President Obama launches a push for college cost reforms. Should colleges be ranked by affordability? Then, should more cities follow Mission Viejo and fine residents for disruptive house parties, and would basketball be better with no free throws? Also, reports say San Diego Mayor Bob Filner will resign, and a military chaplain wants to be become the Navy's first nontheist "humanist" chaplain. Lastly, a new study finds men want women to chip in more when dating. Who should pay for the first date?
Would ranking colleges by value help keep costs down?
President Obama is unveiling a new set of proposals that aim to bring down tuition at the nation’s top universities. The administration’s plan would create a ratings system for colleges that will evaluate their performance along a bang-for-your-buck type of model, comparing things graduation rates, numbers of advanced degrees and graduate earnings with a college’s affordability. Obama’s plan would create the ratings system before the 2015 school year, and would then allow parents to pick schools based on value. The hope is that it will push Congress to connect federal financial aid to college performance to give schools an incentive to keep their costs low.
This year, the average cost in-state tuition at a four-year state school is $8,655 up 4.8 percent from last year, according to a recent survey by the College Board. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau estimates that Americans now owe about $1.2 trillion in student loan debt.
Would a value ranking system help keep college costs down? What would be the criteria for the ranking system? Would schools with large endowments get more federal aid?
Guests:
Beth Akers, fellow in the Brown Center for Education Policy at the Brookings Institution
Neal McCluskey, Associate Director of Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom
Mission Viejo ordinance would fine rowdy partiers for repeat complaints
The Mission Viejo City Council passed an ordinance this week that could make the organizers of rowdy and disruptive house parties responsible for the costs of law enforcement personnel dispatched to investigate repeated noise complaints.
"The intent of the ordinance would be to provide another tool for our police officers to use in general to protect public health and safety," said Patricia Kelley, mayor pro tem for Mission Viejo City Council. "I believe that the assessment of fees would provide a deterrent in addition to recovering costs to the city."
Lt. Jeff Hallock, a spokesperson for the Orange County Sheriff's Department, told the L.A. Times that the fines will be determined by the resources needed. "If a sergeant shows up, they'll be charged for their time," Hallock said. "And if a helicopter shows up, they'll be charge for their time."
The Mission Viejo police chief found that for the month of July there were 94 calls for service for loud parties, with 14 of the calls requiring a return visit by a deputy.
"While it's not a huge problem, like raging parties on every street, if you're in one of those 14 neighborhoods that have to have a return visit, it is a problem and it does affect your quality of life," said Kelley.
Critics argue that the ordinance will be difficult to fairly enforce. For one, someone living next to a more sensitive neighbor might get called on more often than someone else.
"This is based on, in my mind, an opportunity for revenue generation without looking at the constitutional rights of the offenders," said Cathy Schlicht, Mission Viejo City Council member. "This does not have definable parameters to what is considered noise, where your rights and my rights begin. How can the law be equally enforced?"
The ordinance is scheduled for a second reading in early September and goes into effect 30 days after. Lake Forest, Newport Beach and San Clemente also have similar laws in place. Should more cities hand out fines to noisy revelers? Would you support such a move?
Guests:
Patricia Kelley, Mayor Pro Tem, Mission Viejo City Council
Cathy Schlicht, Mission Viejo City Council member
Basketball is too slow, so let’s do away with free throws
A basketball game has four quarters, each quarter is twelve minutes. Add time-outs and commercial breaks to the game, and a quarter can stretch to over 20 minutes. If a game has a lot of fouls and free throws though, total game time could stretch to over 2-plus hours. The problem, according to one NBA lover and observer, isn’t so much game length as the quality of game play. When it comes to the enjoyment of the spectator, free throws are definitely dragging the game down.
ESPN basketball writer
says that on average, 43 free throws are attempted in a game, which he equates to "43 buzzkills that send our attention away from one of the greatest stages in the world toward our mobile devices, remote controls, refrigerators and toilets." But free throws aren’t only a necessary part of the game, they are one of the most important tools in a coach’s toolbox.
Can you say Hack-a-Shaq?
Guest:
Kevin Arnovitz, NBA writer for ESPN.com and editor of the TrueHoop Network
Reports: Embattled San Diego Mayor Bob Filner expected to resign
Reports are saying San Diego Mayor Bob Filner will step down from the office as part of the negotiations reached during the mediation deal. The LA Times reported that Mayor Bob Filner was seen Wednesday night loading boxes into an SUV outside of City Hall, apparently saying goodbye to his staff. During the mediation talks one of the issues was the possibility of Filner's resignation in exchange for some of the legal fees filed against him.
Mediation talks ended after three days of negotiations with retired Judge J. Lawrence Irving. All nine city council members along with other officials have called for his resignation. This comes after more than a dozen women have come forward with accusation of sexual harassment and misconduct from Filner. If he resigns, Filner will be the fourth out of the last seven San Diego's mayors to leave midterm. A special election would then be held to fill Filner's position.
Guests:
Lisa Halverstadt, a reporter at Voice of San Diego
Nancy Bornn, employment law attorney in private practice in Playa del Rey; author of “Representing California Sexual Harassment Plaintiffs” (James Publishing)
Is a military chaplain obligated to believe in God?
Jason Heap grew up as a devout Christian and was once a licensed Christian minister before he lost his faith. Still hungry for religion and spirituality, though, he decided to pursue a master’s degree from the University of Oxford in ecclesiastical history. Heap then stayed in the UK, working as a school teacher and principal, and turned his personal beliefs to the teachings of humanism, a set of philosophies that encourages people to live ethical lives without supernatural influences.
Now the 38-year-old Heap wants to make an impact back at home -- he wants to serve in the military and be the navy’s first ever humanist chaplain. But the military has never sanctioned a humanist chaplain, and is currently holding his application for additional review. Heap doesn’t believe in God, which has provoked a backlash from critics and caused the US House of Representatives to push for an amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill that requires organizations that sponsor chaplains to believe in a higher power.
Congressman Mike Conaway (R-Texas) said that atheists “don’t believe anything” and that he could only imagine an atheist chaplain going to a dead soldier’s family and saying, “your son's just worms, I mean, worm food.” But Pentagon records indicate that about 1 percent of active duty members consider themselves “agnostic” or “atheist”, which represents more than Hindus, Muslims and Buddhists combined, though each of those religions have representative chaplains.
And further, does the military have the right to restrict religious affiliations in any form, or might that violate the separation of church and state?
Guests:
Herman Keizer, Retired US Army chaplain and Co-founder of the Soul Repair Center at the Brite Divinity School at Texas Christian University
Ron Crews, Retired US Army chaplain and Executive Director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty
Paying For Dates: Are dating couples challenging or adhering to gender norms?
Most men are still paying for dates, but in reality many are wishing women would chip in sometimes.
According to a new study presented at the American Sociology Association, 64 percent of men believed women should pick up the tab from time to time. At the same time, 39 percent of women hoped men would not ask them to contribute at all.
"Most [men] did not expect 50-50, they just didn't want to feel like a shmuck at the end of the evening or that they were out with some princess," said Janet Lever, professor of sociology at Cal State Los Angeles. "They would end up being the sole provider instead of one of those many many modern couples where the man and women share the provider role. That's what men are looking for. Life is a litmus test, if she hasn't offered to pay anything in a month of dating, he is going to be wary."
The ritual of men paying for all the outings dates back to when most jobs were not accessible to women. Today, however, men and women are both equally in the workforce. The study looks at how this dynamic shift of gender roles impacts the dating realm.
"About a quarter of the women insist on paying right from the start and that's a good social change, I think. But the women are happy with this balance," said Lever. "Women in general feel that they have the short end of the stick when it comes to privilege in our society...They're reluctant to give that up since on average they get paid less, on average they do more housework, more child care, so maybe this seems like just desserts."
Do women want equality in dating too? The study shows that younger college-educated men and women were more likely to share the costs of dating. In addition, the study also shows that sharing the cost of dates eases the pressure for women to reciprocate sexually if they don't want to.
"That's exactly why women should be paying for themselves at least in part some of the time, because there is no such thing as a free lunch," said Lever. "Eventually, if he's been paying for everything, it does tilt the power dynamic. They're not really seeing the big picture of supporting what is called benevolent sexism — women getting treated and put on a pedestal — still makes the male the provider and the dominant in the relationship. "
Who should pay for the first date? Should men always pay? How have the ‘rules’ of dating changed? Does it matter who makes more money?
Guest:
Janet Lever, Professor of Sociology at Cal State Los Angeles and the co-author of the study, “Who Pays for Dates”