then careful working through what is experienced under the LSD and talking through what is experienced, we've seen and others have seen that it can actually be used for good ends.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Dr. Robin Carhart-Harris of the Imperial College London. Thanks so much for talking with us.</s>ROBIN CARHART-HARRIS: Thank you very much. |
The Republican presidential race has become a delegate-by-delegate race. And no more so than in Colorado, where none of the state's delegates are bound to any candidate. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: If you thought the GOP presidential race was pretty exciting so far, brace yourself for the summer because a contested Republican National Convention is looking more and more likely. And that's turning the party's presidential contest into a mad scramble for delegates.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yesterday, Senator Ted Cruz walked away with all of Colorado's Republican delegates. NPR's Scott Detrow was in Colorado Springs watching it all happen. He joins me now. Hey, Scott.</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: Good morning, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Let's talk about these delegates. Just how important is this win for Ted Cruz, these 34 delegates? What do they mean?</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: It's really important. And that's because if Donald Trump gets the 1,237 delegates he needs to clinch the nomination, he's going to do that by a very, very narrow margin. And that wouldn't happen until the very last day of the primaries, June 7. So any delegate that Ted Cruz can claim makes that contest much more likely.</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: And if a contested convention does happen, it's really important who the specific delegates are because as the rounds would go on, at a certain point, they could basically do whatever they want. They become free agents. So having delegates that a campaign knows it can count on in the first round, in the third round, if, you know, reporters are lucky and it's the 20th round, that goes a long way for campaigns.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Oh, those sound like long nights. OK, so let's talk about what it means to run for delegate. All of a sudden these positions are more powerful than they've been in a long time. I understand nearly 600 people were running for delegate in Colorado. What does a campaign look like?</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: A whole lot of signs. You know, there were a mix of people running. Some of them are congressmen, state officials who've been doing this for a while. And others were people who are just either really into politics or, you know, just were interested in going through this process. So the campaign mostly focused on the delegates that campaigns were putting forward on their slates, the Cruz campaign saying vote for these people, here's the ones that we want; the Trump campaign doing the same. But every candidate did get a chance to speak and give a 10-second-long speech, which led to some funny moments yesterday.</s>MCQUEEN: The only person better for president of United States than Ted Cruz would be Jesus Christ, but he is not a natural-born citizen. Vote for me, 346, McQueen. Thank you.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your pens and vote for number 55, Lawrence Brown or Jenny Raffey, 424. Jenny Raffey, 424.</s>ROBERT ZUBRIN: That's the mothership calling for Donald Trump. I'm Robert Zubrin. I'm with Never Trump, number 584.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Delegates with a sense of humor. So I understand Ted Cruz also spoke at this gathering. There's been a lot of conversation lately about how well the Cruz campaign is really doing at these delegate conventions. And on the other side of this is the Donald Trump campaign, which hasn't been - or there's at least been critiques that he doesn't have the ground game. What did it look like in Colorado Springs?</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: There was a pretty big gap between the two campaigns. Ted Cruz volunteers were everywhere in these bright orange shirts handing out candidate slates. Of course, Ted Cruz himself showed up in Colorado to make a pitch. And those candidate slates, a lot of thought went into them. I talked to Ken Buck. He's a Colorado congressman. He's also the chair of the Cruz campaign here. He said the process of finding and vetting these delegates started in December.</s>KEN BUCK: We looked at people that had run and won in the past. We looked at people that had been supporting Ted Cruz for a long time. We looked at elected officials who knew how to ran - run campaigns.</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: And the Trump slate, on the other hand, had a lot of errors on it, names that didn't match up to numbers and people who weren't even committed to Donald Trump.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So is the Trump campaign aware of this? Are they doing anything to fix the problem?</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: Yeah, and this has happened in other conventions as well, like North Dakota, and there's been other examples of the Cruz campaign just kind of outmaneuvering Trump. They know this. They're working on it. They've opened a D.C. office. They've hired a man named Paul Manafort who's a longtime Washington strategist. They're trying to get in gear, but the fact is these are things that other more traditional campaigns were doing months ago.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: NPR's Scott Detrow. Thanks so much, Scott.</s>SCOTT DETROW, BYLINE: Anytime. |
NPR's Rachel Martin talks about the state of the Democratic presidential race with New York Times columnist Frank Bruni. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Democrats in New York vote as well on Tuesday. New York Times columnist Frank Bruni has been watching Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton make their respective cases. And he joins us now live. Good morning, Frank.</s>FRANK BRUNI: Good morning.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You've been writing about these two candidates for months. At this point in the race, has all the campaigning made them better candidates? Or has it done more to expose their weaknesses? Let's start with Bernie Sanders.</s>FRANK BRUNI: Well, you know, it's done a little bit of both. In Bernie's case - in mister - Senator Sanders's case, it's interesting because it's difficult to go through a campaign this long and not end up seeming more like a conventional politician than you did at the start. You know, of course he came into this running a different kind of campaign, coming from a very different direction than other Democratic candidates for the nomination have come. And he was, in many ways, trying to transcend politics as usual. A long campaign is politics as usual and you end up seeming less pure, less high-minded, more like everybody else. And in that sense, I think his campaign - his candidacy has sullied him a little bit.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And for Hillary Clinton.</s>FRANK BRUNI: Well, you know, we knew Hillary Clinton so well going in. I don't think we've learned a lot new about her. The main thing we've seen with her is that there are very, very finite limits to her appeal. And I think there was a sense of that beforehand, but it's been validated by this campaign. Her unfavorable ratings remain pretty high. She hasn't been able to turn that around. And if the GOP wasn't suffering a sort of implosion of its own, I think there would be great worry about her prospects in a general election. But she may get the incredible break of a very, very weak controversial Republican nominee against her.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That's assuming a lot. I mean, who knows how the Republican primary is going to end up. And if she is the nominee, how does she bridge that enthusiasm gap? I mean, we've seen this huge enthusiasm, all these crowds for Sanders. She's got to figure out how to bring them under her tent. And is there a kind of a political risk in this era in framing yourself as the safe choice?</s>FRANK BRUNI: (Laughter) There's always a risk in that because you need turnout. You need people to be passionate about you. And saying I'm safe and sensible is not a very romantic pitch.</s>FRANK BRUNI: I think what happens if she becomes the nominee - and you're right, I made a lot of assumptions a moment ago - if she becomes the nominee, I think what happens, sadly, is she tries as much to convince people of how horrible the other choice would be as how good she is. And we end up, I think, with quite a negative campaign, which it won't be the first time. But the problem with that is when we have these negative campaigns and then someone ends up in office, it becomes very difficult to govern because you created such a - such an atmosphere of enmity that when you then need people to come together to make decisions and progress, it's difficult.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You wrote this past week in your column that the split within the Democratic Party has been obscured by all the drama on the GOP side, but that there is real trouble within the Democratic Party. What are the fault lines as you see them?</s>FRANK BRUNI: There are a number of fault lines. I mean, one is in foreign policy. You saw this fault line very, very clearly in the debate in Brooklyn. Hillary Clinton talked a lot about the value of foreign interventions. And Bernie Sanders talked a lot about the folly and shortsightedness of so many of them. That's a very big fault line in the Democratic Party. Then there's a big overarching fault line, which is whether we need to tinker with and improve the system as it is or sort of throw it out and begin anew. Bernie Sanders is sort of saying the latter. And Hillary Clinton's saying no, I've worked within the system. Only certain kinds of changes are possible. I know where we can tinker. So it's sort of revolution versus tinkering - is a big fault line.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And you think that's a problem that extends beyond these two candidates? It's something that's a problem at large for the party?</s>FRANK BRUNI: Absolutely. I don't think people are responding to Bernie Sanders - there's many, many supporters - just because he's such a great candidate. I think they're responding to the ideas that he's promoting, to what he represents. They're some of the same people who have been so excited about Elizabeth Warren. So it's bigger than him. And I think it will survive this contest. I think it's something we'll be dealing with over the next decade.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: New York Times columnist Frank Bruni. His latest book is titled "Where You Go Is Not Who You'll Be." Thanks so much, Frank.</s>FRANK BRUNI: Thank you very much. |
Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright reflects on the death of ousted Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi. She calls it a watershed moment for the people of Libya, the international community and "what is known as the Arab Awakening." | NEAL CONAN, host: Libya's Moammar Gadhafi died outside of his hometown of Sirte, earlier today, but the decisive moment in Libya's civil war came this past spring, when NATO launched an air campaign to protect civilians and provide protection for rebel fighters. Back in 1999, Madeleine Albright served as secretary of state when NATO intervened in the civil war in the Balkans and launched weeks of air strikes there. She's now chairman of the National Democratic Institute and joins us by phone from Atlanta. Secretary Albright, nice to have you back on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Thank you. It's great to be with you, especially on such an important day.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And why is it so important, do you think?</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Well, because I think the people in Libya have been able to really, now, see a new path for themselves after four decades of a really brutal dictator. And there's so many aspects of this that show how important it is for the international community to really get involved in helping on this. It is important for the people of Libya. It is important for the possibilities of democracy on the ground. So there are just many, many aspects of this that I think are kind of a watershed in a lot of different events that are taking place in what is known as the Arab Awakening.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The United States, its NATO partners and some Arab allies, including, most prominently, Qatar, joined in the air attacks against the Gadhafi forces. There were no boots on the ground, no American casualties. And the whole thing, according to Vice President Biden, cost about $2 billion, a sharp contrast to other American interventions.</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Well - exactly. I think it's very, very important. It shows so many different things. I mean, there have always been discussions about whether you could win through an air war. That was one of the issues that happened when we were dealing with the Balkans. I think when - it doesn't mean that NATO has to be on the ground. Obviously, the rebels there were fighting, practically hand to hand. But it does mean that international intervention can be done in this particular way through an alliance structure in - and a way that is through the air and with no loss.</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: And I think that it really is - I mean, no loss of American lives. And so I think it's very important. I do think that this shows the leadership of the Obama administration on this. They took a lot of flak, frankly, but I think that they knew what they were doing, and that this was a very important step forward for how America gets involved these days.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. It was an alliance operation, yet only nine members of the alliance took active part. Many of them put sharp restrictions on the way their forces could be used. The two major members of the alliance, besides the United States, involved - that was Britain and France - ran out of ammunition and had to buy some smart bombs from American stockpiles. They're the lessons learned for NATO as well.</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Many - and frankly, let me tell you, one of the things that happened last year - there was a new strategic concept for NATO that the secretary-general, Rasmussen, put together. But before he did that, he was, in fact, asked by the heads of state to have a group of experts that would help in putting some ideas forward, and I chaired that group. And we looked at a whole host of issues about what NATO was about in the post-Balkan experience and how it operated in Afghanistan and what the next years were going to be about. And the issues we did talk about, was how the economic constraints in a variety of countries were hurting their defense budgets, who was doing what, whether people were really fulfilling their responsibilities.</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: One of the issues in Afghanistan was - also, and continues to be - is that each country has kind of national mandates that makes it difficult to have a joint command. But I think NATO is learning, we all are, as we are in a somewhat different situation. But I know there are questions of, kind of, coalition a la carte or how this is going to work. But despite the constraints, I think obviously this is a NATO victory.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There was also a speech by the president last spring in which he said, the United States cannot use force to battle repression everywhere, but that does not mean that we cannot do the right thing when the opportunity presents itself. We're now in a situation in Syria, where according to the United Nations, 3,000 civilians have been killed by that government. Is it time to do the right thing in Syria?</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Well, I do think that it's very important to understand that this has to all be done on a case-by-case basis. And as the president said, not everything, you know, we can't be everywhere. I do know that there is a great deal of concern about what's going on in Syria, and ways that the international community is keeping pressure through multilateral sanctions ad a variety of other ways that they are working on that. But each situation is different, and that is what the policymakers have to do is to kind of assess what works where.</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: And I think the hardest part really is always telling people that each situation is different, you know? One wishes that everything were always the same, but it's not. And the part that's so interesting generally about what's going on in the Arab world is that while there is obviously a similarity to people motivated by social media and by demonstrations, there is a difference in each of these countries. You know, whether it's Libya or Tunisia or Egypt or Syria. Every one of these is a bit different.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Or Bahrain. Secretary Albright, thank you very much for your time today. We appreciate it.</s>MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Good to be with you. Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Madeleine Albright about to leave for the World Economic Forum in Jordan. We appreciate her time with us today. When we come back after a short break: fundamentalism and intellectualism, a growing divide among evangelical Christians. We'll also remember Piri Thomas, who wrote "Down These Mean Streets." Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. |
Refugees in Turkey, who are fleeing wars in Syria and Afghanistan, are worried about the impact of new European Union rules designed to limit their access to European countries. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The route to Europe is about to get more difficult for refugees and migrants heading to Sweden or elsewhere. Starting tomorrow, a new deal between the European Union and Turkey takes effect, which will shut down the main migrant route into Europe, which is through Greece.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: More than 1 million people have fled conflict in places like Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and the Horn of Africa. As of Monday, some refugees stuck in Greece can be expelled to Turkey. NPR's Peter Kenyon is in the Turkish port city of Izmir on the Aegean Sea. Peter, you've been reporting this story for months now. And you were in Izmir last fall. So what are you seeing? How does the situation there compare between now and then?</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Well, it's a dramatic change, Rachel. Last fall, we saw Syrians, Iraqis, others just milling around in public, at the bus stations, getting tickets to the coast, buying life jackets for the kids, waiting for their smuggler's call to go on to Greece and Germany or another country.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Now the crossings are way down. In those days, it was thousands a day. Now it's hundreds at most. The Turkish coast guard stopped nearly 200 just yesterday.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: So everything, as a result, is much more undercover. There's an atmosphere of fear and caution for those few still trying to make the crossings. They can't get on the bus anymore unless they have special permission. There's police checkpoints. And Turks who know smugglers are telling us that the word on the street now is, look, don't go. It's a bad time.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So it sounds like these new rules are serving as some kind of deterrent, although you've been talking to Syrians and Afghans there who are still intent on going - on making this journey. Where are they saying?</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Well, it's interesting. We're hearing a few still intent, but also some saying OK, maybe not. The first migrants, as you said, could be sent back to Turkey here under this new deal as early as tomorrow. And the prospects for those who might be sent back or who haven't made it yet are equally gloomy.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: One Afghan I met gave his name Massoud (ph) - didn't want to use his last name - he used to work for the U.S. military in Kabul. He says he's worried about retaliation. But he talked about a very difficult journey - Kabul to Pakistan to Iran to Turkey, getting pushed back every step of the way. They failed three times to cross the Aegean. And now he says that's it - no more for him. Here's how Massoud put it.</s>MASSOUD: No, I don't want to try. I called somebody in Greece. They said situation is very bad. Stay in Turkey. I saw somebody that still was trying to go to Greece. I told them they are sending back them. They said they cannot send them back.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: But for you, that's enough.</s>MASSOUD: Yeah. For me, it's enough. I lost all my money. Now I'm zero.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: The problem is here in Turkey, there's just no work to be had. And if thousands of more people are about to descend on the country, the prospects are going to get even worse.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The new deal between Turkey and the EU, as we've said, is supposed to come into effect tomorrow. How's the government preparing, Peter? What are their concerns about how they're going to put this into place?</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Well, they say they can do it just fine. But there's no sign that they're ready to accommodate thousands more people. Up in Dikili to the north where we were this weekend, there's just an empty field where reception centers should be. There are protests both in Dikili and over in Greece of the not-in-my-backyard variety. So pressure is growing. And once again, the migrants are caught in the middle.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: NPR's Peter Kenyon in Izmir, Turkey. Thanks so much, Peter.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Thanks, Rachel. |
Republican politicians up for election are scrambling: What if Trump leads the ticket? NPR's Rachel Martin asks strategist Rob Jesmer how candidates are addressing the Trump issue. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And fair to say, it's been a pretty bad week for Donald Trump. He's had to backtrack and clarify remarks he made about abortion. He has had to defend his campaign manager who was charged with battery. And polls have him trailing Ted Cruz ahead of Tuesday's primary in Wisconsin. But even if Cruz wins that race, Donald Trump holds a significant lead in the delegate count overall. That means politicians down the ballot, senators and congresspeople up for re-election this year, must contend with what it would mean to campaign with Donald Trump as the nominee. That's something Rob Jesmer has been thinking a lot about. He's the former executive director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. And he joins me now in our studios here in Washington. Welcome to the program.</s>ROB JESMER: Thank you, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The conventional wisdom out there, as you know, seems to be that Trump winning the nomination is not a good thing for the down ticket, not a good thing for incumbent Republicans. What do you think?</s>ROB JESMER: I share the conventional wisdom, Rachel. I think that, you know, if you're a Senate candidate, you're looking for as much predictability as you can - that's what you want. And as you've seen with Donald Trump just this past week on his abortion comments, you can be at a place where every other day you're forced to defend Donald Trump's comments. And I just think that's not what you want to be as a campaign. So I think a lot of people have kind of processed that. I think the people who are - where people have not processed is in these states - a lot of these states the get-out-the-vote effort is largely dependent on the presidential campaign and has been for years on both sides of the aisle.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: People are motivated by who's at the top.</s>ROB JESMER: Not even motivated by it, but it's also the actual mechanics of getting voters out to a vote has been largely done by the campaigns and in conjunction with their national committees, so the RNC or the DNC. You know, I don't particularly think - I know this is somewhat counterintuitive - but I don't think from a technical point of view that the Trump campaign has run a very good campaign. So why does that matter? Well, if you're in one of these swing states, you want to make sure that the people at the top of the ticket is having - technically proficient in their get-out-the-vote operation. It's not very sophisticated.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And you just don't think that the Trump campaign has that capacity.</s>ROB JESMER: Well, what would suggest that he has? I mean, how about nothing?</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Isn't there a case to be made, which many are making in the Trump camp, that the Trump coalition - they say, you know, he's pulling in independents in record numbers. They claim he's going to pull in Democrats. And if you get those people on Election Day to be thinking that they would vote for a Republican to be the president, doesn't it extend that those same people would open their mind to voting Republican down ticket?</s>ROB JESMER: Yeah, I don't think so. And I don't think that - I think there's a couple things, one. One, Rachel, is I don't - this - they're not really getting new voters. They're getting voters who have voted before who have - some of them have decided to vote in the Republican Party. But they're likely - probably conservative voters and chose not to vote - not vote in primaries or caucuses beforehand. But there's not this, like, rush of new voters. Secondly, I saw a poll just when I was walking in the studio that, you know, he was losing in Missouri to Secretary Clinton. You know, we saw a poll last week in Michigan where he was losing to Secretary Clinton, and Governor Kasich was winning.</s>ROB JESMER: So, like, it - there's - it's - there is a unique coalition of people behind him. But that has so far not - not at all transferred into polling in the general election. And to think any of the primary turnout is indicative of what's going to happen in a general election - that that's going to be helpful to us - there's no supporting evidence of it - zero.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You seem really frustrated (laughter). As someone who has been in this business for a long time, what do you make of his success? Why is it happening?</s>ROB JESMER: Well, this is a - one is I think there is a great deal of frustration with the Obama administration. I also think that we have created this ecosystem on the right - I shouldn't say we have created this ecosystem. This ecosystem has been created on the right where constantly they're telling people that the only issue - the only reason why we have not accomplished, you know, legislative goal - our legislative goals of a smaller government and less spending, what have you, is because Republican leadership has not stood up to President Obama. And of course that's false. This is the bottom line.</s>ROB JESMER: You can't do anything in this country in Congress without compromising. And so I'm frustrated in the sense that we have a group of people out there who believe that the problem is the Republicans. And as a Republican and a conservative and one who thinks the Obama administration has been very harmful to our country, I think it's pretty clear the problem is the president (laughter) and that - and the Democratic Party.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Although his approval ratings are at a, you know, a high in the - the highest in three years.</s>ROB JESMER: I'm just saying as a - if you are - I'm not - if you are a public - my point is this, if you want to take the country in a different direction, which I do as a Republican, I do not believe the first thing to do that is to change the leadership of the Republican Party. I think the first thing to do that is to win the White House and to govern. And so I think, look, what's going to happen is - and sadly - I think Secretary Clinton, by any measure, is the weakest Democratic nominee in 50 years. Like, it's kind of hard to argue. Even if you are a liberal person, you would - it's, like, her - just from a structural point of view, she's very weak. And we are on our way to losing to her. In fact, I think it's likely we lose to her and we take out many Senate seats and House seats with it.</s>ROB JESMER: And so - then I think, hopefully, in November we'll wake up and say - we'll reflect honestly about what we've done to our party and how we govern and how we win elections. And we win elections in off-years. We never win them on the on-years. And the ones when we do win, we have a very difficult time governing. And so I just think we're going to get - we're going to get what we deserve.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Rob Jesmer is a partner at FP1 Strategies. He joined us in our studios here in D.C.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Rob, thanks so much.</s>ROB JESMER: Thank you. |
NPR's Linda Wertheimer asks Pieter Van Ostaeyen, an independent researcher in Belgium, about radicalism in Belgium and Belgian connections to the Syrian conflict. | LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: The bombings in Brussels this past week have focused attention on the fact that Belgium has the highest number of foreign fighters in Syria of any Western European country. Hundreds have left Belgium to fight in Syria and Iraq since 2012. Many of them have returned to Belgium where they've been able to create their own terrorist networks. Pieter Van Ostaeyen, who is an independent researcher in Belgium has been tracking the flow of Belgian fighters, joins us now. Welcome to our program.</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: Thank you very much.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: So first of all, do we know if any of the suspects in this week's attacks had been to Syria?</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: We know that, for example, one of the attackers who blew himself up in Brussels Airport had been arrested at the Turkish border, possibly even twice. Unfortunately, he was sent back to Holland. And the information didn't really flow through to the Belgian security forces and hence, seems that he never returned to Holland. He was able to cross the border. And he was - he remained in Belgium completely unnoticed until he blew himself up this week.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: Do you have any idea of how many people have been to Syria and come back?</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: Well, according to my last count, which was in the beginning of February, we had at least 562 individuals who had been involved.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: There have been many explanations for why radicalism has rooted itself in Belgium - the divisions in the country itself, lack of communication between intelligence agencies, difficulties integrating immigrants. What do you think is the most important reason?</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: The main reason why so many Belgians, in the end, join the Islamic State is because we had some quite big networks involved here in Belgium. We've had Sharia4Belgium with 79 recruits. And then we've had the nucleus around Khalid Zerkani with 45 recruits. And it's especially in this latter group that we find, for example, people like Abdelhamid Abaaoud who was behind the Paris attacks, but also people who have been involved in this week's attacks in Brussels. The guys who joined these groups were able to attract other recruits just by peer pressure, social pressure. They made family, friends and relatives join the ranks of the Islamic State.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: If the Belgian authorities jump in and arrest numbers of these people, will the networks go away, or will they just re-form?</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: Well, this is not going to stop just by taking out the few guys who managed to escape since Paris or after Brussels. If we look at the complexity of the network and the fact that everywhere we can see more individuals linked to Abdelhamid Abaaoud, it's like a spider web. Every single point in the spider's web is connected in one way to Abdelhamid Abaaoud. It's not like they were confined cells - a cell that operated in France and a cell that operated in Brussels. No, these guys were interconnected. And I do believe, possibly, dozens more might have been involved in that particular network. And that we probably only know half about it.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: Pieter Van Ostaeyen speaking with us from Belgium. We talked via Skype. Pieter, thank you very much.</s>PIETER VAN OSTAEYEN: Thanks for having me. |
Rachel Martin talks to Matt Sherman — who spent 13 years as a civilian working in Iraq and Afghanistan — about his deployment and readjustment to life in the United States. | MATT SHERMAN: I thought that I was only going to go out there for six months, so it was a real kind of roll of the dice in the sense that I'd be giving up a very comfortable career. But I wanted to take part in something.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That's the voice of Matt Sherman, and he took part in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sherman is one of thousands of civilian advisers and contractors who worked alongside members of the American military and diplomatic corps. More contractors have served in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars than service members. Sherman worked in each country twice and ended up spending most of the past 13 years in those two places, putting him way to the right on the bell curve of Americans who've served in our two long wars, military or otherwise.</s>MATT SHERMAN: Even though these sorts of tours are very challenging and very disappointing at times, they also give a great sense of purpose that is really difficult to duplicate elsewhere.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Now he's back in the U.S. trying to find purpose in life outside the war zone. Matt Sherman is our Sunday Conversation.</s>MATT SHERMAN: I had just completed law school and needed to pay off some bills. And so I went to a law firm, and it was fine. But at that time, in that immediate post-9/11 environment, there was lots of activities that were going on, actions in Afghanistan. Then there was Iraq. And I was reached out from some former colleagues if I'd be interested in going there. And I thought it would be a change and fitting for my educational background and, in some part, a professional background.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: In the profile that was done of you in The Washington Post, there was a little blurb in there that said that you appreciated the simplicity of life in war zones. Can you tell me what that means?</s>MATT SHERMAN: It allowed me - and allows many others, civilian and military - to focus on the work at hand. My commute every day was about a minute from my hooch to the office.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The hooch is, like, the container where you lived.</s>MATT SHERMAN: The container that I lived, right. And so as a result, I was able to fully immerse myself into my work. That was another thing that kind of fed into the sense of purpose, the sense of mission, because you're able to kind of fully dedicate yourself to it.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: When did the sheen of all of it start to wear off - I imagine it did - when it stopped being such an adventure and so new, when the severity of the war and what you were witnessing really started to hit home for you?</s>MATT SHERMAN: There were - a close friend of mine, colleague, who was shot early on - about three months into the tour, four months into the tour - and that really - that really hit home personally.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Shot how?</s>MATT SHERMAN: He was ambushed in Baghdad and shot, I believe, five or six times. He - miraculously, another Iraqi picked him up and brought him into the green zone and the hospital. And he was near death. We all thought he was going to die, but he was able to recover over a series of years, actually. And it really impacted me a lot.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Did anyone accuse you of being an adrenaline junkie?</s>MATT SHERMAN: I actually don't agree with that at all. That's not what this is about. And I - people have said that. What I do see is that...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: ...Why do you have the reaction to that?</s>MATT SHERMAN: Because it's not an adrenaline thing. It's a sense of purpose thing for me. You're part of something that's much larger than yourself. You work with colleagues that put their all into something. You have people who - whose lives are being impacted for better and for worse.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I guess where I would push back a little bit is - because it's about life and death, right? - that they're married somehow, this idea of having purpose but the purpose is so meaningful because the stakes are so high.</s>MATT SHERMAN: The stakes certainly are high. But at least from my personal perspective, it was a sense of purpose and a sense of mission that really drove me and made me kind of continue and return to these sort of things. And while it's been difficult to kind of step back and decide, OK, I'm going to move on, I'm also very much looking forward to the next chapter of my life.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You have devoted so much of your professional life and your life generally to these wars, these places. And Iraq and Afghanistan - when you say those words to a lot of people today, Americans' eyes glaze over. There is so much fatigue. What is that like for you, having poured so much of yourself into these conflicts for so long?</s>MATT SHERMAN: Well, I'm mentally proud of the work I've done. And even though these endeavors have been immensely costly to so many people, I'm proud of the work that I've done.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Are you hesitant that you won't find anything that will ever compare, that will never give you the sense of purpose?</s>MATT SHERMAN: What I've learned is that you can't equate those two things. You've got to be able to separate them. The time that I had in Iraq was the time I had in Iraq. The time I had in Afghanistan was the time I had there. And I've got to look at the next phase as the next phase and the next chapter of my life.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Matt Sherman. He just wrapped up more than a decade serving as a civilian adviser in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thanks so much for talking with us, Matt.</s>MATT SHERMAN: Thank you. |
