NBC 4 obtained a first-person vantage point video taken by the three inmates who escaped from a maximum security Orange County jail last year, contradicting initial reports surrounding how these men escaped. We also cover the latest on the Hill; LA's new agenda for a municipal bank; increasing work obligations outside 9 to 5?; and more.
DC whiparound: Today in Senate health care, AG Sessions future and the GOP infighting driving Trump’s trans military ban
After it was unable to pass a proposal to repeal major pieces of the Affordable Care Act on Wednesday, Republican leaders in the Senate are pressing forward Thursday as they try to wrangle enough votes to pass a ‘skinny’ overhaul of the health care law.
The rejection of the repeal without replacement is the latest in a line of attempts to reform the ACA and continues to show just how divided the GOP is on exactly how to do it.
Meanwhile, the New York Times and others have reported that both aides to President Trump and members of the Republican Party have pressed him to lay off of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, whose decision-making and job performance Mr. Trump has been repeatedly criticizing in the media. They worry it could stir up the voter base and possibly create a revolt within the GOP. It’s also an additional nuisance for a White House and Congress already plagued with drama as they attempt to accomplish Mr. Trump’s policy goals.
Following the president’s tweets on Wednesday morning that transgender people would no longer be accepted or allowed in the military, the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said today in a letter that the policy on transgender service members will stay as is until the Department of Defense and the White House issue new guidelines. Behind the scenes, however, it’s been reported that the real issue behind the ban was that House Republicans wanted to get a spending bill chock-full of campaign promises through, but an internal fight over whether the Pentagon should pay for sex reassignment surgery threatened to sink the bill, so Republicans turned to the president for help.
Guests:
Bryan Bender, defense editor and national security correspondent for POLITICO Pro
Larry Liebert, national security editor at Bloomberg
LA municipal bank: The ethical choice or a waste of money?
At a Tuesday meeting, LA City Council President Herb Wesson laid out the agenda for his final term, and included a proposal for the creation of a Los Angeles municipal bank.
The LA Times called the bank the most “unexpected proposal” of the night, one that, according to Wesson’s speech, would involve financing affordable housing, providing loans to small businesses and serving as a place for those involved in the marijuana industry to keep cash.
The bank’s relationship to the marijuana industry could take on particularly interesting implications. Right now, the industry operates primarily in cash, as most banks won’t keep cash affiliated with industry. The Southern California Coalition, a marijuana policy advocacy group, maintains that this makes it hard for those in the industry to rent, as many landlords are reluctant to accept cash. A municipal bank could change all this.
As of Tuesday, over 400 people had signed a change.org petition in support of the bank, arguing that a local bank would stay “accountable to the people,” especially in light of local activists’ push for LA to divest from Wells Fargo. However, some remain skeptical that a bank is what LA should be spending its money on.
So would a municipal bank be worth the cost? Is this the best way to bring the marijuana industry into the fold? Oakland and San Francisco are looking into similar ideas— is a city the size of LA up for the job?
Guests:
Phoenix Goodman, co-founder of Public Bank L.A., a group advocating for a municipal bank for the city of Los Angeles; he tweets
Jack Humphreville, member of the Neighborhood Council Budget Advocates, a group that gives feedback to city leaders on the budget, and a contributor to CityWatch, an online publication covering issues involving the City of Los Angeles; he tweets
‘Always on:’ increasing work obligations outside the 9 to 5
There was a time when the work day ended at 5 p.m.
But with technology making us more accessible, there isn’t much to stop the boss from sending a late night text or email. And while there’s technically nothing holding us back from ignoring work, the anxiety of not answering can be trump our need to Netflix and chill before a few hours sleep to start the grind again the next morning. Some may even say that answering the call of work after hours could set you apart from the crowd, giving you a better chance of moving up in your career. As unfair as it may seem, the obligation to work outside of the office is getting stronger. And depending on the company, you may not have compensation for the minutes or hours that are racked up answering those last few emails at the dinner table.
So what kind of protections are you entitled to with this changing labor landscape? Is it fair for your boss to ask you to answer a question past quitting time, or should we just accept this as our current work culture?
