Writer with the San Jose Mercury news. Stephen sock, Investigative Reporter with nbc bay area. And from los angeles, david lazarus, columnist with the l. A. Times. Aurti, lets start with you. Uc berkeley announced a new Scholarship Program for undocumented students. Why did the university feel it was necessary to support these students . Well, yes its very excites news. 1 million from the foundation. And the university really feels strong obligation to these students because theyre one of the most vulnerable set of students that we have. The average Family Income for these students is 24,000 a year. Theyre not eligible for federal financial aid. Theyre not eligible for pell grants. And so theyve overcome great odds just to get to berkeley and we want to keep them as our chancellor, chancellor burgeneaux, whos been an amazing leader on this issue, has said we cant afford to lose this talent in california and we want to keep it here. Not only are we offering financial aid, were actually building a comprehensive support system for them. And we have an academic counselor, a lending library, legal support, all the things that they really need and whats great is that this is a model that were hoping that other universities are going to start following as well. Now, this is just the latest kind of development in a larger debate over immigration reform. Now, the house of representatives passed a s. T. E. M. Jobs act. Them me more about what the job does and why does the Obama Administration not support it . So the s. T. E. M. Bill is a bill which takes visas from whats called the diversity lottery, which is a great pr program where actually its a lottery for green cards in the u. S. It takes those 55,000 visas and says were going to get rid of lottery and make those visas available for people who have advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, math. And its the only bill that the republicans have been willing to pass out of the house. And what the democrats, interestingly enough, the democrats and the president have really stood firm on this. They support the underlying legislation. They dont want to get rid of the diversity lottery. They think we can do both. But they think it needs to be part of a bigger package. Okay. Whats being called comprehensive immigration reform. Thats really not just about these taxes, thats about legalizing the 11 million undocumented immigrants in this country, giving them a pass to earn citizenship. Thats about fixing broken laws that make it really hard even for legal immigrants. And its about fixing the future flow, because really we havent set up a system so that people can immigrate here lawfully which is why we have so many undocumented immigrants. Let me ask you about the prospects for the big change next year in 2013. Obviously this was a hot topic with the president ial race. Latinos and asians both voted 70 to 30 for obama. And i think you can document in several states, colorado in particular, that that was the difference. Do you think that there is enough concern from the republican side that theyll go for a big overhaul finally this time . Or are the sort of Tea Party Wing of the caucus going to block them from doing anything big . I think the signs are showing that there is enough concern because lamar smith, who has been very restrictionist on this issue, is no longer going to be chair of the judiciary committee. Theyre moving people around. You an kind of see from some of that movement that they want someone whos going to they want people who are willing to make a deal. I think on the senate side its going to be a little bit easier. Youve got lindsey graham, mccain, some people who have already come to the table before. Its the house thats going to be the bigger challenge because you still have i wanted to follow what paul said, talking to some sources on capitol hill within the Democratic Party before the election. They say, they tell me that they were worried this proved a vulnerability and they didnt want to sort of get out in front of this because of the fear of losing a state like colorado, or certainly they lost arizona, but that the political calculous. Now that president obama has won a second term, you see the mood shifting from the democratic side, and perhaps the president using his bully pulpit to more effect and essentially pushing this legislation a little more aggressively than he has in the past. Completely. And the thing is this is the kind of bill that you have to have leadership on. Its not the kind of bill that people just kind of sing kumbaya and come together. Its a tough fight. And so without leadership, were not going to be able to get it done. And i think the president and the democrats realize that the balls in their court. And they have to, you know, they have to take and run with it. Lets take a question from david. David, you there . Caller yeah, im here. Im just wondering about the perception among primarily latinos but also asianamericans as to the sincerity of the republicans. Theyre sort of johnnys come lately when itle comes to immigration. As we just heard, this election result is still stinging for them. Theyre keen to embrace this and keen to embrace the social conservatism of the latino community. Right. Yet i wonder if latinos are going to say, you know what, well take it, well take any love at this point. Yeah. I mean, i think there isnt a you cant say latinos and speak for all latinos. There are evangelical latinos who are naturally conservative republicans, and, but also care very deeply about immigration. And i think the republicans are beginning to realize in states like texas and colorado, that they, if they do the right thing on immigration, they actually may be able to survive. But if they dont do the right thing on immigration, theyre going to lose even people who might be their natural constituency. Yeah, they dont need to win a majority of latinos to win the white house. I mean, in colorado, they lost 7030. If it would have been 6040, they would have won the state. Or florida. A huge electoral state. Marco rubio now is sort of trying to woo the republican right from the latino perspective. Right. Latinos are also, i mean, its not an electorate thats, you know, stupid. This is an electorate that can see through what are sometimes these fake bills that offer something but not a whole lot. All right. Fascinating discussion. Thank you so much, aarti. Lets turn to the debate over the oil and gas Extraction Method known as fracking. 