NPR's Rachel Martin asks North Carolina furniture maker Mitchell Gold about a new state law undoing local LGBT protections. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: We're going to now focus in on a new controversial law in North Carolina that is rolling back rights for LGBT people. The law gets rid of anti-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity. And the law gets very personal, requiring people to use restrooms that correspond to the gender listed on their birth certificates. There's been a spate of national criticism about this from the CEOs of Apple and IBM, the NBA. And the mayors of New York, San Francisco and Seattle have all barred city employees from nonessential business travel to the state of North Carolina. The governor of that state, Pat McCrory, posted a video this past week responding to the uproar.</s>PAT MCRORY: To the people and businesses of North Carolina, we are a state of inclusiveness, openness and diversity. And I'm very, very proud of that.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: We're going to hear now from a businessman in North Carolina about the impact of this law both financially and personally. His name is Mitchell Gold. He co-founded the furniture company Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams with his partner Bob Williams. Mitchell Gold joins us now. Welcome to the program.</s>MITCHELL GOLD: Thank you.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I guess I'll just start off by asking for your reaction to this law when you heard this was coming down the pike.</s>MITCHELL GOLD: I was, you know, just shocked by it and think it's despicable and appalling. It's really hard for me to understand why they would want to make sure that local communities don't have nondiscrimination clauses that make each community richer and more diverse. And it's really appalling that for trans people they would want to make a big issue out of where that person decides to go to the bathroom, where they feel most comfortable doing something that's so private and that represents their dignity.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: How do you imagine that it might affect your business?</s>MITCHELL GOLD: Well, I think what is disturbing is when we are trying to recruit people to our home office in western North Carolina, I do sometimes get people say to me, well, I don't know if I want to move to North Carolina. I don't know if I want to move to a rural area. And it's an ongoing battle. And this makes it more difficult, not less difficult, to hire the very best talent.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: How do you imagine this law affecting your life personally?</s>MITCHELL GOLD: It's not about me. I'm more concerned about a 15- or 16-year-old kid. When I was 15, 16 years old, I was scared. I was tortured. I cried myself to sleep every night because I thought I was broken. I thought God didn't love me. And that's - that's who I'm worried about. I want us to all take a deep breath and think about a gay kid that's out there and sees in the newspaper this - on the TV, on the radio, hears his parents talking about it, and especially when his parents say, oh, well, that's a good law. We have to protect a businesses' religious freedom, which is really code for we have to protect their ability to discriminate against somebody. And I'm especially concerned about trans kids because, you know, just imagine for a minute a kid that's, you know, 14, 15 years old. And they are struggling to understand their body, to understand who they are, what's inside of them, what's outside of them. And now the legislature's saying - no, no, no, no, no. You have to go where you're uncomfortable doing something that is of such private dignity.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Have you considered exercising your economic leverage and just packing up and leaving North Carolina as a statement, as a symbol?</s>MITCHELL GOLD: No because I can't tell you how many people in my community have kids that are now 20 and 30 and 40 years old that have said to me if it wasn't for us in the community shining a light and saying that you can be gay, you can be successful and healthy, that you're not broken, how many kids that has affected. So I don't want to abandon my community. I'm not - we're not abandoning the ship, if you will.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Mitchell Gold. He's chairman and co-founder of the furniture maker Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams based in North Carolina. He also co-founded an organization called Faithinamerica.org. Thanks so much for talking with us.</s>MITCHELL GOLD: OK. It's my pleasure. |
Volunteers aiding desperate migrants in Greece are pulling out because under new rules, the asylum-seekers are being herded behind fences and out of the volunteers' reach. | LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: A million asylum-seekers from the Middle East and beyond have landed on the rocky shores of Lesbos in Greece over the course of the migrant crisis. Authorities were overwhelmed. Volunteers rushed in to help. Now the EU wants to shut the door on migrants, so it shut out those volunteers. Joanna Kakissis reports.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: A week ago, this ferry pulled out of the main port on Lesbos headed for the Greek mainland. It was one of the last to carry Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans off the island. The refugees waved from the deck at volunteers standing at the port. Laura Jansen was cheering and fighting back tears.</s>LAURA JANSEN: I was saying I love you in Arabic and in Farsi and in English and just clapping 'cause I think they are so very brave and so very strong. And they do not know what is about to happen to them. I don't think any of us do.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: Jansen put her music career on hold to move to Lesbos last year and help asylum-seekers. She used to interact with them every day. Now, because of an EU deal with Turkey, they're confined to a camp. Jansen can only see them behind a towering metal fence.</s>LAURA JANSEN: There's not a lot of access anymore for volunteers. Everything's becoming quite militarized. And the governments are stepping in and pushing volunteers out.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: The EU deal seems to end a remarkable story on Lesbos, an island that showed mercy in the face of the greatest human migration into Europe since World War II.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: It began a year ago. Asylum-seekers in orange life jackets crossed the sea from Turkey in rubber rafts. They landed on rocky beaches near a village where 85-year-old Maritsa Mavrapidi grew up.</s>MARITSA MAVRAPIDI: (Speaking Greek).</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: "I brought the refugees clothes from my closet," she says. "They were soaking wet, and I did not want them to catch cold." Soon, thousands were arriving every day. The volunteers followed. Syrian-American Neda Kadri spent hours translating and fundraising remotely from Dearborn, Mich. Then, a Syrian friend lost relatives in a shipwreck.</s>NEDA KADRI: This case made me feel like I don't want to be online. I don't want to be doing this over the phone. I want to be doing this in person. I want to be there.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: She quit her job and moved to Lesbos, one of the thousands of volunteers who clothed, fed and even entertained refugees.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: Sabine Chouhair, a professional clown from Lebanon, wears a sparkly gold dress. She hugs six giggling kids from Syria. This scene played out last month at the port. Last fall, she was allowed to perform inside the main migrant camp.</s>SABINE CHOUHAIR: Like, every day we would have 3,500 people coming. So we basically were performing five to six times a day.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: But now Greek police told her and fellow clown Kolleen Kintz they needed special permits.</s>KOLLEEN KINTZ: So we did all of the official paperwork. You know, we had everything notarized and submitted through, and we very quickly heard a no.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: The final no came from the EU last week when it sealed the deal with Turkey to deport new refugees. Now the migrant camp on Lesbos is essentially a prison. Major aid groups like Doctors Without Borders left the camp because they say the new deal is inhumane and violates international law.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PROTESTERS: (Chanting) No borders, no nations, stop deportations.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: Clad in the orange life jackets once worn by the refugees, volunteers protested outside the camp on Thursday.</s>JOANNA KAKISSIS, BYLINE: A fight broke out with police when the volunteers got too close to the fence, trying to clasp the hands of those trapped behind it. For NPR News, I'm Joanna Kakissis on Lesbos.]] |
This piece originally aired March 25, 2016, on Morning Edition. | LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: Fans of the Caped Crusader and the Man of Steel can finally see their heroes fight each other.</s>JESSE EISENBERG: (As Lex Luthor) Black and blue. Fight night. The greatest gladiator match in the history of the world.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: "Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice" opened this weekend. It was produced by Deborah Snyder and directed by her husband, Zack. And that dynamic duo is working on a whole slate of movies based on DC comics as NPR's Mandalit del Barco reported this past week.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Not surprisingly, the new superhero movie packs a punch.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: For the first time, we get to see Batman and Superman together and fight, which is kind of cool. And who will win?</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Producer Debbie Snyder sits in her low-key office on the bustling Warner Bros. studio lot. Superhero figurines and framed photos of her eight children decorate the space. Snyder looks to be settling in here at Warner Bros. for a while. She's working on a movie out later this summer about a group of super villains called "Suicide Squad." And then there's "The Justice League," "The Flash," "Aquaman," and her favorite, "Wonder Woman."</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: That's a lot of superheroes.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: That's a lot of superheroes.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Snyder and her husband, Zack, have worked on such films as "Watchmen" and "300." They have their own production company, Cruel and Unusual Films. Snyder says she's a hands-on producer. She keeps film shoots on schedule and on budget. She negotiates deals, handles actors, checks hair and makeup and she works on the marketing campaigns.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: I love figuring out what the posters are and what the ads are and working with our promotional partners and shaping what their campaigns are.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: These are skills she says she first honed working in advertising in New York.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: It was a great training ground. And that's where my husband and I met because I hired him to do a Soft & Dri deodorant commercial. You got to meet a lot of people. You had to deal with politics. And it was really fast-moving, so you were always, like - you know, you had to think on your feet.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Snyder says she finds herself one of the rare female producers working in action and comic book film genres.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: You know, I've always been in a boy's club. I mean, even starting in, you know, Madison Avenue Advertising Agency, it was really - I worked on a beer account and Texaco - you know, Havoline oil. And it was predominantly male, as is Hollywood. But I think that things are changing.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Debbie and Zack Snyder have been hiring women as writers, costume designers, even a stunt coordinator. She began an initiative with DC Comics to hire and mentor even more women.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: It's easier to look onscreen - right? - to see, oh, there's an absence of great roles for women. OK, we need to make a change. But I've been striving to figure out ways to try and get more women behind the camera.</s>MADELINE DI NONNO: It's very encouraging, and we need a ton more executives like Deb.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Madeline Di Nonno is CEO of the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media. The project reports that only about 20 percent of feature film producers are women.</s>MADELINE DI NONNO: So to have Deb in the position that she is in with power to greenlight, power to oversee the projects, it's very, very important.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Growing up in New Jersey, Snyder says she didn't really read comic books, but she did watch superheroes on TV, especially one particular feminist icon celebrating her 75th anniversary this year.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: (Singing) Wonder Woman (laughter).</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: For next year's "Wonder Woman" movie, Snyder hired Patty Jenkins to direct and actress Gal Gadot plays the title role.</s>DEBORAH SNYDER: The first time we had her on set, I actually got teared up realizing what an impact and what a role model that she could be. You can be beautiful and sexy and still be intelligent and strong. Women should be allowed to be all those things.</s>UNIDENTIFIED SINGER: (Singing) Wonder Woman.</s>MANDALIT DEL BARCO, BYLINE: Mandalit Del Barco, NPR News.</s>UNIDENTIFIED SINGER: (Singing) Wonder Woman. You're a wonder, Wonder Woman. |
Religious services in Belgium today are remembering the dead and injured from Tuesday's terrorist attacks in Brussels. | LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: This is WEEKEND EDITION from NPR News. I'm Linda Wertheimer in for Rachel Martin. We begin this hour in Brussels where Belgian authorities continue to investigate the bombings Tuesday that left more than 30 dead and 270 injured.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: What was supposed to be a peaceful Easter, a time for reflection and unity, turned ugly.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: A March Against Fear planned for today was canceled, so as not to sap police resources. But Belgians did turn out earlier this morning, including a couple of hundred men dressed in black who took over a peaceful vigil.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: NPR's Melissa Block is reporting from Brussels. She joined us from the scene of that vigil.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, BYLINE: There had been hundreds gathered here holding hands in solidarity against terrorism, commemorating the victims. And all of a sudden, a group of marchers, 100 strong - as you say, all dressed in black, all of them men - came marching into the center square here, right in front of the stock exchange, chanting slogans, taking over - essentially hijacking this peaceful protest. They had a flare lit as they marched in. They were pumping their fists in the air. Their banner indicated that they were soccer fans. We would call them hooligans - clearly seemed to have right-wing views. There were shouts of it's all your fault implicating, I believe, Muslims in what had happened here - and the Muslim population of Brussels.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, BYLINE: It was very ugly. Punches were thrown. Police moved in in force - riot police with police dogs. Eventually, water cannons came into the street - trucks of water cannons herded the black-clad protesters out of the square, turned the water cannons on and forced them out of the square. And now back in the square are the peaceful protesters. And I'm looking - right to my right is a man holding a rainbow flag that says peace, a lot of signs about heart over hate.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: This all followed Easter morning services, I take it. There was a very different scene there.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, BYLINE: Right. And the priest at the services that we went to at the cathedral here, which is named after the patron saints of the city, made a brief mention of what had happened. He said after everything that happened in this city these last few days, it's hard to celebrate Easter in the normal way. And he mentioned the victims of arbitrary violence with the theme of resurrection and rebirth and eternal life through the life of Christ, so it was quite moving.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, BYLINE: A lot of people turned out. I mean, the sense around town is that - around the city that I've seen is people are more or less living their lives. Some people have said look, I don't want to go into the metro, which was, of course, one of the scenes of the bombings. But they are out and about. They're in the cafes. Children are in parks. And as I stand here now, there are hundreds of people gathered in this public square.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: Melissa, have you learned anything about - the investigation, as we've said, is ongoing. Have you learned anything more about Tuesday's bombings at the Brussels airport and the metro?</s>MELISSA BLOCK, BYLINE: Well, as you say, the investigation continues. And there have been a number of raids - 13 raids, I believe, in the area around Brussels overnight. Nine people were detained - five of them released. Unclear whether those are people who are believed to have ties specifically to what happened here on Tuesday or more broadly to the attacks in Paris last November. As you know, there are deep connections between those bombers - those suicide bombers in Paris and the people who carried out the attacks here on Tuesday at the airport and in the metro in Brussels.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, BYLINE: You know, Linda, I want to mention one more thing before I go. I'm standing right next to a poster of someone saying - have you seen? And there's a picture of a woman with her name - very similar to the signs we saw all over New York City after 9/11. There were so many victims who were not identified right away, and this is a sign of one of them who was missing.</s>LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST: NPR's Melissa Block. She's reporting from Brussels. Melissa, thank you.</s>MELISSA BLOCK, BYLINE: You're welcome, Linda. |
NPR's Rachel Martin speaks with journalist Ed Montini on how the immigration debate will play out in the upcoming Arizona primary. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Utah and Arizona hold Republican contests on Tuesday. Donald Trump was in Arizona yesterday, and his crowd was as amped up as ever. At an event in Tucson last night, there were more scuffles between protesters and supporters, and one protester was punched.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Trump continued on with his message about border security. He's made a possible wall between the U.S. and Mexico key to his campaign. It's a message people in Arizona have heard before. For more, we called up Ed Montini, columnist with the website AZCentral.</s>ED MONTINI: I think it informs our opinions considerably, but it's not much of a conversation right now. It was so heavily a conversation for so many years and such a divisive issue here that's it's almost as if people would prefer not to talk much about it. It still plays really well with a candidate like Donald Trump who is very much, you know, using the playbook of any number of politicians, including Senator McCain in his last run for re-election, where they play heavily the immigration card.</s>ED MONTINI: You know, Senator McCain, who was one of the Gang of Eight hoping to get a comprehensive immigration bill, well, he produced a commercial for his last election where he's with a local county sheriff. And they walk along the fence line at the border, and they're talking about completing the danged fence. That plays well with voters when it gets right down to the nitty-gritty. And they're going to decide who they're voting for.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Because of, you know, the state law that was very controversial that was passed years ago SB 1070...</s>ED MONTINI: SB 10 - right.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: ...Which allowed state officials to pursue undocumented immigrants. Since then, the whole topic has been put on the backburner. How so?</s>ED MONTINI: Well, the business community in Arizona was really worried about that. I mean, the business community in Arizona took a shot with that. And I think that they, in their own way, behind closed doors, sort of got the members of the legislature to tamp down on that.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Tamp down - you mean not enforce?</s>ED MONTINI: Well, it has more to do with the language and the image. If you keep pushing Arizona as a immigration-troubled state, that doesn't seem very inviting to businesses.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: How are Cruz and Kasich doing in Arizona?</s>ED MONTINI: Well, I'd imagine Cruz would do OK in terms of evangelicals and religious people here. Kasich, I would imagine, he'll have some appeal with those few, what we would call, mainstream Republicans in Arizona. And many of them have drifted into the ranks of independents. There's a very large percentage of independents in Arizona. Most people look at them as sort of a shadow Republican Party - as sort of being the less extreme Republicans.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So do you think it's fair to say that Arizona still has, though, a problem with illegal immigration?</s>ED MONTINI: Oh, absolutely I think every border state has a problem with illegal immigration. There's no question about that. But the fact of the matter is that during the Obama administration, there have been a number of improvements along the border, so it's better. It still has issues. If you believe - if you're a politician - if you're Donald Trump, you play up those issues as much as possible. And if you're somebody like Hillary Clinton over on the other side, you're going to say it's more secure than it ever has been. Both are true to an extent. It's probably more secure than it ever has been, and it still has issues.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Ed Montini's a columnist for the website Arizona Central. Thanks so much for talking with us, Ed.</s>ED MONTINI: Oh, you're most welcome. |
Carl Sagan once said that if you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. In his book The Toaster Project, author and artist Thomas Thwaites describes his effort to build a cheap plastic toaster from scratch, and what the project taught him about material goods, self-reliance, international commerce, and globalization. | IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. You know, we talk a lot, and we talk to a lot of people on this program about making things themselves, people who make stuff, inventors and maker fairs and things like that. Maybe it's - you see a robot or a flying machine, a fancy wheelchair. But my next guest has a story that is guaranteed to impress, even awe many do-it-yourselfers.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: It's all starting with a desire to build a toaster. A toaster, you say? Big deal. Where are the laser beams, the arduino chips, the heavy-duty stuff that we see at all these fairs? Well, wait until you hear the story - or better yet, wait until you read it.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Joining me now is Thomas Thwaites. He's author of the new book "The Toaster Project," just out from Princeton Architectural Press. He's at BBC Studios in London. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Hi, Ira. Hi.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Hi.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Happy to be talking to you.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Happy to have you - what came over you to decide to build a toaster from scratch - I mean, literally, from scratch? You have to go out and make the material, all the materials yourself.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: I mean, yeah, that was the dream.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: What were you thinking?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: That was the attempt. I mean, weirdly, you know, I think it began just with, you know, a book that I read when I was sort of a teenager, you know, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" sort of series. And there's, like, one small paragraph in that book where, you know, the hero, Arthur Dent, sort of finds himself marooned on a kind of planet populated only by, you know, a kind of technologically undeveloped people.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And he sort of - and he's there, and he kind of expects that, okay, yeah, sure, you know, he's kind of got - 20th-century man, you know, he was educated and all that kind of thing, and he kind of expects that he'll be able to sort of, you know, just wow them with his sort of command of technology and, you know, science and become, like, hailed as a genius.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: But I don't know. After a sort of few days in the village, he kind of realizes that actually when he's just by himself, you know, he can barely make a sandwich, let alone a toaster. And that kind of conundrum, like, just from that paragraph, kind of stuck with me until I sort of thought okay, well, maybe - you know, I mean, I've got Wikipedia.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: I mean, you know, Arthur Dent, he was a bit of an idiot. I'm sure I could make an electric toaster myself. So...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Sure. It's the most basic product everybody has in their home, right?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Exactly. I mean, you know...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: What's so hard about this?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Well, yeah, I mean, exactly. I mean...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: But you found out...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...it feels like the last discussion. Yeah, well, actually, yeah. It sort of - I realized it was like the height of arrogance to believe that I could actually make an electric toaster from scratch myself, you know, all by myself. You know, because I sort of - okay, so I thought, okay, I'll reverse-engineer, you know, a cheap toaster, and kind of went out and bought one, took it home.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: It kind of cost a few pounds, and, you know, took it apart. And then this kind of thing, it was made from kind of about 400 different kind of - different bits, if you see what I mean...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah, yeah, little pieces there.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...all put together into this object. And, like, these bits were made of, you know, 100 different materials, kind of hard to estimate where, you know, what different material is, if you see what I mean.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah, well, you describe in the book how you had to go out and teach yourself how to be a metallurgist, how to be a miner. You had to - you had to mine the ore that you were going to make the toaster metal out of. You had to teach yourself how to make the wiring, the plugs, all from scratch. You didn't buy - nothing off the shelf.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Well, I mean, so the kind of - the beginning was, okay, I'm going to make everything from scratch, and I'm not going to use any tools which weren't around, you know, kind of before sort of the Industrial Revolution, or whatever. But then I don't know. I got the train to the iron mine.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: You know, so I went to this iron mine with an empty suitcase and sort of spoke to this old miner and, you know, eventually dragged back, like, a suitcase full of iron ore. But, you know, I'd kind of got the train to do that, if you see what I mean. Should I have gotten, like, a horse and cart? And then, you know, I kind of quickly realized that, you know, from scratch, you know, all by myself was just - that's kind of Unabomber cabin territory, if you see what I mean.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: You know, that's like, okay, start in the forest, and then first I'll make myself some shoes, and then some clothes, and then develop farming and all that kind of thing. So, yeah. So I kind of thought, okay, from scratch means from the raw materials. So, yeah, I had my suitcase full of iron ore.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And then, you know, how the hell do you kind of make this rock into metal, which you can use to make, you know, just the framework of the toaster, or, even better, like, the spring to pop up the toast?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And so, yeah, I went to - you know, knocked on the door of Rio Tinto Chair of Advanced Mineral Extraction, this Professor Cilliers, the Royal School of Mines here in London, and, you know, asked him: Okay, how do I make - you know, how do I turn this rock into iron?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And, you know, basically, you know, he - I ended up going to the library. You know, he was really helpful, but...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: But you had to build a furnace and everything to smelt the ore, and it came out, and it just crumbled in your hand, the first little wire in there.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. I mean, you know, that was like another moment when, okay, so I was looking through the undergraduate textbooks, and, you know, nowhere it tells its - does it tell you, okay, step one, take your rock, and then put it - you know, dig a hole and then - you know, that's not the kind of thing.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: So I ended up going to the history of science library and looking in this - you know, the first textbook - in the West, at least - written about metallurgy and, you know, these kind of beautiful wood cuts of, you know, peasants shoveling rock into a sort of, you know, a kind of fire pit, basically. And that's kind of what I ended up doing but, you know, using a kind of dustbin and a leaf blower instead of, like a, you know, proper furnace and a set of bellows.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And then I, after kind of a day and a night smelting my rock, I kind of dragged it out of the fire and sort of, you know, lifted up a hammer and, you know, began beating it, and it shattered because I hadn't kind of done it correctly. I just didn't have the kind of - the sort of the skills and the wisdom to sort of - to do this process, which is kind of more art than science. And, yeah...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Right. It didn't work out...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...and so I ended up - eh? Sorry?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I said those first steps were kind of tough. 1-800-989-8255 is our number. We're talking with Thomas Thwaites, author of the book "The Toaster Project," and the cover itself speaks 1,000 words of what this toaster looked like, because you also had to make the plastic outsides of the toaster, which you had no experience working with plastic, either, did you?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah, I mean...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: That didn't turn out so well, either, did it?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah, no. I mean...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: How do you make plastic from scratch when you don't know how to...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Well, okay. So, plastic comes from oil, right? It's, like, based on sort of fossil fuels. And, you know, after trying to persuade a big oil company to, you know, send me to an oil rig so I could kind of get myself, like, some - a jug of oil from source, they kind of - they weren't into that idea.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: You know, I sort of ended up looking around for other ways. You know, you can make a kind of plastic from potato starch. And so I tried that and kind of mixed up this, you know, this kind of - it's kind of like - you know, like, sort of snotty goo in a big pot and tried to, like, mold in my kind of mold, which I chiseled from a block of wood.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And, you know, there's a reason I think why most of the plastic around us isn't made from potato starch currently. It's because it's just not developed to a stage where - basically, it was, my potato plastic kind of cracked, and it's not very good material for making toaster cases out of.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And, you know, and it sort of - and that was something that, you know, came out with - okay. So we've had, you know, the Bronze Age, you know, copper, you can get copper. Iron, I mean, I just about managed iron. Steel for the spring, no way, and plastic, you know, the plastic age began, what, like 100 years ago, or whatever. And that sort of difference in time scale, you know, between some, a couple of thousand of years, versus a hundred years.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah, you telescope, like, 5,000 years into a couple of months learning how to do all those things.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah, I mean, and that's the story for everything. Like a car, you know, the wheel was invented, what, you know, in pre-history kind of thing. You know, so everything, even a toaster is, like, this collection of knowledge which spans, you know, the history of, kind of, human thought, in a way.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So what did you take - what did you learn, though? So you actually got the toaster together. You put it together. One thing it did not do - it did - it, you know, it worked for how long when you got it working?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: I don't know, about, kind of, five seconds. This is after nine months and - of traveling around the U.K. and sort of, yeah, spending quite a lot of my...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And you're feeling about...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...money.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Did a little mushroom cloud come up out of it when it...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Basically, yeah. I mean, yeah. It was sort of - it just like electrocuted itself. It just kind of melted the element which I painstakingly sort of drawn out on the wire-making machine in, like, the jewelry department and, yeah. That - yeah. It just kind of melted itself.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So your toaster was toast, basically.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Exactly...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...yeah, yeah. But I mean, I was actually sort of, well, relieved that I didn't electrocute myself or anybody else, because I'd never been able to make any plastic for the wire insulation, you know? So there was 240 volts going through this bare, homemade copper wires from my sort of homemade plug, which I sort of cast in a cuttlefish shell. And so that was the first good thing. And the second good thing was the bit was meant to get hot got hot, rather than, like, the entire circuit, if you see what I mean...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...so, you know? So I was...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Was there ever a piece of toast that came out of this toaster?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: There was warm bread, and yeah. So, partial success. I'm spinning it. But, yeah. Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let's go to the phones. 1-800-989-8255. Steven in Saint Louis. Hi, Steven.</s>STEVEN: I'm pretty well, thank you. How are you?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Hi, there. Go ahead.</s>STEVEN: Yeah. I was curious. If you were to tackle this sort of project again in the future, what would be the next appliance you would like to try to do from scratch, if any?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah. What are you going to do next, for an encore? Or...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. I mean, weirdly...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...have you learned your lesson?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...I should have done - I mean, weirdly, like, a TV company got in touch and was like, oh, do you want to make some more stuff from scratch? And I was kind of, uh, OK. I don't, you know, I don't think they realized quite how sort of long and difficult it is to kind of just make anything from the ground. But - so, yeah. I'm currently trying to make an electric hover mower from scratch. And, yeah.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And, yeah. It's - and kind of - yeah. I mean, it's sort of - and also, like, a light bulb. I mean - yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah. Let me just give...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: It's really hard.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let me remind our...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: So...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let me remind - I have to jump in here and remind our audience that I'm Ira Flatow, and this is SCIENCE FRIDAY, from NPR. And we're talking about...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...stuff from scratch with Thomas Thwaites. He's author of the new book "The Toaster Project," which is a really fun read. And so they want to give you your own TV show, where you try to make stuff from scratch. Is that it?</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. Yeah. And it's kind of - it's a lot of fun.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: It's difficult because it's not just me, you know, pottering around kind of doing it, like in the...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Sort of like "Mythbusters" meets "Project Runaway," so to speak. A couple of...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. I guess.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. I guess so. So, yeah. So a lawnmower, some trainers. That's going to be fun. An electric light bulb.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Light bulb? A light bulb should be pretty easy, but, you know...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...might last as long as the toaster did.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. It's that tricky, you know, inner atmosphere...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...inside the bulb.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: It's the glass-blowing technology you have to master, also, on that, I imagine.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. Yeah. I'm doing, you know, yeah. And it really kind of - when you - you know, that's the thing. You kind of think, OK, a light bulb, you know. It shouldn't be that hard. But actually, you know, when you try and do it, you really kind of realize just how much sort of embodied thoughts and sort of technology is kind of in even the kind of simplest of objects. You know, Edison might have blown his own glass, but, you know, he...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Right.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...you know, did he kind of - I think he used a vacuum. Did he make his own vacuum pump, and all that kind of thing? And, yeah, and it just brings home how interconnected everything is. And so we (unintelligible)...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And you realize that when...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...(unintelligible).</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Right. And when Edison made the bulb, there's no sense in having a light bulb unless you had the electricity to go into it...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...and the wires to carry it...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...and the generators to make it...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...and all those little parts inside that had to work, like you found out with your toaster.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah, exactly. It's just - it's - I mean, everything we do as individuals, I suppose, is a kind of group effort, in a way.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So where is your toaster now? Can we see it someplace or...</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. I mean, you know, this project I kind of did as, you know, as I was doing my postgraduate degree in design. And so - but - so I just kind of started doing this project and, you know, I was doing other things, other projects as well at the time, you know. But it kind of grew and grew as sort of a vague obsession took hold.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: But yeah - and so yeah. But now, like, amazingly, it's being exhibited for a year in the Science Museum in London, kind of next to Stephenson's rocket, which is sort of one of the sort of most important works...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Wow.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: ...like - a very important steam locomotive.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You made the big time, there.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: I mean, yeah. It sort of - it's weird. It's kind of pots and pans, which I was, you know, my pots and pans next to this sort of - you know, my badly made toaster next to this extremely important sort of piece of engineering history.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: And it's kind of - it's really cool, but also kind of strange. But, I mean, I guess it's just - we've got to a stage where it's nice to sort of look back and look at, you know, how far we've come, I guess. And, yeah. I mean...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, good luck to you. And we'll wait to see the show when it comes out. We'll be looking for it.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Yeah. Hopefully, it will be - yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: Hopefully it will be good.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Good luck to you. Thomas Thwaites is author of the new book "The Toaster Project," out from Princeton Architectural Press. It's really fun. And if you want to think about how you would make your own toaster or any other do-it-yourself project, I recommend it. Good luck, Thomas. We'll see you again.</s>THOMAS THWAITES: OK. Thanks, Ira. Cheers. Bye.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: We're going to take a break. When we come back, we're going to talk about some more inventions and how kids might be able to get their inventions into orbit at the International Space Station. Stay with us. We'll be right back, after this break.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY, from NPR. |
