Campaign. Would you support senator feinsteins most recent version of an assault weapons ban . I believe, and we talk about this throughout the campaign, in the second amendment. I believe every lawabiding citizen should have access to guns. I have parents and grandparents and now a son who are hunters and gunowners. But i do believe in common sense measures as put forward by folks like senator manchin and senator toomey, Bipartisan Legislation that would put forward universal background checks to ensure that criminals, terrorists, and the mentally unstable do not have access to guns. I do not support any other form of legislation around guns right now. , one attack has to do with the notion that you want to get rid of the department of education. Do you . 86, and my mom and dad were schoolteachers. By my philosophy is this. One of my first jobs was teaching kids to read. The problem we have is we put billions of dollars in federal funding, and the results of gotten much worse. One out
There, if youve been watching television you cant help but see the ads. The real story behind doctors drug testing and raising the limits on malpractice. Well talk about the hottest contested ballot race in the state. We had somebody very much for the proposition. This week, live in studio, somebody against it. Should marijuana still be classified like heroin and cocaine. A federal judge in a hearing tomorrow is going to weigh that choice. That is an unprecedented federal hearing coming up tomorrow. Lots coming up. Lets look at your Weather Forecast before we get to your headlines this morning. Pretty nice day out there. A live look from the roof cam at the bay bridge. Clouds in the sky. A little bit of fog but not much. Temperatures in the 50s around much of the bay area. The cool spots, santa rosa, 47 degrees. Partly cloudy, cool start. Sunshine for most. Mild temperatures, no rain today. And warmer days ahead. Well take a closer look at your sevenday forecast coming up in a few minu
Care costs and medical debt. Patient advocates and Health Care Officials testify this is. About an hour and 20 minutes. The committee of banking housing and urban affairs will come into order. Todays hearings a hybrid format. Our witnesses will testify in person. Thanks to all five of you for making the effort to be here. Some of you came as far from cleveland, so thank you for that. The members will virtually. Thinking of saying a loved one brush to the hospital in an ambulance or learning you have a chronic disease that is going to require years of k are and monitoring, these kind of medical ordeals or some of the scariest moments in a familys life. They can happen at anytime to anyone without warning. Suddenly, you are coordinating doctors visits and calls with insurance companies. You are nervously checking your savings account. Youre spending hours on in turnable phone calls trying to get answers. Youre dealing with it all while worrying whether your husband or your mother or your
Someone setting out to do this in a league of opportunity. But that leads to the second thing, which is i do worry that a leak as important as it is overshadows a decision that was leaked and then turned into law. I think your second point was mine, which is i think the fact of the league is so much less consequential than the content of the leak. And i think, to the extent that anyone whos questioning the Supreme Court, its not the fact that an opinion got out, but the fact that it is willing to just really make the law in its own conservative image. I think i might take a different take on that because the norms of the process is our trans substantive. So if you want to lead on this than, what about lower courts . What about confidentiality . Anywhere . So, im not institutionalist enough to think that yes, it shouldnt distract from the fact that dobbs is a major decision that revoked or read that existed for 50 years, but essentially if the Supreme Court can no longer do its work, th
That is the sternest you can imagine about confidentiality. It is an incredibly strong norm in the court because it is fraught enough without having to worry about these things. I would say two things. I clerked before the pandemic when most people work from their offices. We had laptops, but were not necessarily working from home. There is a greater possibility that the leak was maybe not intentional, or at least not the result of someone setting out to do this. More of a leak of opportunity. That leads to the second thing, i do worry that the leak overshadows the importance of the decision that was leaked. Your second point was mine. The fact of the leak is so much less consequential than the content of the leak. To the extent that anyone is questioning the Supreme Court is not the fact that an opinion got out, but the fact that it is willing to remake the law in its own conservative image. I might take a different take on it. The norms and the processes are trend substantive. If you