18,000 acres of land was opened up in california, an area believed to hold the countrys largest shale oil reserves. It brings renewed pennsylvania to the expanded use of hydraulic fracturing in the state. To give us background, lets take a look at an excerpt from stephens nbc bay area report. Reporter except for a few pieces of machinery, the process of splitting rocks deep under ground with High Pressure water mixed with chemicals to release natural gas or oil goes on out of sight and until recently in california out of mind. In fact, fracking to extract oil has been quietly taking place all over california for five decades. From kern to los angeles county, monterey to sacramento. We dont have an exact number of how many wells in the state are fracture stimulated. You dont know . We dont know each individual well. Reporter tom kusik is the top oil and gas supervisor at Californias Division of oil, gas and geothermal resources. As a scientist, would you like to know . Is that information you and the public here in california ought to have . We want to know. I made request to the industry. Thats why they have theyre willing to provide it. Reporter right now, all that reporting and data collecting is only voluntary. Is california behind the curve on this . We may be behind the curve on some of the disclosure of information, but were ahead of the curve on well construction. Reporter california state law currently requires strict monitoring, reporting and regulating any oil well construction. But it doesnt require the same for fracking. Not even a permit. Fracking is a technique that has raised some Serious Health concerns in communities all over the country. Where its used to mine natural gas. In some communities, Drinking Water has even caught fire from the high levels of fracking chemicals that have seeped into it. Last year, the oil and gas industry here in california voluntarily reported 628 fracking wells statewide. We dont know exactly how much liquid water is being used. We dont know the types of chemicals that are being mixed in the water. You dont know any of that other than what may be told to you voluntarily. That is correct. We dont know exactly how many wells. That is correct. Reporter he expects that to all change now as his Office Finally has begun the process of adopting new rules to regulate and monitor all fracking in the state. So stephen, when are the new regulations on fracking coming out and how will they change the way oil and Gas Companies operate . Great question. They were supposed to be out already. Our sources within the division of oil, gas and geothermal resources tell us they should be out before christmas. Now, these will be administrative rules that are promulgated by Administrative Office through the governor. And essentially what it will do will require the oil and gas industry to report when they frack, what kind of chemicals they use to frack, what kind of water, where the water goes and how its used and how its disposed of once its done being used. Have there been environmental or Health Issues reported in california related to fracking . Great question. Again, the real concern here is here in california, fracking is used to recover oil, to get at oil versus natural gas in pennsylvania, ohio, new york, where a lot of these problems have popped out. The oil and gas industry folks that we talk to continue to repeat again and again, there are no records of any problems with fracking here in the state. But because theyre not being tracked, because we dont know exactly whats happening, you cant make a blanket statement and say that other than we dont knowrepercussions so far. If i may voluntary regulations. I always ask if we had a voluntary speed limit on the highway, how fast would people drive . The question is about this monterey formation. These are beautiful Rolling Hills south of the Salinas Valley and the lockwood area. Thats right. This is not an area, though, thats had a whole lot of drilling. As youve pointed out, its not the same as other parts of the state because the geology is tricky with fault lines and things. How likely do you think it is were going to see a boom down there versus a few people experimenting and coming up not very economically fweeasible . Another great question. Our first report, we talked to a gentleman who lived in monterey and where there was a fracking well next door and they had actually gone under his land. Ive got to say, paul, because there is so much there, the federal government has confirmed this is the largest onshore shale formation with oil in the country. The potential is there to provide oil for the United States through ten years as great as saudi arabia. Because of those pressures, paul, ive got to think that there is going to be fracking in these beautiful pristine areas. In fact, several oil and Gas Companies were able to bid and successfully get some of these leases for as little as 2. 