Guest:
Jennifer J. Deal, senior research scientist at the Center for Creative Leadership, a San Diego-based leadership development organization where her focus includes “always on” work culture
OC jailbreak: What the new escape video means for security at the prison
It’s been more than a year since three inmates escaped from a maximum security wing at the Santa Ana Central Men’s Jail in Orange County.
A week passed before the manhunt ended in San Francisco, where two of the inmates were captured. The third escapee turned himself in to local authorities. But a new video from a lawyer connected to the case was released this week to KPCC media partner NBC4. The cell phone video is shot in first-person by one of the three inmates who broke out of the O.C. prison, showing both the escape and the days following during their run.
The footage has one of the escaped prisoners, Adam Hossein Nayeri, debunking claims that the jail made about their escape. This has led to questions about jail security, and the transparency over what happened during the incident. Libby Denkmann speaks to reporters who’ve been following the story to find out more.
Guests:
Anh Do, reporter for the LA Times who covers Orange County and Asian American issues; she tweets
Jill Replogle, Orange County reporter for KPCC; she tweets
LinkedIn and hiQ duke it out over your data
Today, a hearing for a suit against LinkedIn will begin.
The company suing is hiQ, a San Francisco based organization that has been collecting data from public LinkedIn profiles since 2012. They use the data to determine whether a person is planning to leave their job, and then share it with employers. LinkedIn recently ordered hiQ to stop, claiming a breach of anti-hacking laws. But hiQ has sued LinkedIn for stifling competition.
LinkedIn argues that hiQ's actions are a violation of privacy, and that they will discourage LinkedIn members from making full use of the site. HiQ lawyers have stated that without LinkedIn data, the company may have to shut down.
Is hiQ violating privacy? Does the knowledge that someone may be watching your resume closely deter you from using LinkedIn publicly? Or is this simply an issue of competition?
Guests:
Thomas Lee, business columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle who’ll be at the hearing this afternoon; he tweets
Ken White, attorney at Brown White & Osborn LLP in Los Angeles, a member of the First Amendment Lawyers Association
Should surgery on intersex children be banned?
People who are intersex, meaning their reproductive anatomy doesn’t fit the typical definition of male or female, often undergo surgery to “correct” their anatomy as infants, before they’re able to consent to the decision.
This practice is facing increased pushback: in June, three former U.S. surgeon generals wrote a letter saying it was not necessary and on Tuesday, InterACT and Human Rights Watch released a report disparaging the practice and calling on Congress to “ban all surgical procedures that seek to alter the gonads or genitals of children with atypical sex characteristics too young to participate in the decision, when those procedures both carry a meaningful risk of harm and can be safely deferred.”
Up to 1.7 percent of people are born with intersex traits, making them about as common as people with red hair.
Proponents of the ban say operating on intersex babies can create involuntary sterilization and further medical conditions, and that instead, the child and family should be provided access to therapy and support. Surgeries can be cosmetic in nature and are done to satisfy heteronormative standards, rather than medical need – a vaginoplasty to allow for penetrative sex, or a procedure that would allow a boy to pee standing up, for example. There’s also the risk of parents or doctors assigning the child the wrong sex.
Opponents argue that parents make big medical decisions on behalf of their children all the time. And having an intersex child often presents a complex medical decision that requires the input of parents and doctors, and that a blanket ban is intrusive and prohibitive. And there are many intersex children that undergo surgery and grow into happy adults, who are glad to leave those procedures in their childhoods.
We gather a roundtable to discuss the ethics and medical repercussions of the proposal. Should surgery on intersex children be banned? If you’re intersex or know someone who is, what do you think? And if you’re a parent, what do you think of curtailing this procedure?
Guests:
Hida Viloria, founding director of the Intersex Campaign for Equality and author of “Born Both: An Intersex Life” (Hachette Books, 2017); s/he tweets
Ilene Wong, M.D., adult urologist at Academic Urology, a private practice, she is on the board of InterACT, and advocacy group for intersex youth, and author of novel “None of the Above;” under the pen name I.W. Gregorio
Laurence Baskin, M.D., Professor of Urology and pediatrics at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospitals