AirTalk dives into the privacy and public safety concerns of using drones in law enforcement after the LAPD proposed a one-year test program Tuesday. We also look at realistic options for President Trump as North Korea's nuclear threats heat up; the possible effect Disney's new streaming service could have on Netflix; and more.
A look at the realities of a North Korea nuclear threat
Things are heating up between the U.S. and North Korea.
The Washington Post reported yesterday that U.S. intelligence believes North Korea has developed a nuclear warhead that can fit atop a missile. And President Trump threatened North Korea with “fire and fury like the world has never seen.” North Korea’s state-run news followed with threats of a missile strike against U.S. facilities around Guam, including Anderson Air Force Base.
Meanwhile, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is trying to lower the temperature. This morning, Tillerson tried to calm things by saying there’s no sign the threat level from North Korea was greater than before. He said Americans can sleep well at night. Given the President’s late night hours of tweeting it doesn’t appear he’s sleeping much.
So what options are realistically available to President Trump? Larry speaks to two security experts today about what to expects as tensions rise between the U.S. and North Korea.
Guests:
Jim Walsh, Ph.D., international security expert and a Research Associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Security Studies Program; he tweets
Clare Lopez, vice president of research and analysis at Center for Security Policy, a conservative think tank in Washington D.C.; she was also former operations officer for the Central Intelligence Agency (1980-2000); she tweets
Democrats debate how big a tent the party should have
After losing both the White House and Congress in the 2016 election, the Democratic Party is working to rebuild and reunify itself before the 2018 midterms, where many see opportunities for Democrats to snatch districts that might typically vote Republican but are unhappy with their representatives’ support of the current administration.
But recently, different wings of the party have found themselves at odds over an issue you might not expect to be divisive.
Recently, the head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee raised eyebrows among some party colleagues when he said that the party would not withhold campaign money from candidates who are against or have personal or moral reservations about abortion. Former Vice President Joe Biden, for example, said in the 2012 vice presidential debate that he believed life begins at conception but refused to force that view on someone else through government rule. Others, like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and California Governor Jerry Brown, have said that they are strongly in favor of a woman’s right to choose but feel there is room in the party for those who may feel differently. Abortion rights activists have come back and argued that Democrats should not be abandoning one of its core values just to win some extra seats in Congress.
The debate raises a larger question about how big an ideological and philosophical tent Democrats are willing to put up. The issue is a difficult one, pitting inclusion of all wings of the party for the greater good, even if they may disagree with a core value or two, versus the view that some policy positions just can't be compromised. The debate has come up in another issue within the Democratic Party: single-payer health insurance.
Do you think Democrats should help fund candidates who are pro-life or do you see this as abandoning party values for the sake of winning? Is there room for pro-life Democrats within the party? Political parties need flexibility, but do you think there are some issues that are or should be non-negotiable? How would pro-life Democrats from the past fit into today’s party?
Guests:
Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life of America
Ed Espinoza, director of Progress Texas, a political communications firm based in Austin, Texas; he's the former Western States Director for the Democratic National Committee and a superdelegate in 2008
Pilotless planes are coming, how will the airline industry respond?
A new report from Swiss Bank UBS found the aviation industry would potentially save $35 billion per year by switching to pilotless planes.
As reported by CNN, remote-controlled planes could be available by 2025 and after 2030, business jets, helicopters and eventually, commercial planes would be autonomous. But according to the survey, only 17 percent of people would agree to be a passenger on a pilotless plane, even with cheaper tickets. That number may change as technology advances. After all, driverless cars are no longer a futuristic fantasy.
However, the industry may be in for a hit from pilots unions if tech takes over the cockpit. Pilots already spend only minutes manually flying an aircraft, with the rest of the time spent monitoring the flight. Safety concerns for passengers will inevitably be a big part of how this develop. And how would this all work? Drones and the military are already using pilotless technology, so what’s the next step for civilians?
Guests:
Captain Ross Aimer, CEO of Aero Consulting and a former United Airlines Pilot
Alan Levin, reporter covering aviation in Washington D.C. for Bloomberg News; he covers air traffic and aviation policy;he tweets
Debating police use of drones, as LAPD looks to launch pilot drone program
On Tuesday, the LAPD announced a plan for a pilot drone program to the Board of Police Commissioners, amid protests from organizations Stop LAPD Spying Coalition and the Drone-Free LAPD/No Drones, LA! Campaign.
The LAPD says it will hold public meetings to get feedback before drafting guidelines for the use of drones. If approved, LAPD would pilot small drones into dangerous situations, such as bomb scares, active shootings and hostage standoffs in order to gather information, as reported by the LA Times.
But privacy advocates and critics are fearful of what they see as the militarization of law enforcement, as well as the potential for overreach, i.e. the expansion of drones beyond their stated use. We debate the potential use of drones by police.
Should the LAPD be allowed to use drones? What limitations and regulations should be placed on their use? What are your concerns over such a program?