Chemists and materials scientists are trying to learn to build ultra-small, precisely ordered structures for use in optics, electronics, and other applications. Writing in the journal Science, Chad Mirkin and colleagues describe a way to use snippets of DNA to tailor the shape and size of crystal structures, tweaking them to fit specific uses. | IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. You normally think of DNA as being the molecule that controls the building blocks of life. But what if DNA could control real, physical building blocks, make stuff out of them? Now researchers say they've come up with a way to use DNA to coax tiny nanoparticles into making new, completely artificial materials.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Chad Mirkin is one of the authors of a research paper in the journal Science that describes just how to do that. He is a professor of chemistry and director of the International Institute for Nanotechnology at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Thank you very much.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So are you basically saying that you can program DNA to build things for you?</s>CHAD MIRKIN: That's - well, we can program DNA and building blocks to do that. So the idea here is to take tiny bits of matter, nanoparticles, and to attach strands of DNA that have a preconceived and designed code that then guides them through an assembly process based upon known DNA recognition properties to assemble into macroscopic structures that have properties that are defined by the arrangement of those particles within the extended structure.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So do you actually code the DNA the way you'd like the product to wind up?</s>CHAD MIRKIN: That's the beauty of it. So, you know, as chemists, we normally synthesize things from atoms. We take atoms and put them together with bonds to make molecules. Molecules, then, are put together to form materials. Here we have a new type of, you know, called programmable atom that's much more programmable than the types of atoms that nature gives us.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: We have a particle that can be one of many different types of compositions, a gold nanoparticle, a silver nanoparticle, things called quantum dots, which have all sorts of spectacular optical properties, magnetic structures, anything you'd like. And then you can attach strands of DNA to the surface of these particles and give them a code that's unique to each particle that you design and has a complementary particle that it recognizes and a solution that you've designed ahead of time.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: And when they encounter one another, they form a duplex, the famous double-helix that then joins them together. And that bond is also programmable because we can increase the length or decrease the length of it and control the strength of it based upon the choice of DNA sequence.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Wow, I don't think people ever thought about, you know, choosing the right DNA sequence to come up with the product that you want.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Yeah, it's really kind of a neat concept. It's one we introduced, actually, about 15 years ago, in an early article in Nature in 1996. But we didn't know how to make the particles form different crystal lattices. We could zip them together, but we couldn't get them adopt the perfect structure that we were after, a design structure, let's say, one that mimicked table salt, sodium chloride or diamond.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: We now know how to do that, and what this paper really does, it doesn't introduce that idea. That idea, as I said, has been around now for about 15 years. But it introduces the set of design rules that allow scientists to systematically make almost any structure that they'd like with completely tailorable what we'd call lattice parameters.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Give me an example of the kinds of things.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Well, as I said, so if you wanted to have a structure where you had an arrangement that's similar to the way atoms are arranged in table salt, you could do that; the way atoms are arranged in diamond, you could do that; in silicon; really anything you'd like based upon these sets of design rules that dictate what the governing principles are in terms of guiding the assembly process and controlling which particles surround others in the solution containing similar entities.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Can you make substances that never existed before?</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Well, all of these substances never existed before because they're made out of these nanostructures, and they have this tailorable structure so that the pattern has existed before, in many cases, but the actual composition is brand new.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: But in addition to that, we can make arrangements of particles where there is no mineral equivalent, where, you know, it truly is an example of, you know, man over nature in this case where, by creating these programmable atoms, if you will, we can make lots of structures that make sense from a geometric standpoint, but we don't have chemical or mineral equivalents.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, apart from the elegance of what you've been able to do, what kinds of practical items could come out of it?</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Well, it's early there, but there already are examples of practical items coming out of the atomic-scale building blocks, or what we're calling the nanoparticle building blocks that I've been describing. They're the basis for diagnostic systems, for example, medical diagnostic systems, probes that are used in high-sensitivity assays for biomarkers associated with disease.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: So a company we started, called Nanosphere, that's commercialized them over the last 10 years, they're beginning to be used now for all sorts of therapeutic applications. There's a new start-up company called Arosense(ph) that is now beginning to use these types of particles for very powerful forms of gene regulation.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: But I think that's really just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. I think that this is a fundamentally new way of thinking about building materials, and materials are important to almost every application that we take for granted, whether we're talking about electronics, optics, biomedical applications, even examples where we're interested in things like solar energy harvesting and energy conversion and storage.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: The ability to take tiny building blocks and arrange them with sub-nanometer precision in three-dimensional space with total control over the types of building blocks and, as I said, all the lattice parameters, the distances between them is going to create a pathway to realizing a whole new class of materials that I think are going to have many important applications.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: But this is really the starting point, and the future will tell the whole story.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: 1-800-989-8255 is our number. You can also tweet us @scifri, @-S-C-I-F-R-I. Just so I can tweeze this out a little bit more so that people can understand what's happening, would it be right, correct to say that you're making something synthetic that used to be made naturally, for example, you know, using - you're making your own molecules but let's say with nanoparticles as atoms and DNA as the bonds between them?</s>CHAD MIRKIN: It's more the analogy that matters here in the sense that we're taking inspiration from nature. We're not making anything that nature makes, but we're taking inspiration from nature, the fact that we now know what the double-helix is made of, and the base pairing that occurs within.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: We're using chemistry to synthesize components of that structure and attaching them to a natural structure, materials, as you said, physical entities, and then using those recognition properties to build a larger structure, and in this case the properties of the larger structure depend upon where the different particles go.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let's go to the phones, 1-800-989-8255. Drew(ph) in Cincinnati, hi, welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>DREW: Hey there, great to talk to you guys. I actually used to work at Center for Nanospace Material Science in Oak Ridge National Laboratory. And part of my time there was spent trying to study the health and safety aspects of working with nanoparticles.</s>DREW: And at this current moment, I know there is no real conclusive evidence on the effects of nanoparticles just because they're very new and, you know, it's very tough to study long-term things that haven't been around for very long.</s>DREW: And I was wondering if there's been any insight recently into whether or not these particles are safe to work with, if there's been any negative or even positive health, like, benefits from working with nanoparticles.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right, thanks for calling, Michel.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: It's a good question. It's an often-asked question. It's a tough one to answer because nanotech is so broad in terms of definition. So it really depends upon the class of materials that you're referring to. In this case, much of what we're doing involves gold nanoparticle structures, especially the biomedical applications that I was alluding to.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Gold is a fairly chemically inert material. In certain cases, in actually many cases, they've even used it in therapies, for arthritis, for example. It seems to be a material that is fairly innocuous and shows some extremely beneficial properties in terms of developing biodiagnostic tools or medical diagnostic tools that allow us to track disease in early states.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: And in the case of therapies, we've created a new way of actually using them to affect gene regulation in a very - what appears preliminarily as a very safe and very powerful way. And so when you talk about health benefits, I think they could be enormous because if you could design - make designer materials that could dramatically change the way we treat disease and get it at its genetic roots using these types of nanomaterials, that would be an enormous win.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You've been a pioneer in lots of different ways. You are one of the most cited authors out there. Tell us about some of the other things going on in your lab.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Oh, lots of things. I mean, everybody asks, you know, what's your favorite? There's so many different things going on in the lab. We've developed, as I said, not only these biodiagnostic and therapeutic tools but high-resolution lithographic tools, ways of doing nanoprinting. We invented the technology dip-pen nanolithography, which is now a commercialized tool used all over the world.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: But we keep pushing the development of that. And we now have effectively created a system that allows you to print structures that would have to be printed using a - tens of millions of dollars worth of equipment in terms of microfabrication at the point of use. We call it desktop fab, you know, the equivalent of a desktop printer.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Like 3-D printing.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Well not just 3-D, this would be two-dimensional printing, but on a very fine scale. We just had some visitors from Microsoft, for example. Craig Mundie came and visited our lab and gave a wonderful lecture. In real time, we made the world's smallest Microsoft logo, one molecule high, 75-nanometer dot resolution. It was pretty extraordinary, you know, while he's standing there.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: That's a type of thing that might be able to be made by other tools, although I'd argue actually it would be difficult if you made it out of the types of materials that we made it out of. But it certainly couldn't be done in real time at the point of use and for instrumentation now is relatively cheap by instrument and research user standards.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So where do you go from here with the work you're publishing today? What's the next step?</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Well, there's a fundamental aspect to it. Much of what we do focuses on really getting at what I think is the major problem in this area, and that is developing analytical tools and chemistry to make and manipulate structures on the sub-100-nanometer length scale. That's really what our whole research has been about.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: But then every time we do that, we often discover new materials and new techniques that can be translated into the development of powerful new technologies, and in this area that we started out talking about today, I see incredible promise in the use of these types of materials in intracellular gene regulation, in the development, as I said, of powerful new medications, pharmaceutical reagents, for example, that can treat many debilitating disease.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: We have several programs focused on a variety of different types of cancer types and a lot of promising results not just in cellular models but in animal models. And I think that's exciting.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, we also have lots of promises. We'll have to see how it shakes out. Thank you very much. Thanks, Chad, for joining us.</s>CHAD MIRKIN: Thank you.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Chad Mirkin is the George B. Rathmann Professor of Chemistry and director of the International Institute for - get the mouth to work today - Nanotechnology at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. We're going to take a break, and when we come back, we're going to talk about, well, building a toaster, now not just any toaster, you know, you could get a Heathkit and build it from parts. This is totally from scratch.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You have to go out and ore - mine the ore yourself, smelt it. We'll get into it. Believe me, it's not a pretty picture when it's done, but it's an interesting project, and the author of a new book about the Toaster Project will be with us. You stay with us. We'll be right back after this break.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY, from NPR. |
So-called "middle market" companies added 2 million workers in recent years. The middle market includes businesses with annual sales between $10 million and $1 billion. Despite their growth, they tend to lack the lobbyists, government supporters and associations that small and big businesses enjoy. Bruce Lackey, president and CEO, Happy Chicken Farms Marilyn Geewax, senior business editor, NPR Christine Poon, dean, Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University | NEAL CONAN, HOST: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan, in Washington. Small businesses are the politicians' darling. Lawmakers proclaim that small-scale entrepreneurs will be the engine of economic recovery. Others argue that it's big businesses that really drive the economy, behemoths that employ thousands of people all across the country or the globe.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Yet, a recent study concludes that they're both wrong, it's the middle market that's doing the hiring. As small businesses treaded water and big employers shed millions of job, mid-sized companies added some two million workers in the last couple of years. And they do all that without the help of the Small Business Administration or the Chamber of Commerce.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: We're talking about businesses with sales between $10 million and a billion dollars annually: factories, construction companies, professional services. If you own or work for a business in the middle market, call us and tell us how it's going, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Later in the program, Occupy Wall Street on the Opinion Page this week: What would define success? You can send us an email now, talk@npr.org. But first we begin with one of those middle-market business owners. Bruce Lackey is president and CEO of Happy Chicken Farms and joins us from his office in Urban Crest, Ohio. Nice to have you with us today.</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Thanks for the invitation, glad to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: How's business?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Business for us is mixed. Sales are up, but margins are flat, at best.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Margins are flat. So your volume is up, but you're making less and less per - what is it you distribute, eggs?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Eggs and dairy products, yes.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And we hear, all around, about the spike in fuel prices. That's been going up and down. But I assume that's a big part of your costs, as well.</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Payroll costs are up. Equipment replacement costs are up. Certainly fuel costs are also up, but other costs associated with current and new regulatory laws are also increasing. But yes, generally, we're working harder for about the same amount earning. But we're blessed, so...</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: OK, what happens when you see new regulations?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Most of the time you look at them, you analyze them and try to see how they're going to affect your business. And if you're a good manager, you figure out ways to actually incorporate them into your business and make it an advantage over your competition.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: But I'm not hearing that you're placing call to your lobbyists on K Street to see if you can get those changed.</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Middle market, I don't think, can really move that needle as much as the billion-dollar-plus companies can, nor maybe the small businesses, you mentioned earlier, the darlings of the media.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Yeah, and so what would - we mentioned there is an SBA for small businesses and the Chamber of Commerce, and big businesses, of course, can do a lot to take care of themselves. What about you guys in the middle? What would help?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Well, we had a conference here in Columbus, Ohio, just a week and a half ago, sponsored by GE Capital, that did just this. We think that various industry groups could perhaps, using someone like a GE, could put together an advocate for middle-market companies and perhaps bring our ideas and, not necessarily our plights, but our ideas how to make some regulatory laws a little more meaningful to our industry.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: A little more meaningful, you mean a little less onerous?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Onerous, yes, something that we can actually look at and say this over here does work. Maybe these two or three things off to the side don't really particularly help our industry, nor the consumer.</s>BRUCE LACKEY: And I - we're going to be talking more about that meeting in just a big. But were you surprised to find yourself in such company?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Yeah, it was great to see the attendees there and get to talk with them and see how much we really did have in common.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And for example what did you have in common, hiring for one?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Hiring was certainly one of the topics, finding good talent. There's certainly unemployment out there, but finding the right talent is always an issue, but more so, the last couple of years. It was interesting to get everybody's notes how their businesses performed 2008, '09 and '10. And that did make us say boy, we are blessed because we didn't have to have any layoffs or pay cuts or any other type of drastic changes to maintain our business, economic activity here.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And what do the next six months to a year look like as they project ahead?</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Certainly there's a lot of uncertainty, and that was one of the big themes that came out of the meeting: economic uncertainty and regulatory uncertainty and political uncertainty. But as I stated, as long as there's owners out there, regardless of regulations, we're going to figure out a way to hopefully beat our competition and get the orders and continue to stay in business and advance.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Bruce Lackey, good luck to you, thanks very much for the call.</s>BRUCE LACKEY: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Bruce Lackey, president and CEO of Happy Chicken Farms in Urban Crest, Ohio, a second-generation business owner and plans to pass the business down to his children.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Here with us in Studio 3A is NPR senior business editor, Marilyn Geewax, and nice to have you with us again.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: Hi, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And you were at that national middle-market summit at the Ohio State University. How much of the U.S. economy are we talking about here?</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: Well, it was kind of surprising to me. You know, I've studied business for years, and I didn't know that much about the middle market. That's really the purpose of that summit was to call attention to it. And what I found out was the slice of business they're talking about are companies that make - have annual sales of like $10 million up to about a billion.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: So they're not small businesses, but they're not giant international, multinational kinds of corporations. And this slice of America, there are only about 200,000 businesses that fit that description. That's only three percent of all companies. And yet this little sliver ends up contributing about 34 percent to all private employment.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: So we're talking about 41 million jobs that come from just these 200,000 companies.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Why are these companies thriving when, as we're seeing, small business, if they want to expand, they're having a hard time getting loans, and big businesses, as we know, are letting people go.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: Well, I talked to some experts about this middle market, and the thing that comes through is that they tend to be businesses that are very particular: The find a market, they know what it is, they learn to understand their customers, and it's very face-to-face. It's not the kind of thing that's a mass-produced product.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: If you're a company like Apple, of course you're enormously successful, but most of your workers are actually in China just, you know, sort of almost human robots just cranking out these products for you. But with these middle-market businesses, they tend to be very much the pillars of their community.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: They're manufacturers who are, you know, the guys who support the Little League team, and they go to the Rotary meetings, and they're very much a part of American life, and they tend not to lay off their workers very quickly because they need that talent, they need the people who know their business and their little niche.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: And they have these very face-to-face relationships with their customers. So when hard times hit, they don't panic so much, and they don't grow so quickly, but they're just steady. They're growing. Every day, they come in, and they do the best they can, and they just advance the ball a little bit. But that's really where the job growth has been.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: We're talking with Marilyn Geewax, NPR senior business editor. If you own or work for a middle-sized American company, call and tell us about your business and what's been changing as we've all gone through the difficult times these past several years. 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Grant's(ph) on the line, Grant calling form Provo, Utah.</s>GRANT: Hello, I work for a company call Fishbowl. We provide advanced inventory control and manufacturing software for what I call high-end QuickBooks users, which is I guess the standard for accounting in the country. So our client base are companies that manufacture product or, you know, they're wholesalers, distributors. They do between, I don't know, maybe $2 million on the very low end to $150 million on the high end. And business is booming for us.</s>GRANT: We're up about 50 percent year over year.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Fifty percent year over year?</s>GRANT: Yes, yes, and the only reason I can account for that, since we've been in business for about 10 years, is I just think the economy, at least with those bigger small companies, that group we're talking about, I think they see the economy growing, or maybe it's already grown to the point where they need a software like ours.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And this is an accounting software. So as they expand, they're going to need more services like yours.</s>GRANT: Well, actually our software's not accounting, it's inventory control and manufacturing software that integrates with QuickBooks. QuickBooks is the de facto standard around the country.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: You're plumbing my profound ignorance about business.</s>GRANT: That's okay, that's okay. But there's millions of companies that - you know, smaller businesses that use QuickBooks, and we are the number one add-on software to QuickBooks. So as these companies grow, and they need to track their inventory better or do better at manufacturing, that's where we come in.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Marilyn?</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: This is exactly the kind of business that I was talking about, where you have a very particular product or service. It's not something like we all know what an iPhone is now, and so you can identify that. This guy has to take a while to explain to us what his business is because it's very particular. And those are the businesses that hang onto their workers. They don't hire quickly, but they don't fire quickly.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: And I've heard time and again from all the experts I've checked with that these are the kinds of businesses that really have been growing. And here's to me the best statistic out of all of these things that Ohio State's research turned out was that they looked at that period from 2007 to 2010, and big businesses cut 3.7 million jobs, but the middle market added 2.2 million jobs.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: And on average, if you work that out, it's about 20 employees per company. So a guy like this, our caller, is adding employees at a slow pace, but when you put it all together, it's a huge impact.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Would that be a fair description of your company, Grant?</s>GRANT: Yes, it is, although we are hiring fairly fast. We'll probably 100 employees by the end of the year. Two years ago, I think we were at about 60.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And you're in one location?</s>GRANT: We're in Orem, Utah.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: But you're just in that town, and let me ask: Do you sponsor a Little League team?</s>GRANT: No, we do other things, you know, sporting competition, like we had a group of our employees in, kind of, a marathon-type thing we did during the summer. You know, we do other things like that. But we do - our software is sold around the country. It's not just here locally. But all of our employees or almost all of our employees are here local</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Well, Grant, thanks very much, and continued good luck to you.</s>GRANT: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: We're talking about the mid-sized companies that are one part of the economy that is adding jobs. A new survey shows just how big a role those companies play in the U.S. economy. More about that next. If you own or work for a business in the middle market, call and tell us how your business is going, how it's fared these past few very difficult years. 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan. The engine of economic growth may not be where we all thought these years. Instead of small businesses, a new study suggests that middle-market companies may be the best bet to create jobs and spark economic growth.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: That study was done by the Ohio State University. It shows that despite the failing economy, a vast majority of mid-sized companies expect to grow in the next year and that more than one-third of U.S. workers are employed by these companies. More about that study in just a moment.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: If you own or work for a business in the middle market, tell us how it's going, 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Our guest is NPR senior business editor Marilyn Geewax. She attended the 2011 National Middle Market Summit at the Ohio State University earlier this month. And joining us now from Ohio State is Christine Poon, who is the dean of the Fisher College of Business there, and nice to have you with us today.</s>CHRISTINE POON: Thank you, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And we just released this study of middle market, and we had this conference a week and a half ago. How come we're waiting until now if this is such an important part of the economy?</s>CHRISTINE POON: That's a good question. You know, this is a really interesting part of the economy. When we began this research project with GE Capital, I'm not sure what we were expecting, but we certainly did not expect to find a set of companies that were contributed so much - so many jobs, were such a big part of the private-sector economy and had some great growth prospects in front of them.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And, well, everybody studies Coca-Cola or GM. I guess there's also the great romance of the mom-and-pop business or the guys who start a computer company in their garage. But why does nobody study these mid-sized companies?</s>CHRISTINE POON: The challenge in studying these companies is that these group of companies are really heterogeneous. So they go all the way from family-owned companies to publicly traded companies. And that in itself puts forward a really big challenge to study this market in more traditional ways.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: So other than size, what distinguishes this group of companies?</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: These companies are interesting in that they're actually fairly stable companies. When we looked at the average age of a middle-market company, it was about the same age as the large, multinational businesses. So that was sort of interesting to us. They're more stable than the small businesses, but they are of course much smaller than the large multinationals and so have less ability to shape or have a voice when it has to do with regulations or public policy or legislation.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: So Marilyn Geewax, that does not suggest that these are mid-sized companies just about - or at least most of them - just about to become very big companies.</s>CHRISTINE POON: It's interesting. We - again some of our research showed that one in four large companies was a middle-market company just five years ago.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Ah, that's interesting. Marilyn?</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: You think about a company like Google, it had to pass through a middle phase. You know, so you start out with a small business, and you get to that middle level, and maybe you turn into one of those gazelles, one of those really fast-running companies that suddenly ramps up to have tens of thousands of employees.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: But while you're in that incubator phase, that middle-market area, you need to, you know, get some help, too, sometimes. And the main thing that I heard at Ohio State was a lot of the people just said, as our earlier guest Bruce said, the middle-sized business owner said, it's the regulatory process that often is daunting to them.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: They feel like they need to have a little more help with understanding what is it that they're supposed to do. They don't have time for lobbyists and lawyers. They just want to know what they need to do to turn into a bigger company and to keep growing, and that seemed to be a pretty big concern.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Chris Poon, let me ask you, also we hear about big businesses sitting on a lot of cash reserves as they wait to see how the economy is going to move, if it'll improve, and they can invest. What about these mid-sized companies. Are they sitting on big cash reserves?</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: You know, it's interesting. We're not able to get an answer to that question. It's actually one of about a thousand really interesting questions we would like to get an answer to. I will say that what was interesting is we looked at a subset, publicly traded middle-market companies. And we found that the top 20 percent of these companies were growing at something of the order of 10 times GDP.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: So there are significant number of these companies that are showing extraordinary growth, investing in innovation and really, as Marilyn said, putting jobs into the marketplace.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Let's get another caller on the line. Let's go to Todd(ph), Todd with us from Williamsport in Maryland.</s>TODD: Hello, (unintelligible).</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Hi, Todd, you're on the air, go ahead, please.</s>TODD: Yeah, I work for a company called Xerxes Corporation. We build underground fuel storage tanks. I've been here approximately 20 years as of July, and I guess in '91 was my first year, I was laid off twice that year, and we haven't been laid off since. We're working 50-hour weeks, 58-hour weeks, 10-hour days, and we're still hiring, actually.