The Department of Justice is requesting that the 2020 Census count include citizenship status, but critics say that this would create inaccuracies in the numbers, affecting the allocation of funds for state services as well as the drawing of Congressional districts. We also discuss contractual morality clauses in the wake of #MeToo; tomorrow's start to the 2018 Winter Olympics; and more.
Pelosi’s 8-hour ‘DACA-buster’: her intention, the impact and what it says about the Democratic divide over immigration
Congress is set to vote on another temporary budget bill. It would increase military spending, among other things, but leaves out a proposal to potentially provide legal status to millions of so-called “dreamers,” those who came to the country illegally as children.
The lack of a DACA deal is dividing members of the Democratic Party. On Wednesday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi spoke for more than eight hours on the floor in a plea for GOP action on immigration.
The 77-year-old congresswoman wore 4-inch heels and took no breaks, only pausing to sip water.
Many Democrats who were previously critical of Pelosi’s leadership were won over by her grit on the House floor. But some were critical of the speech as a way to break a budget deal.
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) told the Washington Post that he would back the budget if it included disaster relief funds to help his state recover from recent wildfires, and to “take what you can get.”
We speak to Post reporter David Weigel on the latest and also hear from a Democratic strategist for analysis on the party’s divide.
Guest:
David Weigel, reporter covering politics for the Washington Post; he tweets
Roger Salazar, Democratic strategist and president of ALZA strategies; he’s worked as a spokesperson and communications strategist for a number of national and state offices including the Clinton Administration and Attorney General Xavier Becerra
The California impact if 2020 Census includes question about citizenship status
There are already questions surrounding how accurate the 2020 Census count will be, due to a severe lack of funding and heavy reliance on the internet for the first time in Census history – but a new push from the Department of Justice to add a question about citizenship status is raising even more concerns over participation.
The Census has not asked about its respondents’ citizenship since 1950, and critics say it would likely lead to a chilling effect in the participation of non-citizens and their relatives and, therefore, an incorrect count. This in turn could create inaccuracies in the allocation of federal government funds for state services like Medicaid and food stamps, as well as the redrawing of Congressional districts and reapportionment of seats – a consequence that would be especially significant in California, which is on the verge of losing a Congressional seat after the 2020 Census.
Supporters argue undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be counted toward Congressional seats anyway, and states should have access to that information if they want to apportion based on citizenship instead of residency.
And even though the official census day is set for April 1, 2020 – more than two years away – the Census Bureau has to turn in the final wording of its questions to Congress by the end of March this year.
Larry sits down with proponents of both sides to debate the issue.
Guests:
James Copland, director of the Center for Legal Policy at The Manhattan Institute
Phil Sparks, co-director of The Census Project, a nonprofit network of organizations that use Census data in day-to-day operations to make decisions and advocate for policy changes; he was an associate director of the Census Bureau from 1996-1999 and held a temp job in graduate school as a census taker
Correction: A previous version of this segment said the last time the Census asked a question about citizenship was in 1960. It was actually last included in 1950. We have corrected the mistake.
Hollywood studios’ answer to the #MeToo movement: morality clauses in contracts
The public fallout of major entertainment players from Kevin Spacey to Harvey Weinstein in the #MeToo era has some studios scrambling to add broad morality clauses to their contracts.
Hollywood morality clauses go back as far as the 1920s, when the notorious Fatty Arbuckle scandal and its following trial rocked the entertainment world. Since then, their popularity and importance has ebbed and flowed with societal values and current events – and the recent rise of the internet and 24/7 news cycle had already increased their prevalence before the #MeToo movement took off last fall.
If you work in the entertainment industry, what has been your experience with morality clauses? Have you been able to negotiate more specific terms than “conduct that results in adverse publicity or notoriety”? Would you sign a contract so broad in the current industry atmosphere?
Call us at 866-893-5722.
Guest:
Tim Cedrone, labor and employment law attorney at Apruzzese, McDermott, Mastro & Murphy, P.C. in New Jersey and adjunct professor at Seton Hall University; he previously served as the chair of the Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section of the New Jersey State Bar Association
After Trump’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, a look at Trump’s history with Evangelicals
This morning, President Trump spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast in front of a gathering of different Christian leaders, praising God and the intersection of faith and American values.
Many in the audience were Evangelical Christians, who are a crucial part of Trump’s base. On the heels of his speech, we examine Trump’s relationship with the Evangelical community – the more liberal Evangelicals who have denounced Trump, as well as the more conservative core that has been willing to overlook Trump’s personal behavior in favor of his rhetoric.
Why does Trump have such strong support from the Evangelical community? What has been their relationship with conservative candidates and politics throughout U.S. history? And more broadly, how has faith intersected and influenced U.S. politics?