50 an acre which is hard to believe considering in kern county its much, much more than that. Where, of course, we know theres oil and right now, theyre extracting oil through conventional means. David, you have a question . Yeah. Its just, i mean, its understandable that theres these financial incentives for industry to want to pursue fracking as aggressively as they can, but it seems as though we just dont know enough about the Environmental Health impacts of this. It defies belief that pumping chemicals into the ground somehow is not going to get into the water supply. Are we comfortable that enough is known about this process to allow industry to proceed at such a manic clip . Absolutely not, david. Thats the point of our story. There are some groups who want to stop oil fracking in california. That wasnt the point of our investigation. It was we need to know more. The scientists need to know more. We talked to geological folks with the usgs who tell us fracking causes earthquakes, small earthquakes but earthquakes nonetheless. Have we studied that . No. Do we know exactly whats going into the water and whether the water gets to our drinking no. Were just not studying it. We turned a blind eye here in california which i find ironic, david, that california which is known as a progressive environmental state doesnt know anything about fracking right now. And if youve talked to the folks in sacramento, thats going to change. But so far, it hasnt. All right. Thank you so much, stephen. All right. Lets talk about a more familiar industry that many of us will be dealing with over the holidays. Air travel. But what may not be so familiar are the new Ways Airlines are racking up fees. David, youve been reporting on this and what kind of changes are you seeing . I think passengers can expect to be increasingly fracked as theyre traveling simply because the fees will keep piling up. Today we had Southwest Airlines coming out with a new fee. Southwest is one of the very few of the big boys who did not charge you a change fee if you needed to change a booking. Most of the other airlines will charge 150 bucks for that. Now southwest says beginning next year, they havent said how much theyre going to charge, but they will charge a fee if you dont show up for a flight. This is new for southwest. Meanwhile, also this week, we also had americanairlines unveiling a fairly radical new Fee Structure whereby coach passengers will have three different tiers to choose from. A basic bare bones no frills tier, where extras will be added on, and a new tier that will cost 68 more where youll be able to dodge the 150 change fee if you had to change and check a free bag each way. That will receive you 25 bucks per leg. For an extra 88 on top of the normal coach ticket, you get the 150 fee waiver, baggage waiver plus get free booze on the flight. What does the traveler need to know about this . Basically american collected about 1 billion last year in change and baggage fees. What they seem to be gambling on is that theyre going to make more money by offering this fee and look at it, the 25 baggage fee, for example. If you go for an extra 68 bucks upgrade here, thats 50 there. Theres your baggage fee. American is figuring another 18 bucks on top of that to avoid the possibility of the 150 change fee, people will jump at it. What theyre not saying is the 150 change fee is simply unconscionable. Moreover, theyre overbooking most of their flights anyway. Its not the biggest inconvenience for them if you do have to change. Kind of what theyre doing is saying, well, were going to try and offer you protection. If tony soprano did this, wed call it protection money. My head is spinning, david. Why are they charging so many fees . Why dont they just increase the price of the ticket . That is a very good question. Certainly consumers have been wanting to do that, just like with cell phones, for example. Consumers want to see more transparentsy in cell phone prices. Dont give us the nick and dime fees but a base to comparison shop. Ditto with airlines. The airlines know full well the consumers shop first and foremost based on price. Far and away the largest determinate in picking out an Airline Ticket so they break out as much as they can to bring that base price lower. Heres also a dirty little secret that not a lot of people might know. Airlines have to pay a higher tax to uncle sam for all the tickets that they sell. The key tickets. But all of those extra fees and things, theyre not subject to the same tax rate. They are taxed at a much lower rate. Therefore, the airlines have a very profound financial incentive to break out as much of this into fees because that means thats less tax revenue being lost to the government. Fascinating. David, how is the industry doing overall . I mean, are they recovering from the bad economy . And is this, like, generating huge profits . Or are they doing this because theyre struggling . Theyre struggling. These are tough times for the airline industry. Fuel costs are a huge factor here. About 30 of your typical ticket is going to be reflected in fuel costs. And so as we see Oil Prices Going up, as the Global Economy recovers, and they will, inevitably weve seen ticket prices going up as well. Nevertheless, we see the losses continuing to mount. Americanairlines, which we were just talking about, still struggling its way after a year of its Parent Company being in bankruptcy protection. Now us airways is kicking the tires for a potential acquisition of american, which will simply mean less competition in the marketplace and, well, you know what that means for prices. David, you know, i hate these fees. You hate these fees. Most consumers hate them. When i talk to the people in the airlines, as you alluded to, american making 1 billion. Theyre making so much money off this. Theres no way theyre going to get rid of these fees, are they . No, theyre not going to walk away from fees. The fee income is too important, just like with banks, for example. Weve been seeing a greater percentage of their revenue coming from fees and so theyre very reluctant to walk away from the Fee Structure as well. Its very tricky for consumers. Not least of which gets increasingly hard to comparison shop. For example, if you go to expedia and book an americanairlines ticket there, you cant pick a seat there. You then need to go back to the americanairlines website to pick your seat. If youre at a window or something, you have to pay more, right . I saw you have to pay more. Yeah, exactly. You might have to