</s>TODD: So, I mean, we're really doing well.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And underground fuel construction, that's what you focus on?</s>TODD: That's the only thing we build: underground fuel storage tanks.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And since '91 - there was a recession back then, too - since '91, how much has the company grown?</s>TODD: Well, we downsized in '91. We went from around eight plants down to five, and we're generally located, you know, one plant on the East Coast, one plant in the Midwest, one plant in Texas, one plant in California. About three years ago, we were purchased by one of our subsidiaries from Canada, and, you know, we just really have been doing very well. I'm just happy as can be.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Todd, congratulations, and thanks very much for the call.</s>TODD: You're welcome.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: That, Chris Poon, Marilyn Geewax was saying for the most part, like that caller, the Xerxes company, these companies focus on one thing.</s>CHRISTINE POON: That's interesting. They do. One of the things that we found is that many of these companies have deep roots and commitments to their communities. So they source locally. They do business locally, regionally. And because they - because the more successful ones, like our last caller, sounds like they also are very committed to being innovative, to have a very differentiated product in there, and I think that's what leads to the most successful of these middle-market companies.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: And this is also why they tend to have a lot of employees relative to their size because they can't really automate that kind of individualized attention in a really particular product. It's not a mass kind of business. It tends to be - you need a really good machinist who really knows your business. Or you need a really good accountant who actually deeply understands what you're doing. So it's a very labor-intensive segment of the economy.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Here's an email we have from Ike(ph): I agree fully. I work for ConnectWise, a software company in Tampa. We're doing pretty good, given the state of the economy, et cetera. We're also extremely fortunate in that we have good management and are expanding. I wish there were more businesses like this one around. I/we are very fortunate.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And this question from Jason(ph) in Rupert, Idaho: I'm wondering if there's any kind of multiplier effect that comes from these small, medium-sized businesses hiring people. Obviously, the more people they hire, the more people have spending money. Is there any kind of data that shows that X number of employees at a medium-sized business create Y number of employees in other businesses in their communities? Chris Poon, do you have any information on that?</s>CHRISTINE POON: You know, another great question. We don't have an exact answer to that, but when we compare, let's say, the typical middle-market business. A middle-market business is operating - only about a third of those companies operate on a global basis, so the bulk of their business, 70 percent of their business, they operate in the local, regional or national level.</s>CHRISTINE POON: And of course from any of these companies then, it's this idea of these community pillars. They're deeply rooted in this nation, in their communities, and of course for those that are successful and growing, they're surrounded by their own supply chain.</s>CHRISTINE POON: And so successful middle-market companies create, I think, strong, successful communities. It's another reason why, from a social standpoint, these middle-market companies are so important to our nation.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Let's go next to Rita(ph), Rita calling from Kansas City.</s>RITA: Yes.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Hi, go ahead, please, you're on the air.</s>RITA: Yes, I work for a middle-sized company that's a retailer, and our problem has not been the number of employment but under-employment. Each employee has had hours cut to the point where they're like five hours a week, 10 hours a week. What's the solution to that?</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: So in other words, they're not letting people go, but they're cutting time back.</s>RITA: Right, they're adding people still and still cutting our time back. I've been associated with this company for about 11 years now. They're cutting us back so that nobody can make a living.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Marilyn?</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: Well, this is one of the things that is a strength, in a sense, for the middle-market company owner. Now, maybe it doesn't feel so great if you're one of the workers, but they tend to be non-union, and they tend to have more flexibility. What they want to have is the ability to ramp up if the economy suddenly turns more positive. Then they've got a bunch of workers who are semi-trained and in the wings and ready to come rushing in, and they can ramp up for this holiday season in a retail operation.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: But as she said, sometimes that can be pretty painful for the workers because they're - they may have to be - have their hours cut back a bit if the economy isn't doing so well. And some of the people I've talked to said that although it has been a good 12-month period for middle businesses, in the past three, four weeks or so, it's turned down a little bit. The economy is - seems to be weakening for a lot of them, and so there may be a little bit more of that kind of tweaking that she's mentioning - cutting back hours, cutting back pay at some companies.</s>RITA: Yeah. The problem we have, too, is we have no set schedules. So you can't really go out look for another job. They want to keep you there for your experience and for your talents. But they won't let you, you know, allow you out to get another job so you can actually make a living.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Rita, we wish you the best of luck. Thanks very much for the call.</s>RITA: OK. Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And, Christine Poon, is it fair to say that these are, for the most part, non-union shops?</s>CHRISTINE POON: You know, we didn't ask that question directly, so I can't answer that question for you.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Good thing you've got a five-year grant.</s>CHRISTINE POON: I know. Well, we just got it, so we're just beginning.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Here's an email we've got from Lynn: I went from sales in big pharma to sales in a mid-sized school picture business, strictly for the job security. Big pharma was purging jobs two years ago. I feel this niche business has more job security because there are fewer employees. I'm the only sales rep in my territory, versus one of 10 sales reps that can be downsized or merged into fewer reps. So far, so good. Sales are steady. I didn't realize that the school picture business was quite that big a business.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: But this from Clay: Our company has revenues just over $10 million per year. It's absurd to call us a medium-sized business. Yes, we are growing, but we're a small business without the advantages that medium and large businesses have. The credit for our growth should go to small businesses like ourselves. The U.S. Small Business Administration provides benefits to all companies with fewer than 500 employers - employees, I'm sure he means. To label companies in this range as medium-sized is an inappropriate confabulation that goes against 50 years of small business innovation in this country. And Marilyn, that's where we get down to these definitional issues.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: Well, that's the thing, is that, you know, we're literally talking about millions of small businesses if you count the one-person freelance journalist, the cleaning lady with maybe two employees, somebody who makes T-shirts, you know, that kind of thing. There are some businesses that are extremely small. So what are we talking about when we say small business? Is it just the plumber, or is it a company with, you know, maybe scores of workers? So these definitions are definitely, you know, they can be stretched and looked at whatever you want. But Ohio State has chosen to define it as about 10 million in sales to one billion.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And why did you pick that 10 million as the bottom mark, Chris Poon?</s>CHRISTINE POON: Well, you know, we looked at sort of where - Small Business Administration, to find their small business cutoff. And as Marilyn says, it's a combination of numbers of employees. It differs by sector. It's by revenue. In some cases, it's by employees, in other cases. So when we looked at it, we - it felt like somewhere between 10 to 15 million was where you transition from a small business with this kind of support that SBA provided to you to sort of growing into this transition where you began to not have that support network that SBA provided for you.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Christine Poon, the dean of the Fisher College of Business at the Ohio State University. Also with us: Marilyn Geewax, NPR senior business editor. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. And let's get Brian on the line, calling from Salt Lake.</s>BRIAN: Hi. How are you guys?</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Very good, Brian.</s>BRIAN: You know, we're cresting at $10 million marks. We have about 70 - 60 to 70 employees and do industrial fabrication for the gold mines and the refineries and different niche industries like that. And we're doing really well. The margins are still being created. We kind of feel a lot of the banks, you know, they're still reeling. They don't want to lend money. So we feel fortunate to have those relationships, but we're picking up. We're trying to hire a person a week, which for us is huge. And our, you know, we feel good about the next couple of quarters, anyways.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And some of those businesses are - gold mining, for example, that's really booming.</s>BRIAN: Yeah. They seem to be - they seem to have a gold mine.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: I bet that's the first time you've ever told that joke, Brian.</s>BRIAN: It is, actually.</s>BRIAN: We're doing really well. So...</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Well, and one person hired per week. Typically, what kind of job is it?</s>BRIAN: You know what? That's interesting. I was sitting here thinking, I'm just so proud of all of our dollar velocity and our contributions, because right now, we're looking at - you create new bottlenecks as you hire. In the past, we've been hiring welders, mechanics and maintenance guys. And now we're looking - we have to hire some additional draftsmen. You know, we kind of have a ratio we have to follow. And so we're going to be hiring all sorts of different people if we can even maintain part of this growth for the next year or two...</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Well, Brian, continued good luck to you.</s>BRIAN: ...all level of skills.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: It sounds like you've got a gold mine, too.</s>BRIAN: Not quite.</s>BRIAN: We are busy, and things look good.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: You know, Neal, one of the things that I did here at the conference, too, was this concern about the inability to hire people with the right skills, because you can't easily put out an ad for the whole country. You're looking for one person who wants to live in your one town, and sometimes that can really be a challenge for a lot of these middle-sized companies trying to find people with sufficient talents to help them continue to grow, but who want to live maybe in a - not a major market.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Here's one final question by email from Karen in Cambridge, Massachusetts: Not only are the midsized companies more likely to grow in staff than large companies, they are also the companies more likely to innovate compared to large corporations that need to meet shareholder demands quarter to quarter. The midsized companies can invest in their focused applications and develop new technologies. It's more likely we will see many of our developments come from these middle-sized companies. Christine Poon, we just have a few seconds left, but would you say that's accurate?</s>CHRISTINE POON: Absolutely. When we look at that group of companies that we're growing exponentially, the number one thing that made them different was their focus on innovation.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Focus on innovation. And are they, for the most part, privately-held companies, family-owned companies? Or are they available publically, or who are offered?</s>CHRISTINE POON: You know, when we looked at the middle market, the vast majority of our companies are either family-owned or privately-held. Only about 15 percent of the middle-market companies are publically traded.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Chris Poon, we look forward to your findings over the next five years, as this study continues. Appreciate your time today.</s>CHRISTINE POON: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Chris Poon is dean of the Fisher College of Business at the Ohio State University. We'd also like to thank Marilyn Geewax, who's NPR senior business editor, who joined us here in Studio 3A. Marilyn, as always, thanks very much.</s>MARILYN GEEWAX, BYLINE: You're welcome.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Coming up: After a month of Occupy Wall Street protests, it's on the Opinion Page. This is NPR News. |
Some Evangelical Christians see a public assault on their beliefs with the rise of gay marriage, the increasing legitimacy of abortion, and the debate on climate change. They are forming a "parallel culture" in response, a practice fellow Evangelical Karl Giberson calls "dangerous." Read Karl Giberson's piece, "The Evangelical Rejection of Reason," in The New York Times | NEAL CONAN, host: As a growing rift divides evangelical Christians, two evangelical professors published an op-ed in The New York Times this week that denounced the anti-intellectualism of fundamentalists who embrace what they described as discredited, ridiculous, even dangerous ideas. They described a parallel culture nurtured by church, Sunday school, summer camps and colleges, as well as publishing houses, broadcast networks, music festivals and counseling groups, all in response to what they see as a secular conspiracy: gay marriage, the elimination of prayer at public school, a growing acceptance of atheism.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We want to hear from evangelicals in our audience. How is this playing out in your community? Give us a call: 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Karl Giberson is a former professor of physics at East Nazarene College. With Randall Stephens, he is the author of a new book, "The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age," and joins us from member station WBUR in Boston. Thanks very much for coming in today.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Thanks for having me.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And where do you see anti-intellectualism among fundamental evangelicals?</s>KARL GIBERSON: Well, it's been very visible in the GOP candidates, most of whom are reaching out to an evangelical base. And the mere fact that, you know, accepting science and believing in evolution can make you into a maverick on that stage is quite alarming. So it's been highly visible in the GOP discussion. But what's important for people to understand is that people like Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, and so on, are reflecting views which are held by tens of millions of American evangelicals and thought to be relatively unproblematical.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In fact, is this the mainstream of evangelical thought?</s>KARL GIBERSON: Yes. This is what the polls show, that the majority of people would agree with Rick Perry that if there's something wrong with the theory of evolution, we don't really need to take it too seriously. So the fact that, literally, tens of millions of Americans think the Earth is 10,000 years old is quite alarming.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I was just thinking about that little news item we read - the spear tip, 13,800 years old, in a mastodon's bone. Some people would have a problem with that.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Yes. I mean, you can be pretty sure that Ken Ham, who's one of the people we profile in our book "The Anointed," will soon come out with a report on how that data somehow is flawed.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And anti-intellectualism, is this not simply saying, wait a minute, we have different beliefs, or is this simply saying what - proven fact, we're just ignoring it, we're just putting blinders on?</s>KARL GIBERSON: Well, it's important to recognize that there's nothing intrinsic to evangelicalism that requires embracing these odd positions. And for, you know, a hundred years prior to the modern creationist movement, most evangelical Christians were OK with the geologists telling them that the Earth was much older than the Bible suggested.</s>KARL GIBERSON: So some of these ideas are relatively recent. They don't come, kind of, directly out of the Bible. They require a certain assumption about how one should read the Bible, which stories are meant to be literal history and which stories are not - and so on. And one of the things that we're careful to do in our book "The Anointed" is to highlight people like Francis Collins, who's a very prominent evangelical Christian.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And now the head of NIH.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Yes. Now the head of the NIH. And, I mean, he accepts mainstream science, including the evolution of the human species and the age of the Earth and the Big Bang Theory and so on, and he's a thoroughgoing evangelical. So there's absolutely nothing in the evangelical theology that requires this. It's simply been the emergence of a politically powerful message put forth by these leaders that we call the anointed in our book, that have kind of convinced people that they need to go in this direction.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yet he and, in fact, others are denounced almost as apostates.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Well, it's not almost as apostates, they're denounced. People walk out of church sometimes when he's speaking and - I mean, we get referred to as being wolves in sheep's clothing and leading the faithful astray. And people - you see people referring to him as a professing Christian, you know, rather than just a Christian, and so on, as there's got to be something suspicious about somebody who can be that comfortable with contemporary science and call themselves a Christian.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I was interested in what you described as this parallel culture, where it is nurtured, well, of course, by church and Sunday school, but also by colleges and universities, which - are they part of the anti-intellectualism?</s>KARL GIBERSON: Not really. In fact, the salvation of evangelicalism, if there's going to be one, will come out of the colleges and universities that are sponsored by that subculture. And most of the faculty in schools like Eastern Nazarene College, where I've taught for many years, are very alarmed at what we see as this growing anti-intellectualism. So there is - there's room and energy within evangelicalism for reform.</s>KARL GIBERSON: But the problem is the power brokers tend to be very, very conservative, and, I mean, for the past 10 or 15 years, I've had influential fundamentalists, like, demanding that I be dismissed from my institution because I was too liberal to teach there. So you deal with that as a kind of a constant threat to the investigation of these controversial topics.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this culture, you describe it as being almost a reaction to the growth of secular society.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Yeah. There's a sense - and, I mean, it's - I think it's easy to see how people can begin to feel like they're being threatened. And you can imagine a small community where a nativity scene appears at a certain spot in the town square, like, every year for, you know, a century and a half. And then, like, all of a sudden, the courts forbid it to reappear there. And like - and that can seem like an assault on tradition, which people value a lot.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Most people don't think there's anything dangerous or sinister about praying, but the fact that praying gets outlawed from the public schools can make it look like religion is not being sort of merely separated, but religion is being undermined and marginalized, and that can feel threatening. And so many people would rather send their children to a school where they could pray before class.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Or home-school them.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Or home-school them, in many cases.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Karl Giberson, co-author of "The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age" with Randall J. Stephens. And they are also the authors of an op-ed that appeared in The New York Times, "The Evangelical Rejection of Reason." 800-989-8255. Email: talk@npr.org. Aaron's on the line, Aaron calling us from Lynchburg in Virginia.</s>AARON: Yes, Neal. Thank you for taking my call.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Go ahead, please.</s>AARON: Yes. You know, I - having come through four years at an evangelical university, growing up in what many would call the evangelical subculture, I - and even now pursuing a graduate degree and working for an evangelical university, I find that there is - there are certain things that will be certain hot-button issues. I mean, I think there is even - as your guest was stating earlier - in these evangelical universities, there are these areas where they are looking into - looking at scientific reason, looking at research and data and not just going off of tradition.</s>AARON: And I think, really, what the issue comes from is not necessarily the true orthodoxy of the Christian faith that they hold, but I think more of these extra-scriptural moralities and even hot-button points, that there can be no compromise on, that I think it's almost something to where the foundation of one's faith, when it is seen as something that is reduced down to into talking points than when - when one of those talking points is challenged, when that's the only foundation that you have, then you really can't move on past that.</s>KARL GIBERSON: Yes. There's a very real sense in which there are hot-button items, but, unfortunately, these hot-button items, I think, have been manipulated by leaders looking to kind of build coalitions. They're not always, like, authentic biblical or traditionally Christian concerns. And, I mean, gay marriage would be a good example. I mean, there's just a handful of proof text scattered throughout the Bible about homosexuality. Jesus said absolutely nothing about it.</s>KARL GIBERSON: And yet, somehow, that's on the front burner of, as sort of the central issue that Christian leaders like James Dobson want us to worry about. So I think there's a manipulation of the, sort of, the evangelical perception of where society is going, where the threats are that's behind some of that.</s>AARON: I certainly agree. And I think what - where some of that - the party lines can be drawn with that manipulation, I think are - whereas it's almost picking one issue over the other, where, you know, as a Christian, you can see that there is a biblical mandate for, you know, caring for the poor and caring for the needy. And - whereas you might be, you know, wanting to align yourself with one certain political party or political force, also, your faith on another hot-button issue would be something like abortion, whereas you may want to align yourself with somebody politically who would want to, you know, have policies in place that would take care, you know, that would - things that would match up with your faith on - sometimes there can be that issue of no compromise. And many times, I find it is just that one thing of maybe not even necessarily gay marriage in some circles, but usually the ethic of human life and how that is treated with abortion rights.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: OK. Aaron, thanks very much for the call. Appreciate it.</s>AARON: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we could go next to - this is Francis, Francis with us from Mt. Shasta in California. Francis, are you there? Francis?</s>FRANCIS: Are you there? Oops.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Francis, you're on - turn off your radio, Francis. You're on the air.</s>FRANCIS: Greetings from Mount Shasta, California.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: OK. You're on the air. Go ahead, please.</s>FRANCIS: OK. This is an Evangelical Lutheran here. And we look at the fundamentalist error that's the root of most of the problem is they don't seem to realize that God created time, and fundamentalists seem to believe that God is limited by the time he created. And, of course, the offset of that is if God wants to take eight billion years to create Earth and tell Moses, I did it in seven days, well, that's fine. We don't see any problem with that. And the other subset is man is a part of nature, and the creation of the soul of man is the realm of faith. So would your guest care to comment on those things?</s>KARL GIBERSON: Yeah. I mean, you're absolutely right. And I think you're illustrating the point I made earlier, that there are resources and movements and denominations within even conservative evangelicalism that are able to make peace with all of these different controversial topics. So, I mean, you're absolutely right. I mean, there's just no need whatsoever to be saying, look, to be a Christian, you've got to think of the Earth as being 10,000 years old. I mean, that's simply not reasonably made an article of faith.</s>FRANCIS: They sure make a big deal of it, but I think at the root of it is their failure to conceive that God created time and, therefore, is the master of it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Francis, thanks very much.</s>FRANCIS: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In your op-ed, Karl Giberson, you described some of these ideas as potentially dangerous. What do you mean by that?</s>KARL GIBERSON: Well, one of the things that has, unfortunately, happened with some of these anointed leaders who are very successful at leading these movements is they've managed to kind of undermine the scientific enterprise. And if you look at what Ken Ham does with Answers n Genesis or what the Discovery Institute does with Intelligent Design and so on, they make so many negative comments about how scientists are biased, how science is all about the assumptions that you bring to the data rather than the objective examination of the data. They make a big deal about scientific revolutions in the past that have overturned well-established ideas, and so on. So they've created an impression that is very widely shared among evangelicals, that science is not really very trustworthy. And Al Mohler, the Southern Baptist leader, has made a - gotten a lot of mileage out of talking about how the subtle results of science today will be replaced by something different tomorrow.</s>KARL GIBERSON: So there's this sense that if you don't like a scientific idea, you've got lots and lots of justification for setting it aside. I think that's one of the reasons why climate science, for example - which everybody wishes wasn't true, because we don't want to have to pay the price that it will take to do deal with that. But so many evangelicals reject global warming, even though that has not even a remote tangential connection to anything in the Bible or their faith. And one of the reasons for that is that they just don't trust science as a whole. So when the National Academy of Sciences comes out and says, look, we all agree that global warming is real, they say, well, OK. We'll just wait 15 years, and then you'll change your mind, just like you always do.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Fifteen years we don't have. Karl Giberson, thank you very much. Karl Giberson wrote "The Evangelical Rejection of Reason" for The New York Times. There's a link to his piece at our website, npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. And you're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. |
The Texas Rangers and St. Louis Cardinals are well-matched and fans expect a hard-fought series. It's the second World Series appearance in a row for the Rangers, who've never won the title. And the Cardinals, under the guidance of manager Tony La Russa, hope to win their 11th World Series title. | NEAL CONAN, host: The World Series begins tonight in St. Louis. The Texas Rangers return from last year, looking for their first world championship. The Cardinals hope to win number 11. The Rangers cruised atop the American League West most of the season and dismissed Tampa and Detroit in the playoffs, while the Cardinals squeaked into the National League wild card berth and dumped the favored Phillies and Milwaukee's Brewers.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: What will you be watching for when the Series gets under way tonight? 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. You can join the conversation at our website as well. Go to npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Bud Kennedy, columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, joins us from a studio there. Nice to have you back.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Hello, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And deputy sports editor Roger Hensley joins us from the newsroom at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Nice to have you with us.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Bud Kennedy, do the Rangers think the second time is the charm?</s>BUD KENNEDY: Well, the Rangers were just thrilled to be there last time, and now they'd actually like to win a Series. But, you know, this is a divided loyalty situation for a lot of people in Dallas-Fort Worth. You know, the Cardinals were the closest Major League team up until the '60s when Houston started. So for a lot of the senior citizens here, they grew up following the Cardinals. And I'd say there is - are as many people here from Missouri as anywhere else in the world except Missouri. There are a lot of Cardinals fans here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, St. Louis was the westernmost outpost of Major League Baseball until expansion back in the early '60s, so you're in good company.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Yeah, I think the - you know, a lot of people grew up in - they still talk about Saturdays watching Stan Musial and the trains they used to take from Dallas-Fort Worth to St. Louis to see the Cardinals play. So - but, you know, I know they won a lot of World Series way back then, but now Texas kind of is in a World Series mood to winning some for our own.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Texas has been doing pretty well in sports of late. But, anyway, Roger Hensley, these teams are well-matched. He was talking about Stan Musial. There's a man who, well, does not really like to take the title of El Hombre because of - he defers to Stan Musial.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: That's correct. We started calling Albert El Hombre in the paper a number of years ago. And Albert's made it fairly clear over the last few years that that moniker is clearly for Stan. And Stan is very revered in this town, although Albert has obviously put up hall of fame numbers in his first 11 seasons here as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There is the lingering question of whether he will be there next year, but that's a question for the offseason. In the meantime, Albert Pujols has been everything any Cardinal fan could ever hope for.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Oh, absolutely. I mean, he put up historic numbers. I mean, he is the only player in Major League Baseball history, in his first 10 seasons, to hit at least 30 homeruns, bat at least .300 and drive in at least 100 RBIs. So there's been no one like him in Major League Baseball history.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And as the Cards fans face this contest, they've got to feel awfully lucky for, I think, until the last week of the regular season. Nobody thought they'd get in.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Yeah. You know, I think the luck factor has kind of worn off as they've made this run. I mean, you know, on August 25th, they were 10-and-a-half games out of the wildcard. It seemed like they were being read their last rights, and they went on an incredible run, led by a team meeting by Chris Carpenter, who kind of got the troops fired up in the locker room, and got to - got in on the last day of the regular season into the playoffs, and here they are. I think people now aren't feeling so much lucky as perhaps this is a team of destiny.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Chris Carpenter then matched his words by tossing a brilliant shutout against the Phillies to wrap up the first series.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Quite the gem, wasn't it, nine innings? And he had gone up against Roy Halladay there, who's likely the best pitcher in baseball. And Halladay went eight brilliant innings, only giving up one run, and Carp nailed it down, giving up zero.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Bud Kennedy, that's about all the talking about pitching - or at least starting pitching - we're going to do. These two clubs have clubbed their way to the World Series. This has been the most offensive display in postseason baseball, certainly some records set by the Rangers.</s>BUD KENNEDY: The Rangers fans, they're worried about all their starting pitchers. There is no starting pitcher that they really feel comfortable with. You know, C.J. Wilson has a chance tonight to become the first Major League pitcher in history to lose a first-round playoff game, a league, a divisional series playoff game, a World Series game and the All-Star game all in one season. And so, you know, there's no pitcher that the Rangers fans feel comfortable with.</s>BUD KENNEDY: But they feel very comfortable about Nelson Cruz. Nelson Cruz, six homeruns and, you know, my gosh, you know, Nelson Cruz has played so well that Governor Perry has announced that if Nelson Cruz continues to hit homeruns like this, there will be in-state tuition for everyone from the Dominican Republic.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I think that'll be an interesting platform for him, maybe running for re-election. I'm not sure. But Nelson Cruz does have to be the best number seven hitter in baseball.</s>BUD KENNEDY: You know, I think that he's going to stay there although there is now talk of moving him up in the lineup. You know, just having these - the Rangers in the playoffs again turned out to be such a surprise this year, though, because, I mean, you look at last year, Cliff Lee pitched them in the World Series, and everybody thought when they lost Cliff Lee that that would be it. Now, if you look at the start of the season, Cliff Lee is gone, and Josh Hamilton's been hurt most of the year.</s>BUD KENNEDY: And early in the season, the most notable thing that happened was the very sad moment at the stadium when a fan actually fell out of the stands on the field and died. And this was a season that was just marked by tragedy and uncertainty. And then all of a sudden, they pulled everything together in the last few months and really thundered through to the World Series.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Nelson Cruz, well-known reputation for hitting, yes, thunderous homeruns but always popping a hammy sometime in June and then sitting out for six weeks.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Eleven years he played in the minors and all of a sudden he's become the hero.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we could get some callers in on this conversation. 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. Frances(ph) is on the line with us from Kansas City.</s>FRANCES: Hi. As a longtime Rangers fan, first of all, I just want to say that up to two years ago, you know, we couldn't even say that we had won a pennant, so that, in itself, is so exciting. But I'm going to be looking for Ron Washington's enthusiasm in the dugout.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ron Washington, the manager of the Texas Rangers, played, in his days, as a coach with the Oakland Athletics in the movie "Moneyball." And, Bud Kennedy, this has got to be sweet vindication for Ron Washington who admitted, what, a couple of years ago, that he used cocaine. A lot of people thought he would be fired.</s>BUD KENNEDY: You know, and that was early in the season. He put it out of the way, and he has just become this kind of, you know, beloved celebrity figure here. And, you know, really, the Rangers play next door to that other big sports stadium here that's like the, you know, the monument to Jerry Jones' ego. And there are a lot of people who say Jerry Jones should go out and find a coach who works as hard and has as good a rapport with his players as Ron Washington.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much for the call, Frances. And then we turn, Roger Hensley, to the genius Tony La Russa, the man who invented the all-time quickest hook, as he replaces pitcher for pitcher in the late innings, matching up lefty-righty.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Oh, yeah. Tony is known for getting the closer's role started in the game of baseball. Now, he's taken it a little far in this series. We've had starters in the league championship series go just two innings, three innings. In fact, none of the starters went more than five innings. And, you know, your last caller referenced seeing Ron Washington being active, you know, in the dugout. If it's anything like the league championship series were for both Texas and St. Louis, both dugouts will be very active as those managers had to use that phone a lot calling the bullpen.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Is there any - Texas a relatively new team in baseball lineage - is there any animosity, any history between these two teams?</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Well, Texas has actually never played here at Busch Stadium. This - tonight will be their first trip here.