Guests:
Tommy Givens, assistant professor of New Testament Studies at Fuller Theological Seminary; his research interests include theological ethics, political theory and the history of Christianity in U.S. politics
Marie Griffith, professor and Director of the John C. Danforth Center on Religion and Politics at Washington University in St. Louis; her recent book is “Moral Combat: How Sex Divided American Christians and Fractured American Politics”
International politics front and center at this year’s Winter Olympics in South Korea
The 2018 Winter Olympics kick off on Friday in PyeongChang, South Korea.
Teams from around the world will compete in 15 sports for the next two weeks. But sports aren't the only thing on people’s minds when it comes to this year's Winter games. North Korea has dominated the media spotlight since its announcement that it would compete in the ice hockey category by sending players to join the South Korean team. Furthermore, both Koreas will march under one flag during the opening ceremony.
On Wednesday, North Korea also announced that it’s sending Kim Yo Jong – North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s younger sister – to the games. The younger Kim is on the US Treasury Department’s list of blacklisted officials.
But still, the Olympics are about the competitions. Here to join Larry to talk about the games before tomorrow's opening ceremony is Reuters' Rory Carroll.
Click here for coverage schedule for the Winter Olympics on NBC.
Guest:
Rory Carroll, sports reporter for Reuters in PyeongChang to cover the Winter Olympics; he tweets
New Gallup data suggests redefining how the US keeps score on employment
Do positive jobs reports, high graduation rates and low unemployment numbers really reflect how well America’s workforce is doing and how it sees itself?
Gallup has released new data that it says makes the case for a re-examination of what markers we use to track and evaluate employment and educational success. Their findings show 34 percent of all working adults report making the same or less overall income than they did five years ago, and that just 12 percent working adults say they’re in the “best imaginable job” for them. The data, Gallup says, is evidence of the need to create a new method of evaluating employment that looks not only at how many people have jobs and how many new jobs are created, but also at how many people feel they have a “great job” and how that’s defined. They say some examples of those factors could be flexibility of working hours and location, how your job lines up with your skill set and what you actually do every day, or whether your work involves you being asked to be creative and/or come up with new ways to do your job.
What do you think of Gallup’s findings? What about creating a new way to evaluate employment that looks at quality of work and employee satisfaction? How are you seeing these findings play out in your workplace? By Gallup’s suggested definitions, would you say you have a “great job?” What factors define a “great job” for you?
Guest:
Brandon Busteed, executive director for education and workforce development at Gallup
Pelosi’s 8-hour ‘DACA-buster’: her intention, the impact and what it says about the Democratic divide over immigration
Congress is set to vote on another temporary budget bill. It would increase military spending, among other things, but leaves out a proposal to potentially provide legal status to millions of so-called “dreamers,” those who came to the country illegally as children.
The lack of a DACA deal is dividing members of the Democratic Party. On Wednesday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi spoke for more than eight hours on the floor in a plea for GOP action on immigration.
The 77-year-old congresswoman wore 4-inch heels and took no breaks, only pausing to sip water.
Many Democrats who were previously critical of Pelosi’s leadership were won over by her grit on the House floor. But some were critical of the speech as a way to break a budget deal.
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) told the Washington Post that he would back the budget if it included disaster relief funds to help his state recover from recent wildfires, and to “take what you can get.”
We speak to Post reporter David Weigel on the latest and also hear from a Democratic strategist for analysis on the party’s divide.
Guest:
David Weigel, reporter covering politics for the Washington Post; he tweets
Roger Salazar, Democratic strategist and president of ALZA strategies; he’s worked as a spokesperson and communications strategist for a number of national and state offices including the Clinton Administration and Attorney General Xavier Becerra
The California impact if 2020 Census includes question about citizenship status
There are already questions surrounding how accurate the 2020 Census count will be, due to a severe lack of funding and heavy reliance on the internet for the first time in Census history – but a new push from the Department of Justice to add a question about citizenship status is raising even more concerns over participation.
The Census has not asked about its respondents’ citizenship since 1950, and critics say it would likely lead to a chilling effect in the participation of non-citizens and their relatives and, therefore, an incorrect count. This in turn could create inaccuracies in the allocation of federal government funds for state services like Medicaid and food stamps, as well as the redrawing of Congressional districts and reapportionment of seats – a consequence that would be especially significant in California, which is on the verge of losing a Congressional seat after the 2020 Census.
Supporters argue undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be counted toward Congressional seats anyway, and states should have access to that information if they want to apportion based on citizenship instead of residency.
And even though the official census day is set for April 1, 2020 – more than two years away – the Census Bureau has to turn in the final wording of its questions to Congress by the end of March this year.
