PATT MORRISON SCHEDULE
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
CALL-IN @ 866-893-5722, 866-893-KPCC; OR JOIN THE CONVERSATION ONLINE ON THE PATT MORRISON BLOG AT KPCC-DOT-ORG
1:06 – 1:39
1:41 – 1:58:30
March 8th Measures I & J take aim at powerful Department of Water and Power
Two measures on the March 8th ballot take aim at reigning in the powerful Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which nearly unhinged City Hall last year by threatening to withhold $73.5 million in surplus from the city’s budget until the city council approved an increase in electricity rates. Measure J would prevent the DWP from using that surplus as a bargaining chip; Measure I would create a ratepayer advocate to independently assess the utility’s water and power rates. There are no formidable opponents of Measure J, but opponents of Measure I from the business community argue a ratepayer advocate position duplicates oversight that already exists at the municipal level and leaves too many details to be tied up by the city council post-election. The council argues that even though its current members unanimously opposed last year’s rate hike, a future city council may not take the same position. That outcome could become more likely if city council candidate Forescee Hogan-Rowles, a former DWP board member heavily backed by the union representing DWP workers, unseats Bernard Parks in Tuesday’s election. Does Measure I, as Council President Eric Garcetti puts it, “prevent the DWP from putting a gun to the head of
ANTI -MEASURES I & J
Stuart Waldman, President of the Valley Industry and Commerce Association (VICA), a
CALL HIM @
PRO-MEASURES I & J
Eric Garcetti, City Council president and councilman representing the 13th district; he wrote both measures himself
2:06 – 2:30
Can we afford mental health services in schools?
If trained professionals get the opportunity to diagnosis and treat children suffering from mental health issues early, when their symptoms first manifest, will it help prevent kids from self medicating or engaging in violent behavior later? Representative Grace Napolitano believes the answer to that question is yes. She has introduced the Mental Health in Schools Act which allocates $200 million for schools to provide on-site mental health services. Rep. Napolitano has implemented the program in 8 schools in her district and wants to expand the program nationwide. But the Congresswoman faces an uphill battle given the current budget crisis and the fact that Republicans in the House want to cut $200 million in mental health services. Rep. Napolitano believes that the recent shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords may help her garnish some political support for passage of the bill. The stats show these programs can help, violence levels go down and grades and attendance go up after just one year in treatment, but can we afford them?
Rep. Grace F. Napolitano, D-California’s 38th District; co-chair of the Congressional Mental Health Caucus
Barbara Ackermann, licensed clinical social worker,
CALL HER @
- She sees it all, abuse, neglect, anxiety, depression, and severe mental health problems. Before she was hired, the campus experienced a rash of suicides. Their motto is "healthy kids learn better".
Neal McCluskey, an education analyst at the Cato Institute, a libertarian
CALL HIM @
Miriam Brown or Tony Belize, LA County Department of Public Health
2:30 – 2:39
2:41 – 2:58:30
Best Buy cures buyer’s remorse: should you future-proof your technology?
“In today’s world, technology changes faster than the weather. This makes us all nervous and unable to commit to a technology purchase. What if today’s latest and greatest is tomorrow’s not-so latest and greatest? It’s like buying a boombox a week before mp3 players come out.” This is Best Buy’s pitch, in a cartoon video on its web page, for its new Buy Back program. Sounds great: pay for “future-proof” insurance so that Best Buy buys back your electronic device when a later and greater version of the device comes out. The catch? There’s an expiration on the insurance. So if a newer version you actually want doesn’t come out before the insurance expires, you’ve lost the money you put down. Also, the amount of money you get from a buy back diminishes with time, so that after 18 months, you only get back 20% of what you paid for the item. Is this another scheme to up Best Buy’s profits and rob your wallet? Or is this reassurance measure only going to become increasingly relevant and desired as technology rushes forward? Would you pay to future-proof your technology – without a crystal ball revealing when the next latest and greatest will come out?
Chris Morran, senior editor for Consumerist.com
Senior Producer, Patt Morrison
NPR Affiliate for
email@example.com / firstname.lastname@example.org