</s>BUD KENNEDY: So, Roger, I'll point out, in Texas, the Bush is a presidential library. It's not a stadium.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Yes, I don't know if there's a lot of animosity. I mean, Lance Berkman had a few things to say this past offseason when he chose to come to St. Louis and play for the Cardinals rather than go on to the Rangers. He had a few dicey things to say about the Rangers. But he's taken that back, make - tried to make good at the All-Star game. And then also has had some very nice things to say this week about the Rangers.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Comeback player of the year, as it happens. But in any case, let's see if we could go to Matt. Matt, with us from Vernon in New Jersey.</s>MATT: Yes, how are you doing?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Good. Thanks.</s>MATT: I just had a comment. It doesn't - I hate to take away from the mood, but being a Phillies fan, winning 102 games this season, going to the playoffs, playing a five-game series and getting - only getting three-game home advantage over two after winning 102 games kind of takes away from the from the sport, I believe, having the right team in the playoffs at the right time. I know that...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Would you have felt the same way had the Phillies won?</s>MATT: Probably not, judging the fact that they were given a, you know, just a five-game series. The only thing I would have to suggest is possibly moving it to a seven-game series. I'm just curious if they'll ever do that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, interestingly, there is a proposal - and we'll ignore the point about sour grapes from a Phillies fan, and I won't have any sour grapes as a Yankees fan. But, Bud Kennedy, there is a proposal that maybe as soon as next year, there will be an additional wildcard team, and the two wildcard teams will play a one-game playoff. That will make a big premium on winning the division championship and make it really scary to get in as a wildcard team.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Neal, you know, the only compassion we have here for the Phillies is for Cliff Lee, who pitched so well last year but has his home - at home in Arkansas this year. And I'll point out he lives not far off the interstate. And all the fans driving back and forth from St. Louis to Arlington can drop right in and visit Cliff Lee. He is at home, and these teams are in the series.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: He's at home, and the teams are in the series. Let's see if we go next to Daryl(ph). Daryl, calling us from St. Louis.</s>DARYL: Yes, thank you for taking my call.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Sure.</s>DARYL: You know, every year, it's like the Cardinals (unintelligible) Midwest. It's always New York or California and all that. And here we are again, you know? It's like you cannot dismiss the Cardinal, ever.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, the Cardinals, they won not so long ago. But it's interesting, Roger Hensley, if the Cardinals or the Rangers win, I think we will then have 10 out of the last 11 years a different champion in baseball. Everybody talks about the Yankees and the Red Sox, but all these different champions.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Yeah, you know, and especially when you talk about the Yankees and the Red Sox, and then - and people in the Midwest I know feel there's an East Coast bias as to how these things are covered. But, you know, take the Yankees, for instance. You know, the Cardinals have been to the World Series three times now in the last eight years, and that's two more times than the Yankees have. So, you know, I think it is true sometimes that these Midwestern teams get overlooked. But at the end of the day, it's about winning, and the Cardinals obviously have a history of doing that, both recent and in past history.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Roger, I think, that's the question. Will the East Coast may be even cover the World Series at all? I mean, we have a Middle America World Series this year. No team from either the East or West Coast. I don't know. Was it in the Times today? I didn't get a chance to look.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, we've told that Fox TV executives are standing on the ledge, waiting to jump off at the ratings. We're talking with Roger Hensley of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from the newsroom there. The World Series gets underway later this evening in St. Louis. Bud Kennedy is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram and joins us from Fort Worth. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. Let's go next to Len(ph). Len with us from Sand Springs in Oklahoma.</s>LEN: Hey, Bud. How are you doing? This is Len from Fort Worth, but I live in Tulsa now.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Len, I'm glad you're listening to TALK OF THE NATION.</s>LEN: Very good. I'm just hoping C.J. can go more than four innings and maybe our starting pitching can kick back in again.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, that is the interesting thing about the Texas Rangers. C.J. Wilson is who he's talking about, the starting pitcher for the Rangers in tonight's ballgame. The Rangers always were a tremendous offensive club. They were never able to put together a pitching staff. And, Bud Kennedy, a lot of people give Nolan Ryan a lot of credit. The general manager there also deserves a lot of credit as they have drafted and brought up pitchers through their system and were able to replace Cliff Lee.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Well, of course, Daniels has been the general manager since the age of 28. He's one of the youngest. He, you know, he came in with a philosophy of just trying to scrap and pull this team together. Nolan - although Nolan has been involved with the pitchers, obviously, Nolan is mainly involved with pulling this team out of bankruptcy. And with the help of a lot of the natural gas money here, some of the gas executives invested and pulled the business-end of the team back together. You know, it's great to see Nolan out there, but, you know, this is not the kind of pitching staff that reflects Nolan's career. This is just some relievers that just kind of, you know, pull a few innings here and a few innings there. You know, my gosh, Derek Holland is starting pitcher.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Derek Holland. He was on my fantasy team, and we winced every time he was out there starting, though he had that great run toward the end of the year. Len, thanks very much for the call. Bud Kennedy, as you look ahead to this series, is there something in - everybody looks for omens in the first game. What are you going to look for?</s>BUD KENNEDY: I think that the question is whether, you know, the Rangers are the ones that have every reason in the world to have stage fright. The Cardinals have a great legacy and a great deal of experience. You know, the Rangers are playing tonight in a colder-weather city. The Rangers have - the biggest thing the Rangers have done in the last two years, they've broken the legendary story that the Rangers could never win because they play in the hottest stadium in Major League Baseball. The outdoor stadium, where it's 105 degrees all summer, the Rangers are traditionally (unintelligible) in August. You know, they're used to playing when it's 105. They're just not used to playing when it's 45. And it'll be interesting to see if they can handle that weather in St. Louis.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, Roger Hensley, what are you going to look for if - when the Cards take the field?</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Well, I tell you, I think just looking at this series, it's obvious there is going to be a lot of offense. I mean, these are the top two hitting teams, the top hitting teams in America league versus the top hitting team in the National League. So, you know, I'm really looking at this game one and how Chris Carpenter looks when he comes out and steps on that mound tonight. I mean, he's the staff ace. He is the guy that needs to come through for them. So, you know, it's going to depend. Both teams are going to hit. I mean, that goes without saying.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: The one advantage I would say that the Cardinals may have and will be looking to see if it carries over is that the Cardinals had the lowest ground bar percentage of any pitching staff in Major League Baseball this year. Can they contain Nelson Cruz and the rest of those big bats in that Texas lineup?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: It's also a contrast. The St. Louis Cardinals, interestingly, for team that comes from the National League, which, traditionally, boasted the base stealing and hit and run, that sort of thing, they are a station-to-station team. Bud Kennedy, the Texas Rangers will run your socks off.</s>BUD KENNEDY: You know, the Texas Rangers wait for the big inning and they'll run. They'll play hard, and, you know, that's the way Washington's always coached them. And, you know, every season, almost every series and every game, everyone's going, oh, why did they send that runner? Why did they, you know, why did Washington send him? You know, what is Washington doing now? And yet sometimes it works out, they have a big inning, and they win.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: First Lady Michelle Obama, will attend tonight's game. Roger, I understand security at Busch Stadium is going to be similar to trying to get into the Pentagon.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Yeah. Unfortunately, that's the case. It's, you know, not just for the fans, for us media sorts too. I know nobody cares about that, but they're trying to get everybody to get out there a couple of hours early today because, I mean, it's going to be essentially TSA-type patdowns to get you into the stadium today. So it'll be a mess.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, enjoy yourself. Are you going to get to go to the game?</s>ROGER HENSLEY: Oh, yeah. I'm out the door as soon as I hang up here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, we'll let you go then. Have a good time.</s>ROGER HENSLEY: All right. Thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Roger Hensley is deputy sports editor of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and currently leaving the newsroom of the newspaper to get on his way to Busch Stadium. And, Bud Kennedy, thank you for your time, and good luck to your Rangers.</s>BUD KENNEDY: Thank you, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Bud Kennedy, a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram and joined us from a studio there in Fort Worth. Tomorrow, we're going to take a look at bankrupt cities and what happens after bankruptcy. Join us for that. This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. |
The Occupy Wall Street protests reached the one-month mark, and spread to cities around the world. Demonstrators march against greedy bankers, politicians, government cuts and the growing gap between rich and poor, among other issues. They have raised nearly $300,000, but many wonder: To what end? | NEAL CONAN, HOST: And now, the Opinion Page. Over the past few weeks, Occupy Wall Street protests spread to many American cities, and this past weekend, to many more overseas. From Taiwan to Minneapolis, thousands of people demand change. The demonstrations have raised a lot of debate about what change means. We're going to read some excerpts from a variety of op-eds. We also want to hear from you on a question raised by Huffington Post columnist Demetria Irwin. I'm not quite clear what defines success for these protesters, she wrote.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: So what do you think defines success? 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. And we have this email from John in Tacoma, Washington. I'm a participant and organizer with the Occupy Wall Street movement in Tacoma, Washington, Occupy Tacoma. Success for our movement, simply put, will be the restoration of middle-class prosperity.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: This movement will continue to plan, organize and grow, and we'll use existing and new forms of direct action and nonviolent civil disobedience to pressure politicians and corporations directly to achieve our specific tactical goals. We will no longer accept being ignored. Those last few words were in capital letters. And this is - we mentioned some articles we're going to be reading. This is from - by Amy Davidson from this week's issue of The New Yorker Magazine.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: What is striking about this weekend is how well-tuned the echoes were and the way the voices were joined. It wasn't just a lot of people yelling about banks, with the Italians getting more out of control than most - though they did, burning cars in Rome. People in London, Hong Kong, Madrid, Tokyo, South Korea, Stockholm and Sydney were carrying similar signs and claiming membership in the 99 percent. One shouldn't dismiss that term as naive or meaningless without looking at what's happened.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Another pair of complaints about the movement is that it is only about catchy rhetoric, and that it's inarticulate about what it wants. Yet somehow, as the marches spread, the ideas are getting more coherent, not less so. There is a global conversation going on now. It would be foolish not to listen. For an anti-corporate movement, Occupy Wall Street has a good sense of franchising. More importantly, it has something to say about enfranchisement.</s>And this from The Daily Beast by John Avlon: There are, of course, plenty of reasons to be angry at the high-finance bailout culture that helped cause the enduring economic crisis. But the be-in lack of focus has not helped their cause. And the 9/11 truther sign I saw that first night across the street from ground zero did not do much to endear their efforts to me. John Avlon, I should note, lives near the protests in southern Manhattan. These protesters have the trappings of anarchists with Apple computers. They are earnest and know how to play for the cameras.</s>And this from The Daily Beast by John Avlon: They have internalized slogans that capture emotions, but are too often unrelated to solutions, and that is a lost opportunity. For example, one frequent battle cry is to replace capitalism with democracy, which sounds great, but makes not a lot of sense. Avlon concludes occupying Wall Street will likely continue, at least until the weather gets cold. Among its other contributions, it might cause us to have a civic conversation about whether there's a right to sleep indefinitely in a public park.</s>And this from The Daily Beast by John Avlon: Peaceful civil disobedience is a time-honored tradition that civil societies accommodate. But as they dance along the line between protest and provocation, these people might ask themselves a truly deep question, whether they'll end up alienating more people than they attract. Let's see if we can go next to - this is Jeremy. Jeremy's on the line with us from Powell in Michigan.</s>JEREMY: Thanks for taking my call.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: What would define success?</s>JEREMY: You know, I mean, I'm just guessing, because I'm not entirely sure that the movement itself is defined clearly what success would mean. But I'm thinking that it will be leveling the playing fields between the, you know, the ultra-rich and the rest of the population, as far as the advantages of people...</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Well, that's a...</s>JEREMY: ...to take advantage of.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: That's a goal. How would you do that?</s>JEREMY: I guess you would - you'd have to look at the current, you know, the current regulations and the current things that are in place and see how those things are happening, you know, and change gloves. But, you know, the movement itself is a bit sporadic and volatile. So I don't know how, you know, you go about doing that in a coherent way.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: All right, Jeremy. Thanks very much for the call. Appreciate it.</s>JEREMY: Thanks.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Here's an email from Bob. Success for the occupy movement will only be realized by a narrower, focused platform. I view success for this movement if the following were to occur: agreement on a set number, perhaps 25 action planks, such as limiting corporate access to Congress, details later and more; posting these actions planks on an Occupy website for the American public to review and comment; limit or eliminate extreme left and right positions from the platform to gain a greater consensus; solicit membership online registration for a powerful Occupy voting block in future elections; present Occupy platforms to candidates at all levels - local, state, national - and endorse those who most strongly agree to support it and then, if elected, take action on the platform.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And let's see if we can go next to - this is Dan, Dan with us from Georgetown in Massachusetts.</s>DAN: Hi. How are you?</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Good. Thank you.</s>DAN: Yeah. My real concern is, you know, for the last decade, there seems to be a major lack of responsibility for large, world-changing events that seems to have originated in this country. Now, I am talking about 9/11 in 2001, but I'm also talking about 9/11 in 2008. There was actually a run in the United States Treasury. Obviously, it had to be from Wall Street firms because it was so much of run that it almost completely collapsed our economy, and this is - Geithner had said this, Kanjorski - Rep. Kanjorski from Michigan had said this.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And Geithner, of course - Tim Geithner, the Secretary of the Treasury.</s>DAN: (Unintelligible)</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Go ahead. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt.</s>DAN: ...lack of responsibility.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: So what defines success then?</s>DAN: People being prosecuted for illegal activity that's obviously happened. The people know it, this happened, and there's no justice being served in our country.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: So if those prosecutions would be for the - what you would describe as machinations on Wall Street that led to the collapse.</s>DAN: Not just on Wall Street. There are several things going on here, and 9/11 seemed to really originate of it. There's a lot of facts that just has not been aired out in the public. If you do research, there's plenty of facts, scientific facts, you know, facts and things - facts were ignored.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: I'm sorry. Are you - is this the Truther agenda, that the buildings were brought down by - not by the airplanes?</s>DAN: Well, it's physically impossible. (unintelligible).</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: I'm afraid, Dan, you're...</s>DAN: ...there's a lot - Newton's laws...</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Dan, I'm going to hang up because you are incorrect. That is scientifically exactly what happened, and I have to apologize, but that's just incorrect. The buildings were brought down by the airplanes and the fires that resulted thereafter. This has been proved beyond any doubt, so I apologize for that.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Let's see if we can go next to - this former President Clinton, who appeared on "The Letterman Show," and he said: I think, on balance, this can be a positive thing, but they're going to have to kind of transfer their energies at some point to making some specific suggestions, or bringing in people who know more to try to put the country back to work, because I don't think many Americans resent the success of people who make a lot of money fairly earned. I think what bothers people is that the country has gotten so much more unequal over the last 30 years. Again, that was President Clinton on "The Letterman Show."</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Let's see if we can go next to - this is Peter. Peter is on the line with us from Atlanta.</s>PETER: Yes, sir. How are you doing?</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Go ahead.</s>PETER: Yeah. I was thinking back to 1992, when - I guess it was 1992 when Bill Clinton enacted the NAFTA bill.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: North American Free Trade Agreement, yes.</s>PETER: Yes, sir, and I think this what we're seeing now is the aftermath of NAFTA.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Aftermath of NAFTA. So success for you would be to repeal NAFTA?</s>PETER: That's correct. Well, you know, it's criminal, you know, for the lobbyists and the big corporations that have made deals with the congressmen to enact the bill in this first place because of, you know, it took a whole, big sheet of the infrastructure of this country, you know, right out.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Just last week, Congress passed a free trade agreement with South Korea, Colombia and Panama. Would you repeal those as well?</s>PETER: Well, you know, that's something you have to look at. You have to do one thing at a time, but I was trying to give some directions to the protesters up in D.C.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: OK.</s>PETER: And that would bring, you know, I guess, it would take the same amount of time that it took to bring us to this point.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: All right. Thanks very much. Appreciate the call, Peter.</s>PETER: All right. Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Peter with us from Atlanta. He said protesters in D.C. There has been relatively few protests in Washington, D.C. The focus, of course, New York City, but it's spread all across the country in the past weekend, across the world.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: A couple or more comments. This excerpt from a Politico's Roundup. David Bossie who's president of Citizens United: The Occupy Wall Street movement is just a bunch of trust-fund babies, college students skipping class, and ex-hippies who are taking their cues from the like of George Soros, Michael Moore and other billionaires and millionaires who want to kill capitalism. To call Occupy Wall Street a left-wing Tea Party is an oxymoron. The Tea Party is a grassroots movement that was founded in local communities around America to protest the destructive policies of the Obama administration. The Occupy Wall Street movement was conceived at the Obama campaign headquarters to gin up the youth vote and liberals and has now been joined by radical left-wing Astro Turf groups like moveon.org and Big Labor.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: This is from that same roundup on Politico. Thomas Mann from the Bookings Institution: Mostly rabble-rousers with too much time on their hands might actually apply better to the Tea Party. Still, much too early to say whether Occupy Wall Street will develop into a serious social movement, but on its face, it is no less legitimate than the Tea Party as an expression of discontent with the current state of affairs. Its diagnosis of the problem and prescription for solving it offers a stark alternative to that of the Tea Party that's much needed and good for the body politic.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: We're talking about the Occupy Wall Street movement on the Opinion Page. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. And let's go next to Brian(ph), Brian with us from Buffalo.</s>BRYAN: Yes. How are you doing? I'll be very brief. I think the main agenda what would be successful - and I mentioned this to the screener - is campaign finance reform, but he said there's a lot of people who've said that, so I think I'll return to Glass-Steagall and repeal of the Financial Modernization Act with the Gramm - I can't remember the name of the bill - but the one that was allowed insurance companies and banks and whatnot to merge and be one big entity. And I think, if we get rid of that, those are two very big successes.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Campaign finance reform would be difficult to - it was the Supreme Court. You're talking about the Citizens United thing.</s>BRYAN: Well, move to amend. I think move to amend the Constitution in some way - and I'm not a legal expert - but in some way, to limit the influence of big money on our political process.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: All right. Brian, thanks very much. Of course, constitutional amendment is a rather difficult to get enacted. This is from Mike in Grangeville, Idaho. One of the things Occupy Wall Street wants without knowing it is the elimination of Citizens United. I believe they may go so far as to call for a constitutional amendment to eliminate corporate influence in policies. Well, there you go again. Again, those are extremely difficult time - difficult things to do.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Let's go next to - this is Bill, and Bill is on the line with us from Boise.</s>BILL: Yes. Well, I think one thing that should come out of this is that the whole idea of socialism should enter into the public discourse now. I think that there's a - it's time for socialism to be seriously considered.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Socialism, this is what they should advocate - advocate, excuse me?</s>BILL: Absolutely. At least it should be discussed seriously. Certain specific idea like bankruptcy reform and taking a profit out of health care and so forth should be part of it, but socialism in general, I think. You know, these downgrades that we see, of sovereign debt around, our own downgrade in this country I think is actually a downgrade of capitalism itself.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: All right. Thanks very much for the call, Bill.</s>BILL: Bye.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: A couple or more editorials. This is from Matthew Vadum - I hope I'm pronouncing that correctly - who writes for The Washington Times. It's an insult to the intelligence of the American people. The leaders of Occupy Wall Street piously claim their movement is in the best traditions of nonviolent protest. These class warriors are lying. The whole idea of these mass protesters is to provoke the police and cause mass arrests, which the organizers can then use for propaganda purposes.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: This exercise in Marxist mobocracy began on September 17th, in Lower Manhattan as the U.S. Day of Rage. This is a more honest moniker because it makes clear that the demonstrators are the polar opposite of the Tea Party movement, which seeks to protect America's economic freedoms from the statist onslaught of the Obama administration. The leftist mob wants a radical transformation of American society in which government is expanded exponentially.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: In reaction to comments like that one, Paul Krugman in The New York Times wrote a piece called "The Panic of the Plutocrats." What's going on here? The answer, surely, is that Wall Street's masters of the universe realize deep down how morally indefensible their position is. They're not John Galt. They're not even Steve Jobs. They're people who got rich peddling complex financial schemes, that far from delivering clear benefits to the American people, helped push us into a crisis whose aftereffects continue to blight the lives of tens of millions of their fellow citizens. Yet they paid no price.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Their institutions were bailed out by taxpayers with few strings attached. They continue to benefit from explicit and implicit federal guarantees. Basically, they're still in a game of heads they win; tails, taxpayers lose. And they benefit from tax loopholes that in many cases have put people with multimillion-dollar incomes paying lower tax rates than middle-class families. This special treatment can't bear close scrutiny, and therefore, as they see it, there must be no close scrutiny.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Now, let's see if we can go next to - this Robert, Robert with us from Raleigh in North Carolina.</s>ROBERT: Hi.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Hi, Robert. Go ahead, please.</s>ROBERT: I think the first thing you can come out of this in terms of success is really to raise awareness. I think that, you know, obviously, these people have a sense of frustration, and my hope is that, you know, having seen their agenda, which seems a little bit scattershot and all over the map, my hope is that, you know, in raising the awareness, that somewhere along the lines they come up with a sort of a more lucid argument that concerns inherent flaws in the system at this point.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: And with that lucid argument, they should do what with it?</s>ROBERT: Participate in the democratic process, you know. Oddly enough, if you've got a bunch of willing leaders, I mean, a bunch of willing power, someone is always going to step up to exploit them, you know?</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: So the...</s>ROBERT: And if what they're voicing is just a sense of frustration at this point, that's a start.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: The Tea Party has run candidates against Republicans they though insufficiently conservative. Should the Occupy movement run candidates in Democratic primaries against Democrats they consider insufficiently liberal?</s>ROBERT: Well, you know, I just - I really don't see any change from outside the system without something clear in terms of an agenda, and I don't see any change at all, you know, and it's going to require participation in the system. I'm thinking that - I'm hoping - that the people who are there for 15 or 20 days and foresee it as a mob, I'm hoping they spend the other 355 days, you know, doing something, contributing, you know, being activists in other realms.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: Roberts, thanks...</s>ROBERT: I'm sorry.</s>NEAL CONAN, HOST: ...thanks very much for the call. We appreciate it. And thanks to everybody who called, emailed and twitted. And, of course, we do not have time to get everyone of you on the air, and we're sorry for that. We posted a complete list of the opinion pieces we've read from today. You can find that at npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION. Tomorrow, the politics of immigration as candidates pick up their attacks before tomorrow night's GOP debate. Plus, "Catch-22," now 50 years old. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. |
Many college campuses have emergency telephones marked with flashing blue lights. They don't help students like Claudia Folska. She's blind. Folska is working with the city of Denver to make the area more navigable, doing things like adding a sound component to the emergency phone booths. | NEAL CONAN, host: On many college campuses in cities around the country, emergency telephones are marked by flashing blue lights. Claudia Folska is a student at the University of Colorado in Denver. For her, those lights aren't much help. She's been blind since she was five. But maybe those emergency telephones would work better for everybody if there was some kind of audible signal, as well. Folska studies urban design and cognitive science, and that's just one of the proposals she's come up with to make her city more navigable.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If you're blind or have another disability, what simple changes might improve your town for everybody? Give us a call: 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. Claudia Folska joins us now from a studio in Denver. Nice to have you on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Nice to be here, Neal. Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I understand the plan to add a sound signal to those emergency blues will - is going to go ahead.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Well, I hope so. I think one of the places we could really use them are at our pedestrian-oriented developments. That's where we have the RTD light rail stations, and many of them have those emergency telephones with blue lights. So if we could augment them with a ping that's really audible to folks without sight, I think it would be really helpful to find out where they are.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And so everybody could use them. And it's interesting. You talked about those light rail crossings. There were, again, controversy over plans to install sound alarms there, too.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: That's right. I mean, we need to be able to know that it's folks with visual impairments or who are blind to be able to hear the train coming, right, so that they can cross safely.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And if there's no signal, they don't know it's coming. Those trains are not all that noisy. They're electrically powered and fairly quiet.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: That's right. And you have the other noise around the light rail, other traffic sounds that can drown them out. And, in fact, even when they have the audible horns that are indicating that they're arriving to the platform, they're usually kind of parallel to the freight train. And when that freight train goes by, you can't hear those oncoming electric cars at all.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And it's interesting. Obviously, the people who live in that area don't necessarily want some big klaxon going off, either.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Indeed.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So it has to be a compromise.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: That's right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I wonder, though, as you get into these issues, why is it that you decided to study urban design?</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Well, you know, it's interesting. We all live in the built environment, and I think it's more and more important for people with disabilities to acquire the education so that they can pretty much be the driver of their boat, you know, to be a voice at the table and to make a contribution in a scholarly way that addresses their needs, but also improves the quality of life for everyone.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So it's not just about the Americans with Disabilities Act. It's about improving the downtown environment.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Exactly.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Now, I know that you went ahead and did, as part of your research, sort of an examination with other people who are blind and asked them to draw up maps of how they navigated Denver.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: That's right. I did.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And what did you find out?</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Well, they were pretty well strikingly similar, and that was in the article that came out in Wired magazine this month. But I think the first important piece of that is that folks without sight - whether they be congenitally blind or adventitiously blind - are capable of drawing a legible sketch map of their - environment. In this case, it was from the light rail station in Littleton, Colorado, to the Colorado Center for the Blind.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Mm-hmm. And there were similar markings on their maps.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: That's right. The primary emphasis on every map was the path. And it's well-established in the academic literature that what is the fundamental background for an individual's cognitive map, that is how they recall an urban environment where their are is grounded on the path that they take, and a path is path because it has an edge. So, you know, the sidewalk is an excellent example of a path, and that's how people without sight really can navigate through the built environment. Then along the path and within the path, you find different kinds of landmarks, and sighted people use landmarks like the Rocky Mountains or the Eiffel Tower or the Statue of Liberty or, you know, large things they can see off in a distance. And, obviously, that isn't possible for somebody without sight, so their landmarks are really imbedded in that path.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And imbedded in that path were things like - I was interested to read in that article in Wired magazine - the burning bush.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Right. Right. And oftentimes - and this happens in neighborhoods alike where people have - there are gardens overgrowing, the trees or bushes and, you know, it's not something that a person without sight would really anticipate come into contact with. I have a friend who's blind in Reno, and he does something called guerilla gardening where he goes out. He's blind, and he takes some shears, and when he crashes into these bushes...</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: ...chops them up, you know, so he's doing his neighbors a favor, I reckon.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Known as the burning bush because everybody ran into it one time or another, yeah.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Uh-huh. Exactly.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There was also the DNA pole.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: That's right. So ill-placed things that are - signs, for example. Poles that have signs that are conveying information to sighted people, whether it'd be the bus stop or when the bus comes or what buses come or stop, danger, don't enter, detour; many of those signs could be permanent even, and they are not - they're just right in the path that you're walking on the sidewalk, and it wasn't really thought out very clearly from the engineers where to place them.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But I was fascinated more - as interesting as those are, I was fascinated that when you looked at the paths that the blind people took, and if there was a big, blank space where none of the blind people went, there you could a find problem that's not going to be just for blind people. It's going to be for everybody.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Yeah. It's interesting and a little bit ironic that it took a blind person to figure out - to be able to see what's missing, what isn't there, you know? So, right. What find in the parking lots are these vague places because they don't have any edges or paths. So those aren't really good places, and they are not good for pedestrian in general.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So if there's a blank place, it means nobody walks there because it's too difficult, or it's too confusing, or it's just, you know, a big problem. The street is too wide. It's huge.