It's been a stressful cycle of 2016 presidential election news - how have you been coping? We hear from listeners about how they've handled the inundation of campaign scandals and vitriol from candidates, and ways to combat unhealthy fatigue; the Vatican released new cremation regulations on how the ashes of loved ones shouldn't be kept in home or scattered; and we dive into Prop 61 over prescription drug coverage reform, one of the most highly debated measures in California.
Turn off your 'toddler brain': 6 tips for avoiding election stress
Addicted to watching presidential election news? Have you lost sleep over your country's divisiveness? Are you desperate for it to end?
Fear not.
There are ways to survive this election season despite the endless campaign scandals and divisive rhetoric exasperating our media screens. Steven Stosny, a therapist based in Washington, D.C., coined the term “Election Stress Disorder” and says that most of this stress comes from the “toddler part” of our brain.
“You're not capable of seeing any perspective but your own,” says Stosny. “Now the election has really reinforced that — partially on purpose and partially inadvertently. The easiest way to switch into [the] adult brain is [to] try to see another perspective.”
Stosny adds that anger and resentment are the most contagious of all emotions. This election cycle in particular, he said, has been fueled by negativity that contributes to a majority of burnt-out voters.
“Whenever we're against something, we have to be motivated by adrenaline,” Stosny says. “Adrenaline gives you a surge of energy and confidence, but then you crash, self-doubt comes in, and you feel depressed. The antidote is to be really clear of what you're for. Not what the candidates are saying so much, but your own analysis of the issues and what you think is best for the country. The more you're against something, the more you say ‘No,’ the less sure of yourself you get. You don’t know who you are; you just know who you’re not.”
Tips for avoiding election anxiety
We've collected a few tips from Airtalk listeners below on managing election stress. How are you coping during the last weeks of the presidential race? Let us know in the comments below, or on Facebook.
1. PUT YOUR ANXIETY INTO ACTION
“...if I stopped lying on the couch yelling at the television, and I went out and volunteered for my candidate (who’s Hillary), I feel much, much better.” - Jill in Mar Vista
2. SEEK QUIET IN THE CHAOS
"There’s so many issues today that we’re having to take a position on, and it’s just very confusing — Black Lives Matter, police violence, we have candidates that are shouting at each other [...] I'm losing a sense of myself as an American... I've been having a difficult time finding a center, so meditating has been really helpful.” - Patrick in Mar Vista
3. FAUX POLITICS CAN BE THERAPEUTIC
“Having found myself not really too thrilled about either of the candidates, or really any of the candidates, I found myself turning to Netflix and watching the joys of The West Wing. I might even write in Jed Bartlet on my ballot in hopeful thinking, and it’s actually nice to see some sophisticated dialogue and kinda learn a thing or two about the political system, as opposed to just hearing about their personal lives. I’m Bartlet all the way, ‘Team Bartlet’ all the way." - Matt in Glendale
4. POSITIVE SELF-TALK
“My way of dealing with the stress and the ugliness of the election is to try and hang onto my conviction that America is full of decent people who are good people of common sense, and I generally believe that come Election Day, the vast majority of people are gonna come out to cast their vote, and we are gonna be hearing from people who are good, who are thinking, who are decent, and who have the best interest of our country at heart. And when those people speak, we will have a good president, and I generally believe that — and that kind of helps get me through the stress." — Renee in Pasadena
5. HAVE SOME FUN
"After I sent in my ballot, I'm spending a lot of time at the L.A. Zoo. The animals make way more sense than the politicians." — Ron in Inglewood
6. SWITCH BETWEEN STRESSES!
“Well I'm going through a child-custody divorce and when I get sick and tired of listening to all the hyperbole on the radio and television, I focus on my paperwork…[and] honestly I think the opposite is true, too. When I get sick and tired of reading pleading paperwork and stuff, I go, ‘You know what, I’m gonna turn the television on and listen to Trump.’ I go back and forth, it’s amazing.” - Steve in Ontario
Guest:
Steven Stosny, Couples Therapist based in the suburbs of Washington D.C.; Stosny’s most recent book is “"Soar Above: How to use the most profound part of your brain under any kind of stress" [Health Communications (HCI) 2016]
This story has been updated.