Larry sits down with proponents of both sides to debate the issue.
Guests:
James Copland, director of the Center for Legal Policy at The Manhattan Institute
Phil Sparks, co-director of The Census Project, a nonprofit network of organizations that use Census data in day-to-day operations to make decisions and advocate for policy changes; he was an associate director of the Census Bureau from 1996-1999 and held a temp job in graduate school as a census taker
Correction: A previous version of this segment said the last time the Census asked a question about citizenship was in 1960. It was actually last included in 1950. We have corrected the mistake.
Hollywood studios’ answer to the #MeToo movement: morality clauses in contracts
The public fallout of major entertainment players from Kevin Spacey to Harvey Weinstein in the #MeToo era has some studios scrambling to add broad morality clauses to their contracts.
Hollywood morality clauses go back as far as the 1920s, when the notorious Fatty Arbuckle scandal and its following trial rocked the entertainment world. Since then, their popularity and importance has ebbed and flowed with societal values and current events – and the recent rise of the internet and 24/7 news cycle had already increased their prevalence before the #MeToo movement took off last fall.
If you work in the entertainment industry, what has been your experience with morality clauses? Have you been able to negotiate more specific terms than “conduct that results in adverse publicity or notoriety”? Would you sign a contract so broad in the current industry atmosphere?
Call us at 866-893-5722.
Guest:
Tim Cedrone, labor and employment law attorney at Apruzzese, McDermott, Mastro & Murphy, P.C. in New Jersey and adjunct professor at Seton Hall University; he previously served as the chair of the Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section of the New Jersey State Bar Association
After Trump’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, a look at Trump’s history with Evangelicals
This morning, President Trump spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast in front of a gathering of different Christian leaders, praising God and the intersection of faith and American values.
Many in the audience were Evangelical Christians, who are a crucial part of Trump’s base. On the heels of his speech, we examine Trump’s relationship with the Evangelical community – the more liberal Evangelicals who have denounced Trump, as well as the more conservative core that has been willing to overlook Trump’s personal behavior in favor of his rhetoric.
Why does Trump have such strong support from the Evangelical community? What has been their relationship with conservative candidates and politics throughout U.S. history? And more broadly, how has faith intersected and influenced U.S. politics?
Guests:
Tommy Givens, assistant professor of New Testament Studies at Fuller Theological Seminary; his research interests include theological ethics, political theory and the history of Christianity in U.S. politics
Marie Griffith, professor and Director of the John C. Danforth Center on Religion and Politics at Washington University in St. Louis; her recent book is “Moral Combat: How Sex Divided American Christians and Fractured American Politics”
International politics front and center at this year’s Winter Olympics in South Korea
The 2018 Winter Olympics kick off on Friday in PyeongChang, South Korea.
Teams from around the world will compete in 15 sports for the next two weeks. But sports aren't the only thing on people’s minds when it comes to this year's Winter games. North Korea has dominated the media spotlight since its announcement that it would compete in the ice hockey category by sending players to join the South Korean team. Furthermore, both Koreas will march under one flag during the opening ceremony.
On Wednesday, North Korea also announced that it’s sending Kim Yo Jong – North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s younger sister – to the games. The younger Kim is on the US Treasury Department’s list of blacklisted officials.
But still, the Olympics are about the competitions. Here to join Larry to talk about the games before tomorrow's opening ceremony is Reuters' Rory Carroll.
Click here for coverage schedule for the Winter Olympics on NBC.
Guest:
Rory Carroll, sports reporter for Reuters in PyeongChang to cover the Winter Olympics; he tweets
New Gallup data suggests redefining how the US keeps score on employment
Do positive jobs reports, high graduation rates and low unemployment numbers really reflect how well America’s workforce is doing and how it sees itself?
Gallup has released new data that it says makes the case for a re-examination of what markers we use to track and evaluate employment and educational success. Their findings show 34 percent of all working adults report making the same or less overall income than they did five years ago, and that just 12 percent working adults say they’re in the “best imaginable job” for them. The data, Gallup says, is evidence of the need to create a new method of evaluating employment that looks not only at how many people have jobs and how many new jobs are created, but also at how many people feel they have a “great job” and how that’s defined. They say some examples of those factors could be flexibility of working hours and location, how your job lines up with your skill set and what you actually do every day, or whether your work involves you being asked to be creative and/or come up with new ways to do your job.
What do you think of Gallup’s findings? What about creating a new way to evaluate employment that looks at quality of work and employee satisfaction? How are you seeing these findings play out in your workplace? By Gallup’s suggested definitions, would you say you have a “great job?” What factors define a “great job” for you?
Guest:
Brandon Busteed, executive director for education and workforce development at Gallup