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Oftentimes, you're not able to gather enough information from your immediate environment to be able to move from your orientation to your destination. So a path is really important. And oftentimes, you know, you can have a path through a park that's a social path, you know, that people just wear out the grass and there's a rut in the road, and so that's a path as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Interesting, because people create those paths because they're most useful than the paved routes the city often lays down.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: That's right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: As you look as this urban design study, I wonder how your fellow students are evaluating your contribution.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Well, that would be interesting.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: I don't know what they think about it yet. I haven't really - I think it's interesting and, you know, I think what we can really take away from this research is that planners, architects, designers all need to be thinking of planning for a multiplicity of people, rather than your able-bodied person in the light of aging population and that demographic. And it's something that's really important for us all to be able to maintain independent living and quality of life.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: When the Americans with Disabilities Act passed, a lot of urban planners and a lot of cities really thought of it as a huge headache. They had to retrofit things like the New York City subway to be, you know, accessible to people in wheelchairs. It's not going to be an easy to do. But as places now go ahead with projects like light rail, which is exploding all over the country, these kinds of designs can be incorporated from the beginning.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Well, that's my hope. And I will say that when the Americans with Disabilities Act really came out in 1991, it was pretty easy to identify, you know, the physical things that needed to be changed to make it - built environment accessible for people in wheelchairs. And at that time, we didn't have the kind of technology that we have today that will enable people without sight to have access to information. So all of the signs that are ubiquitous, whether they'd be in airports or train stations and light rail stations - and you're absolutely right, Denver is exploding on the scene with the largest investment in light rail ever in American history. So it's important that we can pull those things together now and really embrace the technology that we have and put them into our light rail stations so that all people have access to information in a sort of multisensory modality.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I also wonder how modern technology is going to affect this if a blind person, for example, carrying around a device that knows where he or she is. Can't that device say, oh, by the way, there's a red light. Wait 30 seconds and it will turn green?</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Well, there's a lot of different kinds of technology that folks without sight can take advantage of. I think that - but, you know, the question is what - how accurate is it? And how reliable is it? And under what - in what kind of context is it being used? So if you're relying on a piece of technology to tell you that it's safe to cross a major intersection, that might not be as reliable as just following the flow of the traffic that blind people are already trained to do.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nevertheless, it can tell you an alternate route if a street is blocked or something like that.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Yes. Yes, it can.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Do you use a smartphone with GPS?</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: No. Unfortunately, the smartphones - well, I haven't - I know there's a new one out, and I have to go - the - what is it? The Apple 4.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Mm-hmm.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: I have to go investigate that. But, unfortunately, one of the problems I find with technology is that you've got a bunch of engineers that are building stuff that's cool to them, but they're sighted. And so, oftentimes, they're not taking into account the fact that people want the old-fashioned ability to feel the tactile buttons, right, the raised buttons on phones. So I'm a little skeptical about that, but that happens on a lot of different technology, whether it's your microwave or your washer and dryer, just simple things in your house that no longer have any tactile information that you can use.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Claudia Folska who's a dual doctorate student at the University of Colorado, studying urban design and cognitive science about their contributions to urban design from people with disabilities. She's blind. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Will the ultimate answer to those kinds of questions be voice commands because the new 4S phone from Apple does have improved vocal commands?</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Well, it would seemed so, although the other problem is your privacy. So as you are blind and walking around, talking to your phone and then getting the feedback, then that information is broadcast to everyone. So I can probably just...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Anybody who wants to listen to it, yeah. So I hadn't thought of that. Obviously, of course, there's a privacy issue. What other projects are you working on?</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Isn't that enough?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, yeah. I think that's pretty much taking up all of my time right now. I plan to defend my dissertation next year, early in the spring, so that's really taking my focus.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, good luck with your dissertation when it comes up. And by the way, people might recognize your voice. You called in a couple of weeks ago.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: I did. I did. I - a big fan of Jacques Pepin and listen to his cooking shows all the time, and I learned a lot from him about how to cook. And so, I guess, I do another plan. I have a little cooking show idea that I'm building on called "Cooking in the Dark: Connecting Communities Through Yummy Food," and the idea is to really connect different communities in our local neighborhood and in Colorado, really. So spending 10 minutes on the farm and learning about the value of organic farming and then taking those items to a local chef who's a regional, seasonal organic chef, and then - and learning from them and cooking in my kitchen. So that's something that is - I'm planning for the future.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, good luck with that too. Claudia Folska...</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: ...thanks very much for your time today.</s>CLAUDIA FOLSKA: And thank you, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Coming up, we'll talk about your letters. |
Piri Thomas gave voice to generations of Latino Americans across the U.S. He died Monday at the age of 83. His acclaimed 1967 autobiography, Down These Mean Streets, chronicled his life growing up in New York's Spanish Harlem, and the poverty and racism that he and his community experienced there. | NEAL CONAN, host: Writer and poet Piri Thomas died this week at his home in El Cerrito, California, at the age of 83. As a young man, he robbed people on the streets of New York, used and sold drugs and served seven years in prison. After he got out, he wrote a memoir called "Down These Mean Streets," first published in 1967. It described growing up in what was then called Spanish Harlem in vivid, angry language that continues to be taught in universities today. In 2004, he recalled a bit of his earlier life as he introduced his poem "Born Anew at Each A.M."</s>PIRI THOMAS: As a young age, I found out that poetry was a way of communicating. I could put what was happening in my words, in my flows, either prose, poetry, whatever. And so when I wrote something, I was putting a chronicle history of what it was like growing up in barrio, el barrio, the barrio. Barrio is the name for a place. The barrio is a place.</s>PIRI THOMAS: The street's got its kicks like a bargain shelf. In fact, cool breeze, it's got love like anyplace else. It's got high-powered salesmen who push mucho junk, hustlers who can swallow you up in a chunk. It's got lights that shine up the dark and make the scene like new. It sells what you don't sell, and never lets you forget what you blew. It's got our children living in all kinds of hell, hoping to survive and making it well, swinging together in misty darkness with all their love to share, smiling a Christ-like forgiveness that only a ghetto cross could bear. Oh, yeah. The streets got life, like a young tender sun's, and gentleness like a long awaited dream to come. For all children are beauty, with the right to be born not to face racist scorn. All children are beauty with the right to be born, born anew at each A.M. Child out of twilight, flying toward sunlight. Born anew at each A.M. (Spanish spoken) Hey, check it out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Poet and novelist Piri Thomas, best remembered for "Down These Mean Streets." He died Monday at the age of 83. On Monday, Academy Award-winning director Guillermo del Toro will join us to talk, not about movies this time, but about the latest in the trilogy of books, "The Stain," "The Fall," and now "The Night Eternal." Join us for that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tomorrow, it's TALK OF THE NATION: SCIENCE FRIDAY. Ira Flatow will be here. We'll join you again on Monday. This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan, in Washington. |
After six weeks of debates and fluctuations in the polls, the Republican presidential hopefuls look to dramatically shift focus to their ground games in the coming weeks. Each candidate must organize offices in the early voting states, rack up endorsements, raise money and meet voters face-to-face. Ken Rudin, Talk of the Nation political junkie Mike Murphy, GOP media consultant at Revolution Agency | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. Fight night in Vegas, the president breaks it down nice and easy, and Herman Cain's electrifying proposal on immigration. It's Wednesday and time for a...</s>HERMAN CAIN: That's a joke...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Edition of the Political Junkie.</s>FORMER PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN: There you go again.</s>FORMER VICE PRESIDENT WALTER MONDALE: When I hear your new ideas, I'm reminded of that ad: Where's the beef?</s>FORMER SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.</s>FORMER SENATOR LLOYD BENTSON: Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.</s>FORMER PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON: You don't have Nixon to kick around anymore.</s>FORMER GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN: Lipstick.</s>FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH: But I'm the decider.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Every Wednesday, political junkie Ken Rudin joins us to recap the week in politics. A Republican round-robin in another televised debate with the first primary maybe as soon as December. Perry supporter and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal looks to cruise to re-election on Saturday. Scott Walker, his counterpart in Wisconsin, faces a recall effort.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: President Obama campaigns through the battleground states of Virginia and North Carolina, official business of course. In a few minutes, we'll speak with Republican strategist Mike Murphy as the nomination process moves into a new phase, and later in the program what the blind can teach us about urban design.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But first political junkie Ken Rudin joins us here in Studio 3A. As usual, we begin with a trivia question. Hey, Ken.</s>KEN RUDIN: Hi, Neal. I see that Herman Cain is telling jokes. I think he should understand that politics is a serious business. We don't...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Kid around, absolutely not.</s>KEN RUDIN: There you go. Okay, Mitt Romney...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Getting down to serious business...</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, exactly. Mitt Romney and Rick Perry went - really went after each other last night at the debate, making it highly unlikely the two of them will be on the same ticket together in 2012. That's the excuse for this trivia question. When was the last time a presidential ticket was made up either - OK, presidential ticket was made up of two governors or former governors?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, if you think you know the answer - major parties?</s>KEN RUDIN: Doesn't matter.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right. If you think you know the answer, the last time a presidential ticket was made up of governors or former governors, president and vice president.</s>KEN RUDIN: Or a combination, right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Of course, the winner gets a fabulous Political Junkie no-prize T-shirt. And, well, prizes available last night, prize fights in Vegas.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yeah, I heard there was a zoo - some animals escaped from a zoo. There was a zoo onstage last night in Las Vegas. It was seven of the former eight presidential candidates - Jon Huntsman boycotted it and we'll talk about why he did that later. But it was pretty pugnacious. It was pretty personal. As a matter of fact, in the past, in previous debates, they were talking about issues, such as illegal immigration or health care reform, things like that.</s>KEN RUDIN: Instead, this was - a lot of it was personal, and it was about character, and it was really - you see the animosity is clearly there among the candidates.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And particularly, between Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. Here's a clip of - after Perry needles Mitt Romney for allegedly hiring illegal immigrants to work at his house.</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: I don't think I've ever hired an illegal in my life. And so I'm afraid - I'm looking forward to finding your facts on that, because that just doesn't...</s>GOVERNOR RICK PERRY: I'll tell what you the facts are, (unintelligible).</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Rick again, Rick, I'm speaking. I'm speaking. I'm speaking.</s>GOVERNOR RICK PERRY: Your newspaper - it's time for you tell the truth.</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: You get 30 seconds. This is the way the rules work here is that I get 60 seconds, and then you get 30 seconds to respond, right?</s>GOVERNOR RICK PERRY: And they want to hear you say that you knew you had illegals working...</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Are you just going to keep talking, or are you going to let me finish with what I have to say? Look, Rick, (unintelligible). What a tough couple of debates for Rick. And I understand that, and so you're going to get testy.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Are you just going to keep talking, Ken?</s>KEN RUDIN: It sounds like an NPR staff meeting.</s>KEN RUDIN: You know what's remarkable is up to now, Mitt Romney's really had his way with the debates. Matter of fact, in the last debate, when he had a chance to address one of his rivals, he could have taken on Rick Perry. He basically ignored him. He went and gave a softball question to Michele Bachmann. He was just so confident and calm.</s>KEN RUDIN: It was not a confident and calm Mitt Romney last night. I still think he accorded himself well, but the issue about hiring illegal immigrants in a landscaping firm, I mean, that issue came up in 2008, and I think he had the same answer last night as he had back in 2008.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And it was Rick Perry who was bitterly criticized for his lackluster performances in the previous debates, and last night, maybe he didn't win it, but showed a pulse.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, he did show a pulse, and basically the polls showed that he needed to show a pulse, given the fact that Herman Cain became, suddenly, the new alternative to Mitt Romney. In the latest polls, Herman Cain is either leading or in a close second place in nearly every poll. And of course I think that's why all the candidates went after the 9-9-9 tax and economic plan last night in the beginning of the debate.</s>KEN RUDIN: They spent the first 20 minutes trying to explain that the numbers did not add up.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we're going to hear more numbers, I think, Tuesday, when it is Governor Perry's chance to present his economic plan. He's apparently going to call for a flat tax of his own, not the 9-9-9, no it's going to be completely different, but we'll hear the numbers next Tuesday.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In the meantime, other candidates needed to throw the long ball to see if they could make an impression last night, and get back in the contest.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, and I think - I guess the person I'm thinking of most would be Rick Santorum because he seemed to go - be the most aggressive in that. He certainly went after Mitt Romney the most, mostly over the fact that the predecessor for Obamacare was Romneycare, that President Obama got his health care overhaul scheme from Mitt Romney when he was governor of Massachusetts. And of course, as Romney has done in many debates, he tried to, at least, tell the difference, explain the difference between the two systems.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And there was - well, we keep looking at these numbers. There are new polls out today that show Herman Cain not going away, still, now leading the polls in the states of South Carolina and Florida.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, and of course everybody will tell you that whoever has won South Carolina since that primary was first instituted in 1980 has gone on to win the Republican nomination, but I will still argue that there's more critical ink and stories written about Herman Cain's plan. The fact is that many lower - the burden, the tax burden, would be on far more lower- and middle-income taxpayers. And then the rich would get a break.</s>KEN RUDIN: And some people say, well, that's Republican philosophy, but I think Herman Cain did it to an extreme. And whenever he's questioned on that, he says you're wrong, or you're incorrect, or go to my website. And ultimately, that's not going to work.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There was one candidate who called last night for a Lincoln-Douglas-style debate when we get to the general election. Newt Gingrich said I'm the only candidate up here who can debate Barack Obama on all of the policy issues without notes for eight hours at a time.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And he also made a point that, well, hearkened back to Ronald Reagan.</s>NEWT GINGRICH: Maximizing bickering is probably not the road to the White House.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The bomb thrower Newt Gingrich emerges as the grown-up in the Republican Party.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, except the fact that Newt's bombs have always been against the Democrats and the opposition, whereas, I mean, of course, Anderson Cooper wanted to - that's what you have to do when you're running a debate. You want to see where the conflict is. And of course, there are a lot of Republicans sitting back home arguing that the real winner of last night's debate was President Obama.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And in the meantime, immigration, as we heard, was a big issue in the debate last night, but it was also a big issue in Iowa, where Herman Cain spoke over the weekend, and made this remarkable claim about what he would do in the event he is elected president.</s>HERMAN CAIN: Well, when I'm in charge of defense, we're going to have a fence. It's going to be 20 feet high. It's going to have barbed wire on the top. It's going to be electrocuted - electrified.</s>HERMAN CAIN: And there's going to be a sign on the other side that says it will kill you. Warning.</s>HERMAN CAIN: Mr. Cain, that's insensitive. No, it's insensitive for them to be killing our citizens, killing our border agents. That's what's insensitive, and that mess has to stop.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Herman Cain later said, that's a joke. He wrote that off. It didn't sound like one.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yeah, that was pretty funny stuff. The thought of anybody - any Latino sitting and listening to that debate, I mean, Mitt Romney tried to make it an attempt, saying that legal immigration is the greatest thing for the country. But if you're a Latino sitting back home and listening to that debate, that was pretty harsh stuff, and Herman Cain - there are a lot of things he has to backtrack on, and that was one of them. It was pretty remarkable.</s>KEN RUDIN: He also said that he wouldn't trade - he would trade an American held in - by al-Qaida, for all the prisoners that are held in Guantanamo. And he said he never said it, but he did say that, and he had to apologize for that, as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In the meantime, we have some people on the line who think they know the answer to this week's trivia question, and that is the last time a presidential ticket was composed of - vice president and president - of current or former governors, 800-989-8255. Email is talk@npr.org. Paul's(ph) on the line calling from Panama City.</s>PAUL: Hey, Mr. Conan, good to speak to you again.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thank you.</s>PAUL: I had a guess, but I'm not sure about it. So I'm going to go with Nixon-Agnew.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, Spiro Agnew was the governor of Maryland when Nixon picked him in 1968, but Nixon was never governor, although he did run for governor.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But you're not going to have Nixon to kick around anymore.</s>KEN RUDIN: As governor, anyway.</s>PAUL: (Unintelligible).</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much, Paul. Let's see if we can go next to - this is James(ph), James calling from Tampa.</s>JAMES: Yes, I'm guessing it's Governors Clinton and Al Gore.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, there was Governor Clinton, he was the governor of Arkansas, but there was never a Governor Al Gore. Al Gore was congressman and senator from Tennessee.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nice try, though. Let's see if we can go next to - this is Joe(ph) and Joe calling from Anchorage.</s>JOE: I think it was in '72, with McGovern and Humphrey.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, actually the ticket in '72 was - on the Democratic side was originally George McGovern and Thomas Eagleton, and then it became George McGovern and Sargent Shriver. But out of those three people, none of whom served as governor.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nice try, Joe, thanks for the call. Let's see if we can go next to - this is Richard(ph), Richard with us from Gainesville, another caller from Florida.</s>RICHARD: Dewey-Warren, 1948.</s>KEN RUDIN: Dewey-Warren is the correct answer.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ding, ding, ding.</s>KEN RUDIN: Thomas Dewey was the governor of New York. Earl Warren, later Supreme Court chief justice, was the governor of California.</s>RICHARD: Governor of California.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yes, indeed. Well, congratulations, Richard, and hang on the line. We will collect your particulars, and we will mail you off a political junkie no-prize T-shirt in exchange for your promise of a digital picture of yourself wearing it so we can post that on our wall of shame.</s>RICHARD: Great. Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, stay with us. In the meantime, Ken, do we have a ScuttleButton winner to send a T-shirt to?</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, we do. We actually do. There's a new ScuttleButton puzzle up today, but last week's puzzle had a button, the buttons of two Kennedy brothers. There was a Carol Moseley Braun button, there was another button, and the answer of course was "Bob, Carol, Ted and Alice."</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, of course. And anyway, the winner, Melissa Carlson(ph) of Overland Park, Kansas.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Overland Park, Kansas. So she will be getting a political junkie no-prize T-shirt, as well. Just before the break, we do need to know - we've been talking a lot about Republicans - the Democratic presidential candidate was out campaigning this week. He said it was official business, but he was in North Carolina and southern Virginia, campaigning for his jobs bill.</s>PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: What we're going to do is we're going to break up my jobs bill. Maybe they just couldn't understand the whole thing all at once.</s>PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: So we're going to break it up into bite-sized pieces.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: At $447 billion, it did not get through the United States Senate. Any better chances in bite-sized pieces?</s>KEN RUDIN: Well probably not, but of course it's good to note that Virginia and North Carolina were two states that he won, unexpectedly, in 2008. Democrats usually don't win those states, and obviously he's trying to win them again in 2012.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: It could be a long-shot in both of those states. We'll have to see what happens there. We're talking with political junkie Ken Rudin. Up next, last night's debate is done; actual votes come in the next 11 weeks. It's time to focus on the next phase of the campaign. We'll talk with Republican strategist Mike Murphy about the fallout from the latest primary schedule shuffle and who's likely to pull ahead from the pack. So stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. Fight night in Vegas, the president breaks it down nice and easy, and Herman Cain's electrifying proposal on immigration. It's Wednesday and time for a...</s>HERMAN CAIN: That's a joke...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Edition of the Political Junkie.</s>FORMER PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN: There you go again.</s>FORMER VICE PRESIDENT WALTER MONDALE: When I hear your new ideas, I'm reminded of that add: Where's the beef?</s>FORMER SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.</s>FORMER SENATOR LLOYD BENTSON: Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.</s>FORMER PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON: You don't have Nixon to kick around anymore.</s>FORMER GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN: Lipstick.</s>FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH: But I'm the decider.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Every Wednesday, political junkie Ken Rudin joins us to recap the week in politics. A Republican round-robin in another televised debate with the first primary maybe as soon as December. Perry supporter and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal looks to cruise to re-election on Saturday. Scott Walker, his counterpart in Wisconsin, faces a recall effort.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: President Obama campaigns through the battleground states of Virginia and North Carolina, official business of course. In a few minutes, we'll speak with Republican strategist Mike Murphy as the nomination process moves into a new phase, and later in the program what the blind can teach us about urban design.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But first political junkie Ken Rudin joins us here in Studio 3A. As usual, we begin with a trivia question. Hey, Ken.</s>KEN RUDIN: Hi, Neal. I see that Herman Cain is telling jokes. I think he should understand that politics is a serious business. We don't...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Kid around, absolutely not.</s>KEN RUDIN: There you go. Okay, Mitt Romney...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Getting down to serious business...</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, exactly. Mitt Romney and Rick Perry went - really went after each other last night at the debate, making it highly unlikely the two of them will be on the same ticket together in 2012. That's the excuse for this trivia question. When was the last time a presidential ticket was made up either - okay, presidential ticket was made up of two governors or former governors?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, if you think you know the answer - major parties?</s>KEN RUDIN: Doesn't matter.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right. If you think you know the answer, the last time a presidential ticket was made up of governors or former governors, president and vice president.</s>KEN RUDIN: Or a combination, right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Of course, the winner gets a fabulous Political Junkie no-prize T-shirt. And, well, prizes available last night, prize fights in Vegas.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yeah, I heard there was a zoo - some animals escaped from a zoo. There was a zoo onstage last night in Las Vegas. It was seven of the former eight presidential candidates, Jon Huntsman boycotted it and we'll talk about why he did that later. But it was pretty pugnacious. It was pretty personal. As a matter of fact, in the past, in previous debates, they were talking about issues, such as illegal immigration or health care reform, things like that.</s>KEN RUDIN: Instead, this was - a lot of it was personal, and it was about character, and it was really - you see the animosity is clearly there among the candidates.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And particularly between Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. Here's a clip of - after Perry needles Mitt Romney for allegedly hiring illegal immigrants to work at his house.</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: I don't think I've ever hired an illegal in my life. And so I'm - I'm looking forward to finding your facts on that because that just doesn't...</s>GOVERNOR RICK PERRY: I'll tell what you the facts are, (unintelligible).</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Rick again, Rick, I'm speaking. I'm speaking. I'm speaking.</s>GOVERNOR RICK PERRY: Your newspaper - it's time for you tell the truth.</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: You get 30 seconds. This is the way the rules work here is that I get 60 seconds, and then you get 30 seconds to respond, right?</s>GOVERNOR RICK PERRY: And they want to hear you say that you knew you had illegals working...</s>FORMER GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Are you just going to keep talking, or are you going to let me finish with what I have to say? Look, Rick, (unintelligible). What a tough couple of debates for Rick. And I understand that, and so you're going to get testy.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Are you just going to keep talking, Ken?</s>KEN RUDIN: It sounds like an NPR staff meeting.</s>KEN RUDIN: You know what's remarkable is up to now, Mitt Romney's really had his way with the debates. Matter of fact, in the last debate, when he had a chance to address one of his rivals, he could have taken on Rick Perry. He basically ignored him. He went and gave a softball question to Michele Bachmann. He was just so confident and calm.</s>KEN RUDIN: It was not a confident, calm Mitt Romney last night. I still think he accorded himself well, but the issue about hiring illegal immigrants in a landscaping firm, I mean, that issue came up in 2008, and I think he had the same answer last night as he had back in 2008.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And it was Rick Perry who was bitterly criticized for his lackluster performances in the previous debates, and last night, maybe he didn't win it but showed a pulse.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, he did show a pulse, and basically the polls showed that he needed to show a pulse given the fact that Herman Cain became suddenly the new alternative to Mitt Romney. In the latest polls, Herman Cain is either leading or in a close second place in nearly every poll. And of course I think that's why all the candidates went after the 9-9-9 tax and economic plan last night in the beginning of the debate.</s>KEN RUDIN: They spent the first 20 minutes trying to explain that the numbers did not add up.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we're going to hear more numbers I think Tuesday, when it is Governor Perry's chance to present his economic plan. He's apparently going to call for a flat tax of his own, not the 9-9-9, no it's going to be completely different, but we'll hear the numbers next Tuesday.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In the meantime, other candidates needed to throw the long ball to see if they could make an impression last night and get back in the contest.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, and I think - I guess the person I'm thinking of most would be Rick Santorum because he seemed to go - be the most aggressive in that. He certainly went after Mitt Romney the most, mostly over the fact that the predecessor for Obamacare was Romneycare, that President Obama got his health care overhaul scheme from Mitt Romney when he was governor of Massachusetts. And of course as Romney has done in many debates, he tried to, at least, tell the difference, explain the difference between the two systems.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And there was - well, we keep looking at these numbers. There are new polls out today that show Herman Cain not going away, still now leading the polls in the states of South Carolina and Florida.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, and of course everybody will tell you that whoever has won South Carolina since that primary was first instituted in 1980 has gone on to win the Republican nomination, but I will still argue that there's more critical ink and stories written about Herman Cain's plan. The fact is that many lower - the burden, the tax burden, would be on far more lower- and middle-income taxpayers. And then the rich would get a break.</s>KEN RUDIN: And some people say, well, that's Republican philosophy, but I think Herman Cain did it to an extreme, and whenever he's questioned on that, he says you're wrong, or you're incorrect, or go to my website. And ultimately, that's not going to work.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There was one candidate who called last night for a Lincoln-Douglas-style debate when we get to the general election. Newt Gingrich said I'm the only candidate up here who can debate Barack Obama on all of the policy issues without notes for eight hours at a time.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And he also made a point that, well, hearkened back to Ronald Reagan. Former Representative</s>NEWT GINGRICH: Maximizing bickering is probably not the road to the White House.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The bomb thrower Newt Gingrich emerges as the grown-up in the Republican Party.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, except the fact that Newt's bombs have always been against the Democrats in the opposition, whereas, I mean, of course Anderson Cooper wanted to - that's what you have to do when you're running a debate. You want to see where the conflict is. And of course, there are a lot of Republicans back home arguing that the real winner of last night's debate was President Obama.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And in the meantime, immigration, as we heard, was a big issue in the debate last night, but it was also a big issue in Iowa, where Herman Cain spoke over the weekend and made this remarkable claim about what he would do in the event he is elected president.</s>HERMAN CAIN: Well, when I'm in charge of defense, we're going to have a fence. It's going to be 20 feet high. It's going to have barbed wire on the top. It's going to be electrified.</s>HERMAN CAIN: And there's going to be a sign on the other side that says it will kill you, (unintelligible).</s>HERMAN CAIN: Mr. Cain, that's insensitive. No, it's insensitive for them to be killing our citizens, killing our border agents. That's what's insensitive, and that mess has to stop.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Herman Cain later said that's a joke. He wrote that off. It didn't sound like one.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yeah, that was pretty funny stuff. The thought of anybody - any Latino sitting and listening to that debate, I mean, Mitt Romney tried to make it an attempt saying that legal immigration is the greatest thing for the country. But if you're a Latino sitting back home and listening to that debate, that was pretty harsh stuff, and Herman Cain - there are a lot of things he has to backtrack on, and that was one of them. It was pretty remarkable.</s>KEN RUDIN: He also said that he wouldn't trade - he would trade an American held by al-Qaeda for all the prisoners that are held in Guantanamo, and he said he never said it, but he did say that, and he had to apologize for that, as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In the meantime, we have some people on the line who think they know the answer to this week's trivia question, and that is the last time a presidential ticket was composed of - vice president and president - of current or former governors, 800-989-8255. Email is talk@npr.org. Paul's(ph) on the line calling from Panama City.</s>PAUL: Hey, Mr. Conan, good to speak to you again.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thank you.</s>PAUL: I had a guess, but I'm not sure about it. So I'm going to go with Nixon-Agnew.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, Spiro Agnew was the governor of Maryland when Nixon picked him in 1968, but Nixon was never governor, although he did governor.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But you're not going to have Nixon to kick around anymore.</s>KEN RUDIN: As governor, anyway.</s>PAUL: (Unintelligible).</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much, Paul. Let's see if we can go next to - this is James(ph), James calling from Tampa.</s>JAMES: Yes, I'm guessing it's Governors Clinton and Al Gore.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, there was Governor Clinton, he was the governor of Arkansas, but there was never a Governor Al Gore. Al Gore was congressman and senator from Tennessee.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nice try, though. Let's see if we can go next to - this is Joe(ph) and Joe calling from Anchorage.