Podcast (attitude): Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Part One:
We talk to Zachary Siegel, a freelance journalist who specializes in science, health and drug policy. His research analyzes how the media give an unnecessarily negative slant to life-saving treatments for people who are addicted to opiods. Even well-respected media report more about the rare harmful results and side effects of prescribed treatment opioids than they report on the much more common life-saving effects of these drugs.
Part Two:
We speak with Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern about yesterday’s hearing at the US Supreme Court on the 2020 census and, in particular, whether the Trump administration may add a question about whether the resident is a US citizen.
The challengers argue that such a question will result in a tremendous decrease in the number of Hispanics and immigrants who are willing to fill out the census form at all. Even if they themselves are non-residents with green cards or visas (i.e., they’re not violating any immigration laws), they may fear being targeted anyway, and they will certainly be cautious about drawing attention to their friends and loved ones who may not yet have proper documentation.
Therefore, any census forms that include the Trump administration’s requested citizenship question will result in a skewed census count, which grossly undercounts Hispanics, immigrants and others who disproportionately live in blue states, urban areas, and lower income communities. This will improperly distort not only the number of Congressional seats and Electoral College votes that are assigned to each state, but will also distort the federal government’s allocation of money, aid and other benefits among the states — which are determined by the census information from each area.