Pssst. Here's another tip: Let KPCC help you develop your Voter Game Plan. Use our election guide to find your personalized ballot.
What religions around the world do (and don’t) say about handling bodies after death
What happens and where we may or may not go after we die depends on your faith, but the rules for handling remains are pretty clear from religion to religion.
This week, the Catholic Church is reminding its followers what the rules are when it comes to cremation and the spreading of ashes. The Vatican released guidelines on Tuesday stating that the ashes of loved ones shouldn’t be kept in the home or scattered, but put in a safe place like a cemetery or mausoleum. The announcement comes ahead of All Saints Day on November 2nd and is also in response to the fact that cremation is becoming a more popular practice. But it’s not exactly a new directive from the Vatican. While cremation was expressly banned for centuries, the Catholic Church changed its position in 1963 and said that cremation was allowed, but frowned-upon.
The Church advocates for burial instead of cremation, which is rooted in its belief that the body is resurrected, and said in its document that it could not “condone attitudes or permit rites that involve erroneous ideas about death, such as considering death as the definitive annihilation of the person, or the moment of fusion with Mother Nature or the universe, or as a stage in the cycle of regeneration, or as the definitive liberation from the ‘prison’ of the body.” Yet many other religions encourage or even require cremation or the spreading of ashes after death as a way to reintroduce the body and soul to the Earth.
What do other major world religions say about how the remains of loved ones should be handled?
Guest:
Varun Soni, Ph.D., Dean of Religious Life at the University of Southern California and an assistant professor in USC’s School of Religion
3 things to know about Prop 61, California's complex prescription drug initiative
California’s Proposition 61, which seeks to provide more affordable prescription drug coverage, has become one of the most highly debated measures this election.
According to a recent KPCC article, under the measure, specific state programs such as Medi-Cal fee-for service plans and CalPers, would not pay more than the Department of Veterans Affairs pays for prescription drugs.
The measure has been endorsed by political superstars including Bernie Sanders, Robert Reich and Dolores Huerta. And the Yes on 61 campaign accuses pharmaceutical companies opposing the proposition of “unconscionable profiteering.”
"Drug companies are raising prices exponentially now," says Garry South, chief strategist and spokesperson for the 'Yes' campaign on 61. "Think about the EpiPen. They’re doing it at-will, exponentially, and putting these drugs out of the reach of not just average people but government healthcare programs at federal and state levels. They will continue to raise prices willy-nilly if nothing happens."
But the No on Prop. 61 campaign claims the measure would increase prescription drug costs for veterans and reduce patient access to medications.
"It’s very easy right now for people in California, and everywhere, to be upset with the drug companies and concerned about drug prices," says campaign spokesperson Kathy Fairbanks. "There even may be an instinct to stick it to the drug companies, and I think that’s what the proponents are hoping for in passing Prop 61. It’s not going to stick it to the drug companies, it’s actually going to boomerang and backfire on patients and California taxpayers.
Highlights: 3 things to know
What will the overall impact on drug prices be if Prop 61 passes?
Garry South (Yes on 61): This is a measure that deals only with state purchases of drugs. In other words, drugs purchased directly by the state of California with taxpayer dollars. Our estimation is that if the state of California achieves the ability to buy drugs at the same rate that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs pays, the taxpayers could save up to $1 billion a year. In addition, this is a measure that the drug companies have already put $109 million into trying to beat it. This breaks all records for any ballot measure in the history of California back to 1912 when we adopted the initiative system. Opponents are going to tell you that this is something that would actually raise drug prices for veterans and others and not lower them. This measure would not do any of the things that the opponents of it tell you would do. It would be only the drug industry itself that would try to punish taxpayers and consumers in California.