Guests:
Craig Lally, lieutenant at the LAPD and president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the labor union representing LAPD officers
Melanie Ochoa, staff attorney on police practices at the ACLU of Southern California
Watch out, Netflix! Disney launches own streaming service
Trying to pave its own way in a highly-competitive market of on-demand and streaming video services, Disney says it plans to end its deal with Netflix and launch its own streaming service in 2019.
The announcement came the same day Disney reported less-than-desirable third quarter earnings, and is trying to make a big splash in a market that is already highly saturated with streaming services and original content. Fear not, though. Your kids can still watch Moana on Netflix for the time being -- Disney isn’t pulling its content from Netflix immediately. Instead, it’ll cut Netflix off starting with 2019 Disney titles. Disney has an enormous library of movies, TV shows and other original content, not to mention the rights to both the Star Wars and Marvel Comics franchises.
Disney also announced it would be launching a new streaming service for ESPN next year that will carry live sporting events from a number of professional sports leagues like the MLB, NHL and MLS. It is still unclear whether the service will also offer ESPN original content like SportsCenter or their popular ‘30 for 30’ documentary series.
Would you pay for a Disney streaming service? Do you think they will be able to wedge themselves into a highly-competitive market like streaming services? Will Netflix ultimately suffer in terms of subscribers as a result of this?
Guests:
Christopher Palmeri, Los Angeles bureau chief for Bloomberg news who’s been following the story; he tweets
Alan L. Wolk, co-founder and lead analyst of TV[R]EV, a consultant firm for the TV industry; author of the book, “Over The Top. How The Internet Is (Slowly But Surely) Changing The Television Industry” (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2015)
Buzzkill or just being practical? A look at the modern-day prenup
Prenuptial agreements are often associated with wealth.
When the 1% marry, they draw up contracts to protect the significant assets they have going into the marriage.
But in recent years, prenups have become more common, extending far beyond the super rich. In a 2016 survey, 62% of American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers members said they had seen an increase in prenups. 51% of members observed an increase in millennials seeking prenups.
Explanations vary. Some attribute the increase to the people getting married older, and therefore having more to protect. Others cite spiking divorce rates, arguing that these lead people to enter into marriage expecting divorce.
KPCC listeners joined Kelly Chang Rickert, a certified family law specialist at Purpose Driven Lawyers in Pasadena, on AirTalk to discuss the modern-day prenup. Here are some of their stories:
Maria in Cypress still harbors resentment over a last-minute prenup
I got married in September just this last year. And three days before the wedding he pulled me aside and just kind of put [a prenup] on the table. I wanted to marry this man and I did. But it's still in the back of my mind. It really irritates me. I think it put a scratch on the relationship. I don't call it my house, I call it his house. Because he clearly put it that I could never take the house.
I think if he would have more gently led up to it [it would have been easier], because it was very traumatizing. ... I was crying so much I couldn't read it. I signed it, and to this day I haven't read it. Because my expectation was never that I was going to take anything, I've always been self-sufficient.
Jennifer in Costa Mesa said the prenup discussion can be a marker of character
I'm a single woman and I own my own home, so when a relationship becomes serious I make sure to have the conversation and tell my guy that I would want a prenup to protect my asset. And what's interesting is how he reacts is pretty revealing of his character and his feelings for me and his understanding for me and our relationship.
The first person was upset and didn't handle it very well, and in my current relationship he's actually really proud of me. He knows that it makes sense on my end to do that and he doesn't feel at all defensive about it. I also showed him that the prenup will also state that I'm going to be responsible for finishing the paying of my student loans, so it's a two-way street. It's a beneficial thing for him too.
Emma in Laguna Beach didn't sign a prenup — to devastating consequences
I married back in 1974, and that was not a popular thing, to have prenups. [My husband] ran up enormous debt and he forged my signature through massive mortgages in the millions. Even though I won in U.S. federal court and proved everything, the money was off-shore. And yet the children and I lost absolutely everything. I ended up homeless with three children.
In Jewish history and law they had the ketubah. And I think this is very similar to the ketubah. It makes sense. This is a legal matter, and no one should end up poor.
Nanette in Northridge is happily married, and glad there's no prenup involved
I was shocked three months before the wedding that his father was pressuring him to get a prenup, because he had been through a disastrous divorce before. When my father found out about that he went through the roof and drafted a six-page prenup of his own of what a good husband does in a marriage to support a wife. My dad was just absolutely adamant that no way, which is how I felt.
My ground was knocked out from under me when he announced this prenup after we'd talked about it many times that we did not want one, feeling it was saying 'the marriage will likely fail.' And it has worked out fine for us, it actually made us communicate a little bit more upfront beforehand.
Click the blue button above to listen to the whole conversation.
Answers have been edited for clarity.
Guest:
Kelly Chang Rickert, certified family law specialist at Purpose Driven Lawyers in Pasadena