</s>JOE: (Unintelligible), McGovern and Humphrey.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, actually the ticket in '72 was - on the Democratic side was originally George McGovern and Thomas Eagleton, and then it became George McGovern and Sargent Shriver. But out of those three people, none of whom served as governor.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Nice try, Joe, thanks for the call. Let's see if we can go next to - this is Richard(ph), Richard with us from Gainesville, another caller from Florida.</s>RICHARD: Dewey-Warren, 1948.</s>KEN RUDIN: Dewey-Warren is the correct answer.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ding, ding, ding.</s>KEN RUDIN: Thomas Dewey was the governor of New York. Earl Warren, later Supreme Court chief justice, was the governor of California.</s>RICHARD: Governor of California.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yes, indeed. Well, congratulations, Richard, and hang on the line. We will collect your particulars, and we will mail you off a political junkie no-prize T-shirt in exchange for your promise of a digital picture of yourself wearing it so we can post that on our wall of shame.</s>RICHARD: Great.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, stay with us. In the meantime, Ken, do we have a ScuttleButton winner to send a T-shirt to?</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, we do. We actually do. There's a new ScuttleButton puzzle up today, but last week's puzzle had a button, the buttons of two Kennedy brothers. There was a Carol Moseley Braun button, another button, and the answer of course was Bob, Carol, Ted and Alice.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, of course. And anyway, the winner, Melissa Carlson(ph) of Overland Park, Kansas.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Overland Park, Kansas. So she will be getting a political junkie no-prize T-shirt, as well. Just before the break, we do need to know, we've been talking a lot about Republicans. The Democratic presidential candidate was out campaigning this week. He said it was official business, but he was in North Carolina and southern Virginia campaigning for his jobs bill.</s>PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: What we're going to do is we're going to break up my jobs bill. Maybe they just couldn't understand the whole thing all at once.</s>PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: So we're going to break it up into bite-sized pieces.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: At $447 billion, it did not get through the United States Senate. Any better chances in bite-sized pieces?</s>KEN RUDIN: Well probably not, but of course it's good to note that Virginia and North Carolina were two states that he won unexpectedly in 2008. Democrats usually don't win those states, and obviously he's trying to win them again in 2012.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: It could be a long-shot in both of those states. We'll have to see what happens there. We're talking with political junkie Ken Rudin. Up next, last night's debate is done; actual votes come in the next 11 weeks. It's time to focus on the next phase of the campaign. We'll talk with Republican strategist Mike Murphy about the fallout from the latest primary schedule shuffle and who's likely to pull ahead from the pack. So stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan. Ken Rudin, our political junkie, is back. After five GOP debates in the past six weeks, he's going to have to find something else to do in the evenings. Apparently, there's this baseball tournament that begins tonight.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The next debate is nearly a month off. You can still find Ken's latest columns and that devious ScuttleButton puzzle at npr.org/junkie. For the campaigns themselves, it is time to shift into the ground game, and the clock is ticking.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks to the shake-up of the long-sacrosanct primary calendar, actual votes now may come as early in December. More on that in a second. Mike Murphy have been watching all of this unfold from the sidelines, for now. He's a veteran Republican strategist who advised Senator John McCain in 2000 and joins us now from his home in Los Angeles. Nice to have you back on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>MIKE MURPHY: It's great to be back, gentlemen, great to join you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And if the past six weeks and those five debates were Round One, who's on top?</s>MIKE MURPHY: Well, I'm going down to the debate Methadone clinic today, as a fellow junkie, to kind of separate from the debate game, which is important, but it's not the voter game yet. I think it's - and I've been predicting this for a while - it wants to be a two-person race between Romney and Perry, with Herman Cain as kind of the third place some voters are going now. We don't know if they're going to stick there.</s>MIKE MURPHY: But we're really going to move into the voter contact period now. The ads are about to start in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida - the early important primaries that now look like they're all going to be in January, but as you said there's some questions about the calendar that still are not resolved.</s>MIKE MURPHY: And in some ways, I think the primary electorate we have this year is interested in Rick Perry. In other ways, I think Romney has the performance skills, experience, and establishment backing that makes him very formidable and historically probably the frontrunner. So I think we're going to have a real race between those two.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Some of the Perry people say the debate phase was not their strong suit, never was, never was going to be. But now that we've got some time off before the next debate, they have a lot of money, they retail contact with the voters. Those things, and organizational strength, and those things are going to play to Perry's strengths.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Yeah, they look at the presidential primaries like big-state, statewide guys, which makes sense. That's what they have done in Texas. They've been good at it. They beat Kay Bailey Hutchison in the primary for the governor's race in 2010 from behind.</s>MIKE MURPHY: And in that school of political theory, practical politics, ads are everything" paid media, direct mail. Other stuff doesn't count as much. However, in presidential primaries, you can't underestimate the value of the tremendous media coverage you get, and that's where Perry, I think, has been sloppy.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Debates are not everything, but they're not unimportant, particularly to opinion-makers and people you want to give money. He's got his $15 million war chest now. It's probably really about $12 million because every campaign plays a little accounting game with cash versus bills they keep in a desk drawer. The question is can he keep raising money if, in these debates, he looks like he can't hold his own with Barack Obama in the general election.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Donor elites like candidates who perform well in debates because they look like winners, do well on their feet. So one of the questions for Perry is how much money can he raise going forward. I think Romney has some advantages there.</s>MIKE MURPHY: But Perry is a good - has a good kind of tone ear for the Republican primary. He's got some trained advantages on the calendar, which is very important, I think, an item that's being missed a little. And so I think it's going to be a big between both of them.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ken?</s>KEN RUDIN: Yeah, I mean, everything that Mike said, I was nodding my head yes. I wasn't falling asleep. I was nodding my head in agreement, especially the fact that we're not going to have a debate for another month or so. And as you say, Mitt Romney has really, has shone, has shined – has shurned(ph) - during these debates. But of course, if you have paid media, and you have paid attack ads, nobody's a more ferocious campaigner than Rick Perry.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Right, and the paid ads can define the press coverage for a while. Whatever fight you pick with your television ads, the media kid of parrots that and goes off and asks the candidate about oh, you had that debate for a while.</s>MIKE MURPHY: But I have to say the one that struck me about these debates is, Perry's the only candidate I've seen who's gotten worse. You know, normally they start bad and get better. He got worse and worse and worse, and I think improved a little bit last night, though his tone became something that might be an issue, as well.</s>MIKE MURPHY: So he just - he struggles with the unscripted, non-advertising part of the campaign, but again, you can always get better, and the media is quick to forgive and realign the race if they sense improvement.</s>KEN RUDIN: And even if George W. Bush was not that effective against John McCain in 2000, at least Bush had the party establishment, whatever that means, behind him. Perry certainly doesn't have that this time.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Right, he had a little of it at the beginning, but then I think he - his problem is with the party establishment, as opposed to the primary voters, really care about is winning and losing. And Perry does not look like a general election winner. Now, if he wins the Iowa caucus, if Romney does not engage him there, he'll start to rebuild his image, and he'll get a momentum factor, which I think could be very dangerous for Romney.</s>MIKE MURPHY: I think the biggest strategic call now that we're in the voter contact part of the campaign is does Mitt Romney jump into Iowa and try to stop him there, or does he hold up in fortress New Hampshire and run the risk of letting Perry get some real momentum.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And that, as you say, is risky. If he does invest in Iowa and does not do as well as he'd hoped, then, well, he stands to lose a lot.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Yeah, you go to Iowa, and you get beat bad, you lose. You get beat close, I think it makes your New Hampshire win, which is a primary, better terrain for Romney, the composition of it, worth something. So although it's tough to go engage in Iowa, what's really tough is to have a guy like Perry come out of Iowa with momentum. So I'm not sure what Plan B for the Romney campaign is.</s>MIKE MURPHY: And I think people quickly forget one bit of the math last time. They all remember Romney lost. I know Romney remembers Romney lost. Romney got about 31,000 votes in the caucus out of 120,000. Huckabee got about 41,000, but McCain got 15,000, and Fred Thompson got 16,000. Rudy Giuliani didn't really compete there, got about four.</s>MIKE MURPHY: So there's 30,000 to 35,000 kind of regular Republican votes out there, not all of them, but a big hunk of them, which is why a lot of people around Terry Brandstad, the governor of Iowa, think Romney could actually prevail in the caucus.</s>MIKE MURPHY: So I'm not - it's a tough chore, but, you know, getting nominated is a tough chore, and I'm not sure what Plan B would be for Romney. I'm kind of curious what other route they could take, other than a risky move into Iowa that could play huge rewards.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we did see John McCain lose in Iowa both in 2000 and 2008 only to go on and win New Hampshire both times, as well.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Right, right. I just - I think Romney might have special South Carolina problems that McCain didn't have after New Hampshire. And Romney has, you know, the benefit of a lot of strength in New Hampshire. That's the burden of high expectations. I think if Perry wins Iowa without a Romney contest, goes into New Hampshire and gets beat by six points, the headlines might be Texan does better than expected in New Hampshire.</s>MIKE MURPHY: And then you go on to South Carolina, which you're really, if you're Romney, you don't want that to be the tiebreaker.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, we're talking about that schedule as if it's the actual schedule. Ken, at last word, New Hampshire is still threatening to hold their ballot as soon as early December.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, here's the thing. Iowa, first of all, the news of the week is Iowa announced that they will have their caucuses on January 3rd. Earlier, or last week, Nevada announced they will have their caucuses on January 14th. That puts New Hampshire in an awkward position because they have to have theirs a full week before the next succeeding contest.</s>KEN RUDIN: So anyway, there's a contest. So right now, New Hampshire is threatening to have their primary in December, but the Nevada Republican Party is meeting, they have a meeting this Saturday, and my guess is they're going knuckle under the pressure. They're talking about - all the candidates are talking about boycotting their caucuses. I suspect that Nevada will move their date to at least - back to at least January 17th, if not even further back, allowing New Hampshire to come in January 8th and everybody - January 10th, and everybody will be happy.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Yeah, I couldn't agree more. Ken's always right about these process things, as a true wizard at this part of it. And I agree because what you've got going on now with these three states is like a naval battle between the British Navy in the '40s, the American Navy and the Belgian Navy.</s>MIKE MURPHY: And Nevada's Belgium. And they're going to get shoved because they just don't have the heavyweight power to compete with New Hampshire and Iowa.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That is why Jon Huntsman, by the way, was not in Nevada last night. He's put all of his bets on New Hampshire. And the Union Leader, the big newspapers there, said where's Mitt Romney. He ought not be in Nevada, either. He should be here in New Hampshire. And, well, I don't know if we're going to endorse him. But we're going to have to see what comes out of that.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Yeah, that process game in New Hampshire is important, but it's not vital. Back in my old days with Lamar Alexander, we got into that about Delaware, which was the Nevada of the '96 cycle. And, you know, you can score a little bit of easy heat and everything. But Huntsman's problem is somehow they've spent $4 million with a guy who looks good on paper, at least in New Hampshire, but they've never been able to run a TV spot to make him famous enough.</s>MIKE MURPHY: So now the question is do they have money to really compete. If he does find some money in a superPAC or somehow, I think he could get a little traction in New Hampshire. But he's running out of time.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I think Delaware was the Swiss Navy in this - in your analogy. Anyway, let's see if we can get a caller on the line, 800-989-8255. Tom(ph) is on the line from Norfolk in Virginia.</s>TOM: Yeah, I had a question about a lot of the - what we're hearing, recently, is about the budget and the deficit and all that. And I've heard a lot of, you know, about the 9-9-9 plan, the numbers not matching up and how we're not sure about some other plans. But I haven't heard any opinions on Ron Paul's plan that he mentioned the other day. And I'd like to get Ken's view on that, specifically. I mean, is that possible? Are his numbers adding up?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, it's cut a trillion dollars from the federal budget immediately, eliminate five government departments and a lot of other things, which is one of the things that makes it difficult for Ron Paul to get more than a small fraction - well not necessarily a small fraction - but a fraction of the Republican primary vote.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I wanted to ask you - Ken is not noted as an economist, a process master, yes, but Mike Murphy, what is it that somebody like a Ron Paul or a Michele Bachmann, or for that matter, Herman Cain, who's currently leading the polls, what can they do to sustain that or break into the top tier?</s>MIKE MURPHY: Well, I think, you know, Paul is a niche candidate with an intense niche of supporters, which means he's a catalyst in the early state to other people, particularly in Iowa, where I think he could do 10 percent of the caucus vote, maybe even a little more. But as - for the realism of his plan, he basically has to make a deal with space aliens to come down and elect 400 Ron Pauls to Congress to get anything like that done. Cain is a little different, and Bachmann, again, is another catalyst in Iowa.</s>MIKE MURPHY: I think she may have a little bit of a comeback if Romney starts beating the hell out of Perry with negative ads. There's going to be a room for some movement, conservatives who don't like Romney to go anywhere, and they're going to be looking at Bachmann again, and I think at Cain. Cain, I give a little more credit to on policy. The 999 plan is, at first glance, popular because it's simplistic. But the idea behind it is actually fairly sophisticated, which is to widen the tax base into some sort of national sales tax, which a lot of other Western democracies do.</s>MIKE MURPHY: So I think - although I doubt Cain will get nominated. I think he peaked at that debate, and it's now a downhill slope for him. I'm guessing. The voters get to decide. I do think the idea, as a country in the fiscal crisis we look at, looks at tough spending cuts and potentially revenue going forward. The idea of widening the tax base into some other kind of tax vehicle like that and the lower corporate - and taxes on capital gains is going to be an interesting idea that'll be part of the tax debate in 2012. So Cain may have some legacy here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we already mentioned that Rick Perry's coming out, apparently, with a flat-tax proposal next week.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Right. The problem with the flat-tax proposal, Steve Forbes learned, is in a practical primary, it's great at first glance. Then people get out their calculators, and they start figuring out what about my mortgage deduction? You know, what is it for people under $75,000? And there are a lot of those in the Iowa caucus who vote. Is that actually a net tax increase for me? The second look at these super-attractive tax plans often gets a little bumpy, particularly in Iowa, where people, you know, if they're in the farm industry or whatever, they're - parts of the tax code, they're very popular.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Mike Murphy, a GOP media consultant, a principal of Revolution Agency, a political consulting firm, a senior strategist for John McCain back in 2000, joining us from his home in Los Angeles. Of course, Political Junkie Ken Rudin is with us, as he is every Wednesday. And you can go to npr.org/junkie to read his column and look at that devious ScuttleButton puzzle if you'd like. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, coming to you from NPR News. Ken?</s>KEN RUDIN: Mike, there seemed to be a lot of people who are going - or at least filled - they've gotten over the charm of Herman Cain, and they're going over the numbers saying this doesn't work, that doesn't work, this doesn't make sense. But the people who like Herman Cain, the people who get on their feet when he gives his great oratory, the people who really, really like the charisma, are they listening to the people who are just tearing apart his programs? Or does it matter to them?</s>MIKE MURPHY: You know, I don't think his - I think some of his new voters are listening, and I think that's why we're going to see him start to decline in national polls now. These national polls are so overrated early. They're kind of noise meters, in some way, so what's going on in the political discussion rather than voter intent. But Cain's got kind of a base of support, but it's not enough to win the caucus, and it's not enough to win the New Hampshire primary. And the question is: Can he take all the attention he's getting and take it to the next step?</s>MIKE MURPHY: And what I saw last night was he was kind of dug in and defensive and not briefed up to some issues. So he's going to squander his opportunity, is my guess. Again, we'll see. He'll hang on (unintelligible) vote on charisma, though, no doubt about it. So it'll be, you know, it'll be Perry and Romney on the A-list, and I think on the B-list, you're going to have a combination of Santorum, who's running a pretty pure campaign of social conservatives. There's some votes there. Cain on charisma. And still, I think Bachmann will kind of go up and down a little bit, kind of depending on how Perry does.</s>KEN RUDIN: And the difference this year, of course, is that in the early primaries and caucuses, they're - proportionally, it's not winner-take-all. It's proportional. So Ron Paul and all the others you just mentioned can survive, at least for a couple of months.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Yeah, for some reason, the Republicans all got high and decided to ape the Democratic system, where we give you delegates for 11th place. We used to be the mean social Darwinists, it's all, winner-take-all. Though, you know, as you know, a lot of the early - it's pre-April, a lot of those are winner by congressional district. So it's kind of like partially proportional. Some are more than others. So I don't think it would have quite the effect the Dems do, but it will, to the extent as an impact, it could lengthen the process, absolutely, which is a very un-Republican way, historically, to do it. We tend to do the winner-take-all, and we change that to be a bit more proportional. It'll be fascinating to see how that plays out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's get Keith on the line, Keith with us from Gainesville.</s>KEITH: Hi. I want to hear more about the importance of Florida's primary. We hear so much about New Hampshire and Iowa, and I am a Floridian, and like to hear more about the importance of our primary in selecting a candidate. If he loses New Hampshire - I'm a Romney supporter - or - and or Iowa, Florida's still in there and, I think, important.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Florida's pretty early and pretty big, Mike Murphy.</s>MIKE MURPHY: It's huge. And it's interesting, because it's the one early state that's also a mega state and also a super critical - some would argue the most critical - general election state. So I'll even make a prediction. I think those sneaky guys over at the Obama campaign, when Perry and Romney start running paid negative ads, and Perry has already started calling TV stations for pricing in Florida, they may slip in a little superPAC money into that negative ad mix to work on Romney for the general election. They'd be happy, I think, with Perry. So Florida's going to be ground central. If I could come back in life as anything, it would be the owner of a television station in Orlando...</s>MIKE MURPHY: ...because that is ground double-zero, along with Tampa Bay. The one thing I think candidates have to be careful of - and I'd be curious what Ken thinks - you can't underestimate the momentum effect. I remember old Reubin Askew, a great governor of Florida, ran for president, nothing happened, you know, in the early states for him. He had to drop out of the race before his home state primary, because there was nothing left. So when you try to build these fortresses - and John Connally, Al Gore in '88 in the Democratic primaries in the South - and you don't do well early, the sandcastle can get washed away.</s>MIKE MURPHY: So I think whoever wins kind of has momentum coming out of the early primaries will have some advantage in Florida, combined with who has the most money, because unlike the other primaries, Florida is so large, money's even more important there, because it costs so much to advertise. That's where, if Mitt Romney's going to write a $5 million check out of his piggybank, I bet it'll be in Florida to try to jump to a money advantage over Perry after they both spend all their early money. So...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we'll give Ken...</s>MIKE MURPHY: ...I believe - I'm still old school, even with the proportional primaries. I think whoever wins the Florida primary will wake up the next day not inevitable, but close to the - being really in the driver seat toward the nomination.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Mike Murphy, thanks very much for your time. We appreciate it.</s>MIKE MURPHY: Thank you. It was fun to be with you guys. Talk to you soon.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We'll call again. Mike Murphy, joining us from Los Angeles. He's a principal with Revolution Agency. And thanks again for joining us. Ken, before we go away, Bobby Jindal looks like he is set for an historic election on Saturday - re-election as governor in Louisiana, and a recall election process now beginning in Wisconsin.</s>KEN RUDIN: Right. The Bobby Jindal thing is historic given the fact that the Democratic Party, for the first time in its history, has not put up a candidate. There were nine others on the ballot. Jindal looks like he's going to go a smashing victory. They begin recall petitions against Scott Walker on November 15th.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And that election would be in the spring. Coming up, what we can learn about making our cities more livable for the blind. So stay with us for that. Ken, we'll see you again next Wednesday.</s>KEN RUDIN: OK, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: NPR News. I'm Neal Conan, in Washington. |
Each week, some story ideas make it on air while others die at the pitch meeting. Editor Ed McNulty gets a second chance to sell Rachel Martin on a story about a bony-eared fish with a funny name. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: OK. At this point in the show, I'm going to pull the curtain back a little bit on how we do what we do. Every Wednesday morning, we have an editorial meeting - when our producers and editors throw out their story ideas. The ideas we like, we pursue and then we turn them into interviews. And the ideas we don't like...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Well, those just die. The thing is, though, sometimes the person who has pitched said idea is really into it. So we thought we'd carve out a little space in the show to get that producer or editor a second chance to talk about the pitch that failed. First up, editor Ed McNulty. He's here in the studio with me. Hi, Ed.</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: Hi.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What's your pitch?</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: It's about the assfish...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The assfish?</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: ...which I want to say real early is ass as in donkey.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That makes it way better. All right.</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: I saw it in National Geographic. It's a story that has gone - because it's a Canadian story - politely viral. In the Royal BC Museum in Victoria, British Columbia, they've just put on display an assfish.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What does it look like?</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: It's a deep-sea creature, kind of like a fish and kind of like an eel together - looks like a tadpole. It is soft and flabby.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Uh-huh.</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: And this particular assfish is called the bony-eared assfish.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Why did this story jump out at you and make you think this - this is for WEEKEND EDITION SUNDAY?</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: Well, it's an interesting deep-sea creature.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: (Laughter),</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: The name actually comes from confusion about the scientific name Acanthonus armatus.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Uh-huh.</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: And acanthos is Greek for prickly, so that's where the bony-eared part comes from. But the onus part of that word can either mean hake, which is, like, a relative of cod or donkey in Greek.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So were you interested in the linguistic origins of this fish and its name, or did you just want the excuse to say assfish on the radio?</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: I think the story has everything.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: (Laughter).</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: I think the story has ichthyology. We could talk about Carl Linnaeus and scientific nomenclature.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: We could.</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: Canada.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Uh-huh.</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: So, I mean, what does it lack?</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Well, Ed, thank you so much for sharing your enthusiastic pitch. I think we're all better for it. At least you got to say assfish on the radio.</s>ED MCNULTY, BYLINE: No, you did.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Ah, boom. Ed McNulty, editor, assfish lover. Thanks, Ed. |
NPR's Neal Conan reads from listener comments on last week's show topics including the pros and cons of living in Detroit, and the bike ride of your life. He also corrects the popular myth that the Chevy Nova failed to sell well in Mexico because, in Spanish, the name means "no go." | NEAL CONAN, host: It's Wednesday and time to read from your comments.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Our conversation with Jonathan Turley about President Obama's record on civil liberties generated this respond from John Mack(ph). I've been voting in presidential elections since 1984. Only on two occasions have I picked winners, 1988 and 2008. I was a strong and vocal supporter of President Obama into the first year into the first year of his administration on the basis of personal liberty. I can't think of another time when I felt so deeply disappointed in our chief executive. He concluded: My political support for Barack Obama is completely withdrawn.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Our discussion about Detroit and whether that city is experiencing a revival sparked a lot of debate about the pros and cons of the Motor City. Kerry Carlson(ph) from Elk Rapids, Michigan, sent this email: I worked in radio in Detroit and lived there most of my life. I nearly cried when I first saw the Chrysler 300 ad on TV. It gave me a lump in my throat. The city is on the move, but it will take good planning to build it right just like the cars the Motor City is turning out today.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Teresa(ph) Butler disagreed. I moved from Detroit to a surrounding suburb five years ago due to the poor conditions in the city, including crime, a poor school system, high insurance and tax rates. Those reasons have not changed and will prevent people from moving back to the city. I'm so glad I left.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Many of you enjoyed reminiscing about the ride of your life during our discussion with Bill Strickland of Bicycling magazine. Tim Devaney(ph) wrote: In the summer of 2005, I left in the early morning from Williamstown, Massachusetts and cycled through the lovely Berkshires, took a dip in the quarry near Bish Bash Falls, rode the rail trail down through Millerton to Wassaic, where I pick the train to New York City. A lovely ride of about 80 miles and a great way to get home.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Finally, in our discussion with John Colapinto last week about brand names, we bought pointed to the Chevy Nova as an example of poor branding, repeating the alleged problem in Spanish. Nova means no go. Well, after a flurry of tweets, we check the website snopes.com, and we apologize to the Chevy Nova, and all its former and current owners. The story is an urban legend. In Spanish, nova means the same as it does in English. You need to insert a space to get to no va, and evidently people didn't. The Nova sold very well in both Mexico and Venezuela.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If you have a correction, comment or questions for us, the best way to reach us is by email. The address is talk@npr.org. Please, let us know where you're writing from and give us some help on how to pronounce your name. And if you're on Twitter, you can follow us there @totn, or you can follow me, @nealconan, all one word. |
Teen movies are all about stereotypes — the geek, the jock, the popular girl. But the new trend among filmmakers is to let teens tackle issues beyond detention and prom. | MADELEINE BRAND, host: A lot of celebrities in this country get their start in a very specific type of media, the teen movie. And there are stock story lines and stock characters in those movies - think the cheerleader, the jock, the geek moving up and down the social hierarchy. NPR's Alison Bryce reports that new teen films are going way beyond those stock characters and stock story lines, beyond detention or the prom date.</s>ALISON BRYCE: You want to talk about teenagers in recent movies? Look to Olivia Thirlby. She's in two, "Juno" and "Snow Angels." And in both she helps a friend navigate problems that have nothing to do with high school. In "Juno," Thirlby's bubbly blonde character holds Juno's hand while Juno tells her parents the unexpected news.</s>Ms. OLIVIA THIRLBY: (As Leah) Dude, I think it's best to just tell them.</s>Ms. ELLEN PAGE: (As Juno) I'm pregnant.</s>ALISON BRYCE: And in "Snow Angels," a movie out now, Thirlby's character also extends beyond the world of high school. She becomes a confidant to her crush, Arthur, while affairs, alcoholism and murder swirl around him.</s>Ms. OLIVIA THIRLBY: (As Lila Raybern) Why are you smiling?</s>Mr. MICHAEL ANGARANO: (As Arthur Parkinson) I've never seen you without your glasses.</s>Ms. OLIVIA THIRLBY: Yeah, because I think I look funny without them.</s>ALISON BRYCE: All we see of Arthur and Lila's high school is marching band practice and empty hallways where they awkwardly steal glances from one another.</s>Ms. OLIVIA THIRLBY: And I think you like me too. And you're just afraid to say it.</s>Mr. DAVID GORDON GREEN (Director, "Snow Angels"): I consciously made an effort to make them particularly eccentric, just kind of individual and independent.</s>ALISON BRYCE: "Snow Angels" Director David Gordon Green put his teen characters outside the realm of high school so the audience wouldn't judge them.</s>Mr. DAVID GORDON GREEN (Director, "Snow Angels"): They are their own little isolated island in utopia, away from the stress, anxieties of social pressures, of social circles, of the rest of the high school community.</s>ALISON BRYCE: In the past, movies about high school culture idealized the experience, says actress Olivia Thirlby.</s>Ms. OLIVIA THIRLBY: It's refreshing, I think, to see movies that are about teenagers but aren't about high school because, you know, while high school is important and it's an important time and it's kind of the way to go to remember your teen years, there's so much more going on.</s>ALISON BRYCE: There is a lot more going on. And movies like "Superbad," "Rushmore," and "Rocket Science" show it. But back in the '80s, the John Hughes era, teenagers lived and died to fit in at high school. Ty Burr, the Boston Globe's film critic says movies dealing solely within the insular high school world are over.</s>Mr. TY BURR (Film Critic, Boston Globe): Those movies, there were only teenagers. There were no adults. The only adults were sort of rare authority figures, you know, mean teachers, the occasional grumpy parent. But you know, you look at "The Breakfast Club" or "Ferris Bueller," "Pretty in Pink."</s>Mr. ANDREW MCCARTHY: (As Blane McDonnagh) I had a great time.</s>Ms. MOLLY RINGWALD: (As Andie Walsh) Liar.</s>Mr. ANDREW MCCARTHY: I was with you, I had a great time. If I was in a Turkish prison, I would have a great time. Feel any better if I asked you to the prom? I know the prom's kind of lame, so if you don't want to go...</s>Mr. TY BURR (Film Critic, Boston Globe): The teenage world in those movies is a completely self-contained bubble.</s>ALISON BRYCE: The high school-centric bubble has burst. And teen movie critic Jade Kassof(ph) says it's great. She relates to the teenagers she sees on screen today.</s>Ms. JADE KASSOF (Movie Critic): I think teenagers are, I guess, crude a lot of the times, and they are more mature than adults think that they are. But I'm pretty sure it was probably the same back in the '80s. It just didn't get shown on television or in movies.</s>ALISON BRYCE: If you want to check out real teenagers on screen, the documentary "American Teen" will be in theaters this summer. It follows four seniors around their small town Indiana high school. Alison Bryce, NPR News. |
