What about Football in the City of Industry?
Host:
Produced by:
Subscribe to this Podcast:
Listen to/Watch entire show:
Despite all the recent excitement over Farmers' Field, the NFL hasn't agreed to locate a football team in downtown LA--and there are still a lot of hurdles and hoops to be jumped through. But in the City of Industry, Majestic Realty's alternative site is "shovel-ready." Would 600 acres at the center-point of four counties make better sense than a congested urban core? Also, can Occupy Wall Street catch on in LA? On our rebroadcast of today's To the Point, the President, the US Supreme Court and healthcare reform.
Banner image: Rendering of Majestic Realty's Los Angeles Football Stadium
Making News
Report from Occupy LA ()
The Occupy Wall Street movement is spreading. Several hundred protesters were arrested yesterday crossing the Brooklyn Bridge en masse, and related demonstrations took place in Chicago, Boston and downtown LA. Here, starting on Saturday, they've been camped on the lawn outside City Hall, moving onto the pavement to sleep and moving back to the lawn in the morning. Ian Thompson is an activist with the ANSWER coalition, participating in Occupy LA, camping out at City Hall.
Guests:
- Ian Thompson: ANSWER Coalition
Main Topic
What about Football in the City of Industry? ()
Governor Brown and the legislature have accelerated the environmental process for Farmers' Field in downtown LA. Only two out of 15 city council members have any reservations at all. But the NFL still may like another site better -- in the City of Industry, on 600 empty acres, where the 57 and 60 freeways meet. Billionaire Ed Roski and Majestic Realty's Los Angeles Stadium Project could get the nod over Philip Anshutz and AEG.
Guests:
- Taylor Talt: Majestic Realty
- Paul Krekorian: Los Angeles City Councilman
- Eric Richardson: ANSWER Coalition
Links:
Main Topic
Healthcare Reform: Should Obama Have Fought for Single-Payer? ()
The US Supreme Court opened a new session today with an unexpected challenge. The Obama Justice Department has asked that it resolve differences between lower courts on the President’s controversial healthcare reform, specifically the mandate for all Americans to buy health insurance whether they want to or not. What could that mean for next year's elections? Is a "single payer" plan providing "universal coverage" still a live issue after all?
Guests:
- Linda Feldman: Christian Science Monitor
- Cathy Schoen: Commonwealth Fund
- Avik Roy: Monness, Crespi, Hardt & Company
- Samuel Metz: Physicians for a National Health Program
Links:
- Feldman on why a fast Supreme Court ruling on healthcare might benefit Obama
- Commonwealth Fund on the Affordable Care Act and growing number of underinsured in the US
- Roy on likelihood of Supreme Court to decide Obamacare's constitutionality in 2012
- Metz's letter to the New York Times in support of single-payer system
Underwriters
Which Way L.A.? is made possible in part by the Ralph M. Parsons Foundation, the Rosalinde and Arthur Gilbert Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, and the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation, which supports study and research into policy issues of the Los Angeles region.
Engage & Discuss
Further the conversation with your thoughts and comments. Agree, disagree, present a different perspective -- engage.
For information and guidelines click: Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
Please note, comments are moderated. KCRW reserves the right to edit and or remove posts deemed off-topic, abusive or not in accordance with KCRW's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
BROUGHT TO YOU BY
