The US and Russia have agreed on a deal to get rid of Syria's chemical weapons. Are their goals realistic? Then, a plan has been reached to revitalize the LA River, but some say it doesn't go far enough. And the Supreme Court will soon hear a challenge to Michigan's affirmative action policy. How could its ruling affect policy in California? Later, we'll discuss who's set to become the next chief of the Federal Reserve. And should Americans be required to vote? And finally we'll talk to author A. Scott Berg about his biography of Woodrow Wilson.
BREAKING: Washington navy yard shooting
At least twelve people have been confirmed dead after a shooting at the Washington Navy Yard on Monday. One alleged shooter is dead, and federal officials are still searching for a possible second suspect. At this time police do not know the motives for the shootings. D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray said he believes it not related to a terrorist attack. The incident began around 8:15 in the morning when shots were reported.
Guest:
Hal Kempfer, CEO and Founder of KIPP, Knowledge and Intelligence Program Professionals Inc. in Long Beach, California
The U.S. and Russia reach a deal on Syria, but the goal realistic?
Today it was confirmed that sarin gas was used in rocket attacks against civilians on August 21. Over the weekend, Russia and the United States hammered out a plan for the dismantling of Syria’s chemical weapons, which could be tricky to implement.
“If Assad fails in time to abide by the terms of this framework, make no mistake, we are all agreed — and that includes Russia — that there will be consequences,” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters. Kerry was flanked by British Foreign Secretary William Hague and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, in a show of international cooperation.
The goal for the destruction of the weapons is mid 2014, and experts think it’s ambitious to think so much dangerous work could be done so quickly, especially amidst a raging conflict. A UN resolution is now being drafted to turn the plan’s framework into an actionable document.
But skeptics see the process as a win for the Assad regime, which has a history of using stalling tactics. But Kerry says the process of getting rid of these weapons has teeth, confirming Britain and France as allies in the process, stating, “The world must be prepared to hold [Syria] to account if they don’t, and our three countries are certainly determined to do so.”
Guest:
Denis Fitzgerald, Freelance Journalist at the United Nations who blogs at UNTribune.com
L.A. River revamp plans floated, River watchers think it doesn’t go far enough
The Army Corps of Engineers has chosen a plan to revitalize the Los Angeles River. The $453-million plan is the second cheapest of four options shortlisted in a feasibility study released Friday. The plan, known as Alternative 13, would revitalize an 11-mile stretch of the river between Griffith Park and Downtown by removing concrete from the bottom of the river and widening it to create a freshwater marsh by Glassell Park.
RELATED: Report recommends greening 11 miles of the Los Angeles River for recreation and wildlife (PHOTOS)
The federal government will foot more than a quarter of the price tag, according to the Los Angeles Times. The city of Los Angeles will cover the rest. Environmental and advocacy groups don't think the plan chosen by the Corps goes far enough and are planning to push regulators to adopt and more comprehensive, albeit it more expensive, proposal.
The Corps will make its final recommendation after a 45-day public comment period. The project would need Congress' authorization before it could start, which could take years.
Guests:
Josephine Axt, Chief of Planning, Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District
Omar Brownson, Executive Director, LA River Revitalization Corporation, a nonprofit created by the city of Los Angeles
Supreme Court to hear challenge to affirmative action policy
A politically charged Michigan ballot proposition that banned affirmative action will soon get its day at the Supreme Court. The 2006 Proposal 2 asked Michigan voters to prohibit race-based affirmative action in college admissions and hiring practices. The mostly white state supported the ban.
After lengthy legal battles, including a very close U.S. Sixth Circuit Court 8-7 en banc ruling overturned the ban, a hearing is slated for October 15 at the high court. The question remains the same as most affirmative action lawsuits: does the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause guarantee greater protections for racial minorities?
If the Supreme Court rules against the Michigan ban, how could it affect California? If Justice Elena Kagan recuses herself because of a conflict of interest in arguing similar cases previously, how could it affect the fate of this case?
Guests:
Joshua Thompson, Staff Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF); Thompson co-authored PLF’s amicus brief on Schuette
Joyce Schon, Attorney with Sheff, Washington & Driver, the Detroit based firm arguing this case at the Supreme Court for the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary (BAMN), et al.
With Larry Summers out of contention, who is the frontrunner to lead the world economy?
What a difference a day makes. Just 24 hours ago, the world over was expecting Lawrence Summers—a top economic advisor to President Obama and the Treasury Secretary under President Clinton—to be a shoo-in as the country’s next Federal Reserve chief. Summers was President Obama’s top choice, despite reservations from many lawmakers, economists and academics, who instead favor the Fed’s current Vice Chair Janet Yellen for the post.
All that changed yesterday after a small group of Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee came out to say that they would vote “no” if Summers was nominated. The unexpected defection led to an even bigger surprise: an announcement from Summers saying that he has decided to pull out of the Fed chief race, so as to spare the country from a nomination process that would be “acrimonious and not serve the interests of the Federal Reserve, the Administration, or ultimately, the interests of the nation's ongoing economic recovery."
The stock and bond market responded to the news Monday positively. Summers is commonly seen as a proponent of deregulation and has been held up by opponents as one of the culprits that led the country into the Great Recession. Yellen, his erstwhile top rival for the job, is thought of as someone who would continue the scheduled unwinding of the Fed's stimulus measures.
With Summers’ exit, Yellen seems poised for the top job of running the US economy. Still, other names have been floating about. The Wall Street Journal reports that other possible candidates include Donald Kohn (former Vice Chairman of the Fed), Roger Ferguson, another former Fed Vice Chair, Christina Romer, former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, and former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who immediately said he isn’t interested in the gig after Summers’ pull out.
The current Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, ends his term at the end of January 2014.
The race for the Fed chief seat has been characterized by intrigue and public anger—something that a decade ago wouldn’t have been thought possible. It’s one testament of the recession’s effects on our everyday lives.
What do you think of Summers withdrawal? Is this good for the economy of not? What do you think of having the first woman Fed chief?
Guest:
Heidi Moore, the Guardian's U.S. finance and economics editor
Australia does it: Should Americans be required to vote?
Australians chose a new prime minister earlier this month with a voter turnout rate that would shock most Americans. Nearly every Australian voted in that election - but not out of choice. It was because they have to. Voting has been required in Australia since the 1920s and it results in a 90 percent turnout at their elections.
Australia is one of 23 countries around the world that require their citizens to cast ballots. Nearly every election cycle someone makes the argument that Americans should be required to vote to boost our usually-dismal turnout.
Only 15 percent of Los Angeles residents voted in the last mayoral election. The 2012 presidential election only got 57 percent of people out to the polls.
Would requiring citizens to vote help get people more engaged in the election process? What are some of the problems with this? Without mandatory voting, how else could citizens be encouraged to participate? Do you think Americans should be required to vote?
Guests:
Norman Ornstein, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute
Jason Brennan, professor at Georgetown University and author of The Ethics of Voting
Woodrow Wilson: A more personal look at the internationalist president
Woodrow Wilson is known as the president who passed the first progressive agenda and who was determined to make the world “safe for democracy.” A. Scott Berg’s biography “Wilson” provides a look at Wilson’s life through a more personal perspective.
Though many saw him as being stoic and aloof, Berg paints a picture of a much more complex Wilson. Through letters and documents that had not before been accessed, Berg tells the story of the man he calls the most influential figure of the 21st Century whose personal story he calls “the most dramatic to ever unfold in the White House.”
Guest:
A. Scott Berg, Author, “Wilson”
Berg will be signing copies of the book at the Library Foundation of LA, at the Mark Tape Auditorium tonight at 7:15pm.