pay an extra 42 and now theyre introducing other tiers that would require these upgrades as well. I think its just a matter of time before theres going to be standing room on these flights. I know that the faa im not kidding. I couldnt make this up if i tried. In fact, over in england, theyre already examining this as a possibility. The airlines, theres no danger here whatsoever. Takeoffs and landings, piece of cake. Im thinking to myself, wait a minute, ive seen a lot of footage of really scary i cant wait until they start charging for you to use the bathroom. Bring a lot of quarters. You know thats inevitable, too. You didnt have to travel far to see a spectacular natural phenomenon happening along our shores this week. Paul, tell us about king tides and what are they getting people so excited . These are the highest tides of the year. And if you remember back to your High School Science class, tides are caused by the gravitational pull of the moon. What happens is, the moon doesnt go in a circular orbit around the earth. It orbits every 29 days in an elliptic orbit. Sometimes the moon is closer to the earth than other times. When its closer, theres a greater gravitational pull. And the moon is pulling the water, causing a bulge basically, in the ocean which causes the tides. And this week, wednesday, peaking on thursday, and also friday, the tides were several feet higher in most places than they were throughout the rest of the year. We had some minor flooding on the embacadaro in San Francisco, lake valley, around lake merr t merritt. Basically it was a great opportunity to do tide pooling as well because the high is higher than normal, but the low is much lower than normal. So the people who got out and went to places like fitzgerald Marine Reserve on the san mateo coast, you could walk much, much further out at low tide. Hundreds of yards further than you otherwise would have been able to. It was a great opportunity to teach your kids about, you know, star fish and all the other critters out there. Will the severity of the king tides be exacerbated by global warming, any time . You know, its interesting, because i think Hurricane Sandy really woke a lot of people up about the risk of rising sea level in the future for coastal communities. 75 of california residents live within an hour of the coast. And, you know, basically the ocean has already risen eight inches in the last 100 years. We can measure that by the tidal gauge at ft. Point in San Francisco which has sat there more than 100 years. The same gauge, the same water. These are not al gores theories. These are measurable phenomenon, empirical data. As the ocean continues to rise, were going to see more days like these high water events. So theres a Nonprofit Group called the california king tides initiative. And there are similar ones in oregon, washington, british columbia, that asks people to go out and photograph this phenomena before and after and post it on websites so you can see what the future is going to be like. David, you had a question . Yeah, we also had some flooding down here because of the king tides. Paul, im wondering about how do you stem the tide, as it were, in terms of Climate Change . We have wealthy homeowners in malibu and elsewhere in Southern California who are out of their own pocket trying to restore beaches before their Beachfront Homes wash away. Are we expecting california to provide subsidies or any sort of effort to try and preserve coastal communities . Basically, no, is the answer, because you cant stop the ocean. And, you know, there was a report by the National Academy of sciences that came out this summer showing that at the current rate, the ocean is going to rise as much as one foot by 2030. Thats not really that long from now when you think about it. Thats 18 years. Its going to rise as much as two feet by 2050. And as much as five feet by 2100. When you think about San Francisco bay, five feet is amazing. The runways at San Francisco airport, oakland airport, will be under water. The San Francisco giants will have to build major flood walls around the ballpark so the center field doesnt fill up with fish at high tide. And then, you know, not only that, the question is, who pays for all this . Theres going to come a point where they do whats called manage retreat. Were already seeing it in some places where if your Apartment Building or house is starting to fall into the ocean, its too bad basically. You have to move it backwards. And theyre not going, you know, the Coastal Commission and other agencies are not going to give as many permits or any, frankly, for building close to the ocean or the bay anymore. You mentioned al gore, which alludes to the whole Politics AroundClimate Change. I find it ironic that now the science is catching up. Or the reality is catching up to what the scientists told us 20 years ago. Its too late, whether we believe it or not anymore, isnt it . Thats right. The only question now with Climate Change is how severe is it going to be . We still have time to lessen the impact. Think of the big storms like sandy. You know, thats where it really gets bad. A few inches of ocean rise normally isnt too bad, but if its a couple feet, youre going to have bad problems. We can make changes and lessen the damage. Thank you, paul. Thats our show for tonight. I want to thank or guests for joining us tonight. We hope youll visit our website kqed. Org thisweek to watch complete episodes, subscribe to our newsletter and pod cast and share your thoughts about the show. Next week, tune in for seat and harvest, a look at the impact of Climate Change on agriculture in california. Im uyl quan. Good night. The following kqed production was produced in high definition. Every single bite needed to be great. Twinkies in there. Wow its like a great, big hug in the whole city. That food is about all i can handle. My parents put chili powder in my baby food. French fries everywhere, all over the table and just a lot of chili