In his new book, Fool Me Twice, writer Shawn Otto tells why he thinks science is under assault in America. Otto, CEO and co-founder of Science Debate 2008, also explains why his "American Science Pledge" for candidates might bring more science into political decision making. | IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY, from NPR. I'm Ira Flatow. Up next: science under attack. In his new book, "Fool Me Twice," writer Shawn Otto says science is under assault in America, and especially so in Washington, D.C. While science informs almost every aspect of our lives - think about climate change, energy, agriculture, medical research - Otto says anti-science views are so mainstream and science so marginalized that it's becoming a threat to our democracy.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Science didn't always take a backseat in politics. The Founding Fathers Jefferson and Franklin were themselves citizen-scientists, advocating for an informed citizenry. So what happened? And is there a way to bring science back into our social discussions, even into the presidential debates?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Shawn Otto is here to talk more about it. He is co-founder and CEO of Science Debate 2008. His new book is called "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America." He joins us from Minnesota Public Radio in St. Paul. Welcome back to the program, Shawn.</s>SHAWN OTTO: Thanks, Ira. It's great to be back.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Tell us why you wrote this book and how science is under attack in America.</s>SHAWN OTTO: Well, in 2008, you know, we noticed that the candidates for president really weren't talking about science issues at all. Coming out of the Bush administration, a lot of scientists were frustrated by the way that science had taken a backseat to policy positions that were determined by other factors.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And one time in particular, in January, we noticed that about 2,975 questions had been asked the candidates for president by the top five TV news anchors. And out of those 2,975 questions, six mentioned the words climate change or global warming, which was arguably - no matter which side you feel about it - a large policy position that they should have been talking about.</s>SHAWN OTTO: So we put together this effort called Science Debate 2008 to get the candidates to talk about that, and we ran into some really interesting snags. So the book starts with that as a jumping-off point to find out why it is that candidates leading the world's leading science country really could only talk about science in a forum on religion.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah. And do you think now that we're now into the next cycle of politics for the presidential candidates? Will - do you think there's any way to bring science into that debate now? Should - how do we get some of those questions answered, or even discussed?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Yeah. It's become, in some ways, much more difficult, as we can tell from looking at the current crop of GOP candidates. You know, Jon Huntsman said we don't want the Republican Party to become the anti-science party. But with the exception of Mitt Romney, every other candidate has taken - almost gone out of their way to take positions that are anti-science and that once would have not been accessible from a mainstream political candidate, but now are almost celebrated.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Do journalists and journalism share some of the blame of this not being part of the debate?</s>SHAWN OTTO: They do. There's something called false balance that happens in journalism, and it's really something that's only happened in the last generation of journalists. And there are a lot of factors in play, here. It's not just this. But the idea that there is no objective truth that journalists must dig to get to and that their responsibility is fulfilled simply by presenting competing versions of the story and letting the audience decide which is true.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And what that does is that inappropriately weights our public discourse towards extreme views and furthers partisanship.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Can you give us your assessment of President Obama's record on science issues since he took office? What's his science report card?</s>SHAWN OTTO: I think it's been mixed. He started out strong, beginning with his inaugural address and his engagement with Science Debate 2008 on the campaign trail. He put together a terrific team of scientists led by Harold Varmus to answer the questions of Science Debate 2008. There were about 39,000 scientists and engineers that had signed on and wanted these questions answered.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And that really did help inform his public policy ideas going in. This is the first time that we were aware of that a president had a fully formed science policy going into office. But that peaked in early 2009, as - after the stimulus bill was passed, which did a lot of good for science, it seemed that the Obama administration began moving in other directions, I think partly responding to the economic crisis, prioritizing health care over climate change in the legislature, I think, was a strategic decision that Obama made.</s>SHAWN OTTO: But it wound up putting immense pressure on climate scientists, because it gave opponents of that another year to spend several hundred million dollars attempting to fight it.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Do you think that scientists themselves sat on their hands too long and let things - let anti-science attack take place?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Absolutely. And that's one of the things that I've talked about in the book. There are a lot of factors in play, but, you know, science used to be thought of as an exploration of nature, and much of it still is. But there's also a part of science that, in World War II, came to be used as a weapon, an intellectual weapon to win the war.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And that's a valid use of knowledge. Knowledge is power, as Francis Bacon said. So why not use it as power? But after World War II, Vannevar Bush made a terrific pitch called, "Science the Endless Frontier," about how the government should continue to fund science moving forward.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And he sold Truman on the tremendous advantages that that could bring to the nation, and indeed, it has. It's possible that he made part of that pitch too well, in that scientists really, after that point, didn't have to engage in the same level of public outreach that they did before.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And in fact, university tenure programs grew up that did not reward public outreach, and often it was a disincentive. There is even something that happened called the Sagan effect, after Carl Sagan was denied admission to the National Academy of Sciences.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And that idea is that your popularity with the public is inversely proportional to your contributions as a scientist. In Sagan's case, that wasn't true. He published some 500 scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals, probably about one a month over his 39-year career. And indeed, recent research has shown that scientists that engage in public outreach actually generally perform better academically, too.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And so now scientists are more fearful, then, that if they speak up, the same thing would happen to them? They're afraid of being ostracized?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Exactly, and not only that, but that science - or that politics came to be viewed as something that was dirty or that was beneath scientists, and that it could taint your objectivity. So why engage? Why take a risk in something like that?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And has - when has science become so political, and why is it so political? Or (unintelligible) be that way?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Yeah. There's - okay. So there's two questions there that are both actually pretty interesting. First of all, why is it political? You know, again, Francis Bacon said knowledge is power, and science is about creating knowledge, and politics is the exercise of power.</s>SHAWN OTTO: So science is always inherently political. Any time we extend the bounds of our knowledge, that is going to have moral and ethical consequences that are going to be political questions. Also, it's also going to disrupt vested interests.</s>SHAWN OTTO: Climate change is a great example of that. Scientists aren't out pursuing a political agenda. They're pursuing the truth, and the truth is pointing them in a particular direction. And we've seen this kind of thing happen over and over again, when science has disrupted vested interests, be they monetary, financial or be they religious interests.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: There's a section in your book where you talk about the book "Super Freakonomics," written by an economics professor and a journalist, and you say it is full of misinformation and propaganda, and you quote climatologist Raymond Pierrehumbert talking about the book, calling it, quote, "sloppy, politically motivated thinking."</s>SHAWN OTTO: That's right.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I mean, that's pretty heavy criticism.</s>SHAWN OTTO: Well, that comes from Ray. But that part of the book is - was belittling climate scientists in a certain tone and also really taking a partisan point of view in advocating for something called geo-engineering, which Pierrehumbert and most climate scientists view as a terribly dangerous thing to be promoting as if it were a simple technological solution.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And that's the idea that we don't have to worry about the causes of climate change. We can just dial down the Earth's thermostat in a number of different ways, some of them cheap enough that any one of several billionaires could probably personally afford it. But what happens when you do that is you can disrupt a planetary climate system and essentially create an addictive situation that you can't ever get out of.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Mm-hmm. You also talk about something we see over and over again that is - especially when you talk about climate change or any other issues of science, and that is if you say something over and over again, people think that it will become true. You say that climate change is not real, and you think if you say it over and over again you can negate the 97 percent of the climate scientists who believe it is.</s>SHAWN OTTO: Right. It kind of reminds me of that old cartoon of a person covering their ears and saying I'm not listening, I'm not listening. If you say it loud enough and often enough, maybe it will go away. And there's a lot of research actually that's coming out on this now about the different ways that people think about problems in navigating their daily lives. And scientists are a little bit different in the way that they approach that than the average, you know, Joe public, who cherry-pick bits and pieces of information and make rhetorical arguments to sell their point or to win the argument, to get what they need. And that's the way many people approach political questions. Scientists are trained to do really just the opposite, to set all that aside, to measure reality, to look at those measurements, to make inclusions based on the observations of the data.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Mm-hmm. Let's go to the phones, 1-800-989-8255. Gary(ph) in D.C. Hi, welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>GARY: Hi. I think that one of the reasons specifically the voting public does not trust science much as it might is because scientists often use their data to make conclusions that are beyond the realm of science, and they actually enter the realm of what could be called philosophy or metaphysics or religion. For instance, a lot of, you know, I've heard scientists say that, you know, we have proven that the human being is nothing more than a material organism, that there is no soul. The brain controls the being. And I think that really upsets people to the point where they no longer trust scientists because they've heard scientists so often go beyond the scope of their discipline.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Shawn, any comment?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Well, Eugenie Scott talks about this quite a lot. She's the executive director of the National Center for Science Education. And I like her definition of science. And she says that science - good science concerns itself with the material world, the study of the physical world. That science is metaphysical in the same way that plumbing is metaphysical. It's just is about how things work. And once science begins to make statements beyond what we can observe, that gets into the realm of faith. And that's not really an appropriate place for science to go.</s>SHAWN OTTO: On the other hand, there are also people like Pat Churchland, a neurophilosopher, who have compiled a lot of work in neuroscience, and - who wonder about this issue because as different brain systems are injured, for instance, it can radically change what appears to be a person's spirit or soul. So these are always complex, often ethically and morally disturbing and painful questions. But they are questions that we have always had as human beings. And as we extend our knowledge, these are the kinds of discussions that we have to have.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Talking with Shawn Otto, author of "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America" on SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR. Let's talk about the subtitle, "Fighting the Assault on Science in America." In what way would you begin that fight?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Oh, how to begin the fight? Well, partly, I think that the way to do that is as multifaceted as how we got into the problem. Scientists need to re-engage civically, not necessarily running for office, although I think we need some more Vern Ehlers and Rush Holts and Bill Fosters up in Congress. But also perhaps even just running for school board, or more than that talking to their friends and neighbors and speaking out in their community, not about a conclusion to science, but about the process of science, about critical thinking, about how to make informed public decisions based on data instead of on opinions or ideology, which is really something that we have begun to get away from.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, let me ask you this, Shawn, don't you think that people are smart enough to do that if they want to? I mean, even the politicians, they're, you know, they're pretty smart people. Don't you think if they wanted to take a critical look at things, they know how to do that?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Part of this is - again, there's a lot of research that's starting to come out on this as well. People often process belief and knowledge using the same brain centers. And sometimes, they hold very conflicting ideas and they apply them differently in different circumstances. For instance, it's very interesting to note that when, you know, this big brouhaha - I think it was last year - about the national - gosh, who was it - it was in the change in the way that we asked the polling question about evolution and whether or not you believe that man evolved in the current - or man was created in its current form about 6,000 years ago, or whether humans evolved over time.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And it turned out that Americans who had constantly scored below many other nations on this question, when the question was rephrased and they were asked according to scientists humans evolved from earlier species of animals, they answered that pretty much on par with other nations. So there is this cognitive dissonance that goes on. And what happens is that extends out into our culture, and people adopt ideas that they see others adopting around them.</s>SHAWN OTTO: I once said at a conference we have to shame anti-science thinking into submission the same way that we shamed racism. And that was - it engendered a lot of controversy, but it was getting to that same point, that acceptance of science in public discourse is almost a matter of cultural pride.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Mm-hmm. 1-800-989-8255 is our number. We're talking with Shawn Otto, author of "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America." We're going to take a break and come back and take more of your phone calls. Also, you can tweet us, @scifri, @S-C-I-F-R-I. You can leave some comments and join the discussion on our website at sciencefriday.com. So stay with us. We'll be back more with Shawn Otto and your questions. Don't go away.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You're listening to SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: We're talking this hour about science and politics in America with Shawn Otto, co-founder and CEO of Science Debate 2008. His new book is called "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America." And as I promised, we're going to go to the phones when we got back. Let's go to Jerry(ph) in Cookeville, Tennessee. Hi, Jerry.</s>JERRY: Hi. How are you today?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Hi there. Go ahead.</s>JERRY: Yeah, listen. When Shawn said 97 percent of all scientists agree with this, well, there's been over 30,000 scientists who signed - I guess it would be kind of like a document - saying that they don't believe it's manmade global warming. They believe it's cyclical and that it happens. And then I guess critical thinking is when everybody thinks the same, and if anybody questions it or has other data that shows otherwise, that they compare it to the civil rights or Holocaust denials. I think that's a little bit of a stretch, don't you, Shawn? Especially in the light of stem cell research.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, let me get an answer because I think it deserves an answer. Shawn?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Yeah, absolutely. Well - and this is a problem, I think, that scientists fall into on both sides of this question, is the appeal to authority. Thirty thousand scientists say this. The National Academy of Sciences says that. OK? So now you've got just two different groups of scientists butting heads on it. And really what scientists need to do - and this is what I talk about in the book - they need to find ways to work with the media to do a better job of explaining the process of science, the steps that they've gone through to come to the conclusions that they have, because when you just make an appeal to authority, well, that may carry a lot of weight with people that believe in science. But for those who - or that believe in climate change because it's become a matter of political belief now. But for those who don't, it won't carry any more weight than, say, if a bunch of bishops said something to a - you know, that wouldn't carry any more weight with someone who wasn't catholic. So...</s>JERRY: Yes. But I'm not talking about bishops or anything. I'm talking about other scientists who have used other data, and their data shows that it's not manmade. In fact, most people don't even know how - do you know what the percentage of carbon dioxide that's in the atmosphere right now?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Jerry, can I ask you a question?</s>JERRY: Yes.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Is there any amount of data that we could show you from those 97 percent of scientists that would convince you that global warming is manmade?</s>JERRY: Well, see, there again you use the term 97 percent of scientists.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, take away...</s>JERRY: That was from one study.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well - no. Let's take away that 97 percent. Is there any amount of data that we could show you that would convince you that global warming has a manmade element to it?</s>JERRY: Well, there might be - very small, but it's - let me ask you a question. How much carbon dioxide...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: No, no. Jerry, I'm asking...</s>JERRY: ...percentage is in the atmosphere? Do you know that?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Jerry, I'm not going to debate the exact amount, the exact data itself.</s>JERRY: Well, it's less than four-hundredths of 1 percent.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Jerry, is there any - if I could show you a million pieces of paper with research on it, would that convince - is there any amount of data that would convince you?</s>JERRY: Well, I'm always open for looking at all different points. But I have, and I've read other scientists' stuff. And their conclusions are different. They're not using projected out in the future. They're using real live data.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: OK.</s>JERRY: You could project anything in the computer.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Shawn, this is very typical, is it not?</s>SHAWN OTTO: Oh, it's very typical. And what will happen is that - for instance, you can say all right, you can dispel that and say most of those 30,000 scientists were meteorologists who don't have any training in climate scientists...</s>JERRY: Well over 9,000 of them have Ph.D.s.</s>SHAWN OTTO: And - doesn't matter.</s>JERRY: Well, they're not researchers who are getting paid by the government to do global warming studies. And let me ask Shawn one more question. About the embryonic stem cell research. There has not been one treatment of human beings with embryonic stem cells that have shown any sign or anything that can help them. But using your own stem cells, there's been all kinds of people that are being helped today. In fact, just a week or two ago...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, Jerry. Jerry, I'm running...</s>JERRY: ...own cell and create stem cells...</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Jerry.</s>JERRY: ...then genetically make it into what you want.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I'm running out of time.</s>SHAWN OTTO: This is a great example of what happens then, especially on - like I'll put a blog post up on Huffington Post, say, and there will be all kinds of climate deniers that will come out and comment. And you can dispel it with science, and you can dispel it with arguing the facts and presenting, and then just move on to the next of 10 or 12 talking points and just cycle through them. So the conclusion is already made. And what is happening here is people are cherry-picking little bits and pieces of data that agree with their predetermined conclusion.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And that's a - and as I say, that if people really wanted to be objective about things, they could be. But you're saying...</s>SHAWN OTTO: They could be.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: ...they're coming here with political or religious ideas that's going to limit to what - the kind of things they want to consider.</s>SHAWN OTTO: That's right. And when, you know, partly this is tied to the lack of science information in the main broadstream, I'm sorry, the broad mainstream general culture. As scientists removed themselves over the last 20 years from the dialogue, evangelical religion in particular, organized, but also a lot of anti-science and bogus science think-tanks were set up and funded by - particularly the energy industry, who wanted to create enough of a smoke screen to confuse people. And it's become a, you know, Vikings versus the Packers. It's my team versus your team. And people don't think about it objectively anymore. They just root for their team.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right. Shawn, thank you, but we've run out of time. And I want to thank you for taking time to be with us today.</s>SHAWN OTTO: Thank you. It's good to talk to you again.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Shawn Otto, co-founder and CEO of Science Debate 2008. His new book is called "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America." Interesting read. Gives a lot of history and balance on where the science debate is today. |
The origins of a stash of 220-million-year-old, 40-plus-foot-long ichthyosaur bones at a Nevada site have long puzzled paleontologists. Paleontologist Mark McMenamin explains his controversial theory that the bones were put there by a giant, ancient octopus-like creature. | IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. If you attended a session, Session 120 at this week's Geological Society of America meeting, you heard quite a story: A murder mystery, really, that started about 220 million years ago. Here's what we know about the evidence, actually fossil evidence.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Nine giant ichthyosaurs, swimming dinosaurs about 45 feet long, died or were killed, and their bones were arranged in what looks like a pattern. The fossils were discovered in the 1950s in what is now Nevada, and since that time, paleontologists have been puzzling, just puzzling over the remains.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Were the ichthyosaurs stranded in shallow water? Did they die in a toxic algal pool? And at Monday's meeting, paleontologist Mark McMenamin threw his own theory into the ring. The ichthyosaurs, he says, were murdered by a giant octopus-like creature, a kraken, who arranged the bones in - well, in sort of a self-portrait.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Sounding a lot like science fiction? Some scientists say so. But Dr. McMenamin says he has proof, and he's here now with us. He is a paleontologist and professor of geology at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts. Mark McMenamin, welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Hello, Ira, how are you?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Hi there. You really don't offer a whole lot of proof for this theory, do you?</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Well, the study of fossil octopods, as they're called, is beset by a lack of direct evidence. We could take the entire octopus fossil record and put it into a suitcase. There are only eight known species.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And so this basically then is a hypothesis of yours, trying to explain the fossils you found.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Yes it is. And the case that we built is basically a case based on the placement of the shonisaur ichthyosaur bones. And this is not an unusual way to proceed when you're dealing with a soft-bodied predator. For example, there are Miocene octopuses that are known only from the bore holes that they made in the scallops. No one's ever found a fossil of the octopus, but no one doubts that those octopuses existed.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So give us a scenario of what you think might have happened at that spot.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Well, the site appears to have been deposited in relatively deep water. And so what I believe happened is that there was a large cephalopod of some sort, possibly belonging to the vampire squid lineage, that would grab onto these ichthyosaurs as they were diving into deeper water for their prey, would immobilize them in some way, kill them and then carry them down to the sea floor and deposit them on a midden.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And would they arrange their remains there somehow?</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: There seems to be evidence that they did that, if the bones have been meddled with, shall we say, and some of them seem to be organized into almost geometric patterns. Now, you have to keep in mind that there are insufficient currents at this depth to arrange the bones, so current action couldn't do it. There's enough mud in the environment still to show that there were no strong currents.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: And in any case, the specimen U array is in a hydrodynamically unstable position. If there were currents, it wouldn't end up looking like that.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: So you're saying there must be - these beings that did this, they must have some sort of intelligence enough to know how to create this sort of self-portrait, as you describe it.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: That's one hypothesis. It's also possible that they had some kind of rote instinct, perhaps some kind of breeding display or behavior that led them to arrange these things by instinct. But the intelligence option is a viable interpretation at this point, and that's the one I would prefer at this point.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And your hypothesis has been greeted with quite a bit of skepticism, has it not?</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: It has indeed, and, you know, to a certain exist rightly so. But as John K. Wright(ph) once put it, outrageous hypotheses arouse interest, invite attack and thus serve useful fermentative purposes in the advancement of geology.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: So what we're trying to do here is advance the science, and I think we've made a huge step forward. At the Geological Society meeting, in fact, we kind of hit a geological grand slam. We describe the oldest chiton, which is the oldest animal fossil, the oldest evidence for the trilobite ancestor; we believe we've solved the Shonisaur murder mystery; and now we're announcing the identity of this serial killer, the Triassic kraken.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah, we don't know ourselves what's the right way to pronounce it.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Yeah, I've been getting - I've been doing interviews all over the world. I spoke to New Zealand just the other day. Apparently it's kraken in Britain and kraken in New Zealand.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, I want to play an audio clip. We talked with Eric Scott, curator of paleontology at the San Bernardino County Museum, one of the skeptics, and just so we can hear what they had to say. Here's what he had to say about your claim.</s>ERIC SCOTT: Other than the paper itself, other than the presentation itself, there isn't any hard evidence supporting the existence of one of these krakens. What has happened, seemingly, is that the authors see what they interpret to be a pattern in the ichthyosaur remains, and they are proposing an explanation that in their view might explain what they're seeing.</s>ERIC SCOTT: And they're basing it on comparison with things like modern octopuses, which are known to create what are known as midden piles, but there's a bit of an extrapolation. Number one, octopuses don't create midden piles with giant fish like ichthyosaurs, so you'd have to be talking about a large animal. And number two, octopi don't create midden piles that show patterns.</s>ERIC SCOTT: And so these authors have taken it further and argue not only was this a giant cephalopod, but it had rudimentary intelligence, as well, and that's an absolutely extraordinary claim. And generally in science, if you have an extraordinary claim of that nature, you have to have extraordinary evidence to back it up.</s>ERIC SCOTT: You can look at things and see what appears to be design. I can see shapes in clouds or rock formations that make me think of birds or turtles or spaceships or what have you. That doesn't mean that they're anything but clouds or anything but rock formations. And so the appearance of design isn't enough to argue that it has to be design. You actually have to then take it the next step and rule out other alternatives. And from the evidence that's been presented, that's now what happened here.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: How do you react to that assessment?</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Well, I would say two things, first that - as I mentioned, the interpretation of the octopus fossil record is going to - it's going to demand that we make certain inferences about their existence. For instance, the Oichnus ovalis octopus made the boreholes in the shells that I mentioned.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: There's another type known as the Oichnus excavatus, a different type of octopus, again known only from its boreholes. And so this is commonly taken in paleontology as the standard evidence for determining the presence of an ancient octopus.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: And with regard to the idea that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, that's a quote from Carl Sagan, that is something that I would certainly agree with, but I think that in this case, we have the extraordinary evidence.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: We have nine gigantic ichthyosaurs whose skeletons show twisted necks, broken ribs and then pieces of the bones or skeletal elements have been organized in a very non, shall we say, natural way. This to me is extraordinary evidence, and it demands explanation and has eluded the explanation or has eluded proper explanation by paleontologists for a generation now. It's time that we figured this out.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Is there any way to find evidence of the giant sea monster that might have done this?</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Well, that is something that possibly could be done, and I'm in discussions currently about how we might go about locating evidence for this creature. It really depends on what kind of cephalopod it is. Now, if it was a squid-like creature, there is a significant chance of finding the fossil remains of the squid pen, which as a fossil remain would be called the gladius. And the gladius, a sword-shaped structure inside of the squid, is actually known as a fossil from Cretaceous strata in the Cretaceous Interior Seaway in North America.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: A number of these specimens are known. They're huge. Some of these animals are thought to have gotten up to about 11 meters in length. So there is a fossil record for very large squid-like creatures.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: If we're talking about an octopus, it's going to be somewhat more difficult but not impossible to find something like a very large beak or possibly egg cases that have been permineralized. There may be a way to do this.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: In reading the research on this discovery and your hypothesis, I read some interesting stories that one of the - the birth of the germination of this idea came from actually watching what goes on in real aquariums, about the hunting that goes on. Describe that.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: In 2005, the Seattle Aquarium was having a problem. Something was killing the sharks in their large shark tank, and they couldn't figure out what it was. So they set up a video camera to catch the culprit, and they found out that it was a Pacific octopus that they had introduced to the tank.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: This octopus was rising up out of a crevice, wrapping its tentacles around a shark, killing it and then carrying it off and depositing it in a particular place. It's an amazing piece of footage. Just for your listeners, if you want to see this, just go to YouTube and search for octopus versus shark.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: And this is what we believe is happening here in the Triassic, that some very large octopus-like creature, scaled up to be a match to the ichthyosaurs, is doing the same thing.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: How big would the ichthyosaur have been?</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: The ichthyosaurs are known to be about, you know, 45 feet long.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Wow, so it would - just like we see in those pictures of the sea monsters grabbing a hold of the whole ship. It would be about that big.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Precisely. It would be very similar to those woodcuts and those old images except instead of a wooden ship with masts, substitute the Shonisaur ichthyosaur, and that's what we envision happening.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Will you be publishing a paper on this?</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: I'm working on two papers right now. One is a description of - of our hypothesis regarding the site. And then the second is a review paper that examines all of the hypotheses, their strengths and weaknesses that have been applied to the Berlin ichthyosaur site.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, thank you for taking time to explain this. It's certainly interesting mystery.</s>MARK MCMENAMIN: Thanks very much.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You're very welcome. Mark McMenamin is a paleontologist, professor of geology at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts. We're going to take a break, and when we come back, we're going to talk about "Fool me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America." Shawn Otto will be with us, our number, 1-800-989-8255. You can tweet us, @scifri, @-S-C-I-F-R-I, talking about science and politics next up. Stay with us. |
The popular asthma drug Singulair is under investigation for its possible links to suicide. Madeleine Brand talks to Bob Moon about what the investigation means for drug maker Merck. | MADELEINE BRAND, host: From NPR News, this is Day to Day. Federal regulators are looking into possible safety problems with the widely used asthma drug Singulair. There have been anecdotal reports of a link between Singulair and suicidal behavior. The Food and Drug Administration says it is investigating three or four suicides. Marketplace's Bob Moon is here now, and Bob, is the FDA saying consumers should immediately stop taking this drug until they've concluded their investigation?</s>BOB MOON: No. In fact, the government is telling doctors and patients to keep using Singulair unless it turns up more information that might establish that there is a problem. Right now, as you say, the FDA says it's only received a small handful of reports of suicides that might have had something to do with the drug, but for now, it says it hasn't even established a casual link. It's asking Merck and Company, the New Jersey-based pharmaceutical giant that makes Singulair, to search deeper into its clinical trial data on Singulair and these patient reports since the drug has gone to market and they going to see if there is anything that might establish any kind of a connection here.</s>MADELEINE BRAND, host: Well, this is an extremely popular drug, a big moneymaker for Merck. What does Merck say?</s>BOB MOON: It is a critical profit center for Merck. Singulair is the company's biggest product, in fact, and it's the country's most prescribed respiratory medicine. Just last year, sales grew 19 percent to more than four and a quarter billion dollars. Merck officials say that none of the 11,000 patients that were enrolled in their pre-market clinical trials has committed suicide. It also says there is no indication there is anything to associate the way the drug works with possible suicidal behavior, and the commercials that Merck runs for Singulair make no mention of anything like this. This is the pitch from one of their TV ads.</s>Unidentified Announcer: Side effects are generally mild and vary by age and may include headache, ear infections, sore throat, and upper respiratory infection. Singulair, a different way to treat allergies.</s>BOB MOON: Now, beyond what the TV ads say, Merck has updated the drug's labeling four times in the past year and they have added several new possible side effects including tremors, anxiousness, depression, and suicidal behavior. The company says that's an effort to be on the safe side. The research director of Merck says that's because suicide is a life-threatening event, and the company thought it was important to include the information on the label.</s>MADELEINE BRAND, host: Now, this action from the FDA. It's coming very early on in the process, as you say, before there are any definite conclusions. So, but does it signal a change in any way by the agency in terms of how it handles these kind of questions?</s>BOB MOON: Actually, it does reflect a change that came about after some congressional pressure over - with the withdrawal of Merck's painkiller Vioxx from the market back in 2004, you may recall. Last year, the FDA started a program to disclose when it has identified possible risk in this way through patient reports or later studies, and by the way, they say they're looking into two similar asthma and allergy drugs from other companies, Accolate and Zyflo. Their labeling doesn't contain any reports of suicide.</s>MADELEINE BRAND, host: Thank you, Bob. That's Bob Moon of public radio's daily business show Marketplace. |
Subsets and Splits