Kathy Fairbanks (No on 61): I can’t say for sure what will happen if Prop 61 passes. What I can point to is similar policy. Back in 1990, Congress passed the Omnibus Budget Act of 1990 which extended VA pricing to other federal agencies, meaning that other federal agencies could buy drugs at the same price that the VA got. At the time, the prices that the VA was paying went up because the small program that was supposed to be for the VA was extended to federal agencies. That’s what we’re looking at today. The VA pricing would be extended to California, and I don’t know that there’s any reason to think that history wouldn’t repeat itself. Nothing in Prop 61 prevents drug prices to the VA from going up and those costs being passed on, and then that will have a ripple effect across the entire state. If Prop 61 goes into effect, and the 12 percent of people covered by Prop 61 experience some lower drug prices, the 88 percent of people in California who are not covered by Prop 61 could see an offsetting price increase.
So should voters be concerned that Prop 61 will have a similar ripple effect?
GS: The federal legislation Kathy refers to did apply the discounts that the VA was enjoying to other federal government programs. It is true that the avaricious drug companies, in their greed, did raise the prices to the VA. What she didn’t mention is what happened in 1992 as a result of that act of greed by the drug companies. Congress put in place a law that mandates the drug discounts to the VA, and the drug companies cannot overcome that of their own volition. It also put in place a law that limits price increases to the VA to no more than the consumer price index. It is utterly disingenuous to assert that if Prop 61 passes, drug companies can go to the VA, rip up their contracts, and raise prices to the VA. Federal law doesn’t allow that to happen.
KF: Garry is right about that 1992 law and he’s right that the VA automatically gets a discount of 24 percent off the list price of drugs. What he didn’t tell you is that the VA doesn’t always pay that price. The VA actually negotiates steeper discounts for the drugs that it purchases, and estimates are that it could pay 40 percent less than Medicare and get a much steeper discount than that 24 percent.
What will the overall impact be on veterans?
GS: I really respect and honor our veterans' service to our country, but there are Prop 60 ads all over the air with vets talking about how this is going to increase prices to not just the VA, but veterans as well. That also is not possible under the law. Most veterans don’t pay anything for VA care or drugs if they have a service-related injury. Those vets get their care for free. Other vets who have non service-related maladies or illnesses or problems pay a very low co-pay per month -- $8 per drug is the highest it can go – and there’s a $960 limit annually on what a veteran can pay out of pocket. So a typical veteran isn’t affected by drug prices that the VA pays, even if they go higher.
KF: The concern of the VA, and this is where they come up with the $3.8 billion I mentioned earlier, is the difference between the prices that they’re paying now and the 24 percent is that $3.8 billion. If the VA is faced with such a big budget hole, even if it doesn’t get to that $3.8 billion figure, they will have to fill that hole somehow. There’s only two ways to address a budget deficit: either you cut costs, which could mean cutting services to veterans, or you pass the cost along. Nothing in Prop 61 says that the federal government couldn’t someday increase co-pays for veterans or charge them more for healthcare. Prop 61 can’t dictate what a federal government does. If VA is faced with massive budget hole, they’ll have to do something and from a veteran’s perspective, they don’t like what they see.
How much is being spent on the campaigns?
Guests:
Garry South, chief strategist and spokesperson for the Yes on 61 campaign
Kathy Fairbanks, spokesperson for the No on Prop 61 coalition
Voting has begun in California. KPCC is here for you and will help you develop your Voter Game Plan. Use our election guide to find your personalized ballot.
AirTalk asks: What are the racial attributes of dreadlocks?
Every workplace has guidelines on appearance, but what about policies on hair texture?
A recent NPR article notes a 2012 incident where an African-American job candidate, Chastity Jones, was denied employment because she refused to cut off her dreadlocks. This led to a discrimination lawsuit which ended in an appeals court last month, ruling against Jones.
So what are the legalities concerning dreadlocks in the workplace and should they less accepted than rules that let employees wear hijab or yarmulkes? And does the fact that people of any race can wear dreadlocks make a difference?
Larry Mantle speaks to Law Professor Camille Gear Rich and Africana Studies Professor Noliwe Rooks about the nuances and legalities of wearing dreadlocks on the job.
Guests:
Camille Gear Rich, professor of law and sociology provost level diversity liaison for the social sciences at the USC Gould School of Law
Noliwe Rooks, associate professor of Africana Studies and Feminist, Gender, Sexuality Studies at Cornell University