Party. Joining us uc hastings law professor rory little. James taylor, university of San Francisco political scientists. And marisa lagos. Senate gop leaders finally unveiled their Health Care Bill yesterday. What are some of the key provisions . Its not as different from the house bill as a lot of folks expected. Were still seeing these massive repeals of the tax hikes that funded obamacare on the rich. Were seeing deep, deep cuts to medicaid. In california thats the medical program. The house version would have been that faster, so the Senate Version is a slower rollout. But it would still slash payments and put a cap on that really kind of making it not an Entitlement Program anymore. It would allow states to drop what is considered essential benefits under obamacare, like maternity care, Mental Health care, emergency services. It does keep more subsidies for the exchange than the house bill. But i think on balance, this is a very draconian change. Would be for a lot of americans. How does this affect california . Because california had the most to gain under the Affordable Care act. Does it now have the most to lose . I think it does. We have seen a massive expansion of our Medicaid Program in california. We have seen a really aggressive push to get people on the health care exchange. And the advocates in california who really pushed these expansions and governor jerry brown immediately came out really slamming this bill as being draconian, as potentially hurting california even more than some of the states especially red states that really didnt embrace this expansion of health care. This plan was hashed out behind closed doors. Senate Majority Leader Mitch Mcconnell wants a vote as early as next week. That gives lawmakers very little time to study it before voting on something this major. No, this is about politics and process. And the way in which this is being sort of rushed through echos a lot of what the republicans, especially john boehner, when he said hell no you cant, when he talked about and enumerated the ways in which he felt the democrats had done this to the republicans with the Affordable Care act in the past. So to see the republicans sort of flip the script. And now sort of meeting in secret for days and then were talking about 400 pages to be read in a short period of time, then to vote, then the political process that followed that, its really a problem. I think we should say that while that was a gop critique of obamacare, i dont think its fair to say these are in any way similar processes. There was over 100 hearings on that bill. Gop republican senators and house members themselves made over 50 amendments to the bill. So this is a very different situation. California lawmakers have taken a tough stance on fighting scaling back core provisions of aca. Realistically how much pow do they have to prevent an overhaul . I think a lot. The old tradition of both parties has been localism. Especially democrats, thats how theyve governed for 50 years in the south, even longer, local im. I thought when trump came into power this would be a new feature of american politics, that the liberals would be arguing states rights as ways of protecting themselves against federal initiatives in this way. So the bottom line, then, do you think that there are enough vote in the senate for this to pass next week . With the Vice President , yes. Right now. But there are about three republicans who are talking about coming out very soon to sort of express concerns that they have with the current state of the policy and theyre not willing to vote for it. That is a problem for Mitch Mcconnell and for paul ryan ultimately. So this is a problem for them. Its not a done deal. And i think the defeat as much as the republicans are excited about these local victories, defeat again in health care would be a major setback as we thought it was recently. They could pass it even if two republicans said no. But three becomes a problem. Its interesting though. Its like they have political sort of pitfalls if they pass it and people feel like it is too draconian. And if they dont they cant deliver on a promise they made that swept them to victory in 2016. Were going to bring you into the discussion at this point, rory, turning to another big story which is the u. S. Supreme court has agreed to take up this fall wisconsin gerrymandering case that could have huge implications for future elections. Can you take us through the key points of this case . This is a blockbuster case. The arguments wont happen until next october. But legislatures around the country have tried to embed their party by drawing districts that basically block the other side from electing state representatives, even though they may have a majority. And this has been avoided by the Supreme Court for the last two or three decades. This case in wisconsin, some brilliant social scientists have come up with a mathematical formula to test whats partisan gerrymandering. If the Court Accepts that idea, then i think they would have to strike down the idea that you can block one person, one vote by defining your districts in a sort of unfair way. The real issue, will they review it or not . Thats going to be the argument. If they decide to review it, thats big news. Then youre going to not be able to do this. If they decide not to review it, thats also big news. It will basically eliminate the constitution alimonying of one person, one vote. So this is a very big case. Weve seen in the past a lot of challenges on the basis of racial inequality and a sort of other things beyond this partisan question. But politically this is a really interesting moment. Republicans were brilliant in 2010. They overtook statehouses and governorships and managed to draw the maps for ten years in a way that enabled them to take back congress and the senate last year. And when you look at this case combined with the 2013 decision on the Voting Rights act and the fact that they took a lot of power away from the federal government there in reviewing States Election laws, including redistricting ahead of time, this could kind of potentially if they ruled in favor of democrats, really, in this case, turn the tide. But i do think its interesting. Democrats did this just as much as republicans. In california we dont have this problem anymore because we have an independent redistricting commission. Both sides fought that tooth and nail, even though republicans were in the minority. Because there was always a lot of backroom deals in those cases when are at least they were drawing some safe districts for the other side. I think both parties are as guilty as the other of this and have fought any reforms. The name gerrymandering comes from in american politics 205 years ago from jerry dee, the massachusetts govern history drew the districts that were so salamandered. Yes, thats right. It gets it name, we know this history. This has been a practice and democrats have been masters, republicans have learned the new technology, the log rhythms and the modeling, the game theory, and figured it out better than democrats right now. Now they have an advantage as the democrats had. We saw this in texas. When the state legislature redrew the maps to give republicans the advantage they hadnt had in 20 years that the democrats had dominated. This is an ongoing feature of american politics and the american political system. The democrats and republicans have been, if you will, gaming the system. And if you break it down further, what is at the core here is that who gets to decide on major issues . Do you want the politicians picking the voters through gerrymandering . Or do you want the voters to have a voice and actually have their decisions mean something as opposed to politicians who are in such safe districts that they never have to be accountable . When you say who gets to decide, Justice Gorsuch makes a huge difference. The court was unable to grant review because they were tied 44 until gorsuch came on. This is one where president trumps election, the loss of Merrick Garland as opposed to gorsuch, is going to make a huge difference. If they vote along political lines in this case, the republicans in a sense say were not going to review this, you never know when the pendulum could swing back. So youre absolutely right that this is a case where theyve got to be careful as to which way they vote because the future is a long road. Without this case, if they grant review and say this is unfair, it could have bigger implications because only about half the states have direct democracy where you can put Ballot Initiatives on the ballot. Thats one of the big things, experts say why californias model of an independent commission couldnt actually catch fire across the u. S. Unless there was it was basically forced by the court. So this could be a landmark case. Well be watching that. Also want to turn attention to something that has been very much in the headlines this week. A georgia vails but with implications here in california as well. That congressional race was won this week by republican karen handel, sending reverberations throughout our state. It was thought to be perhaps a bellwether case, that a democrat could take over, that could indell signal some really good momentum for 2018 for the democrats. But that didnt happen. So what does this mean for california and for the Democratic Party . I mean i think that theres a little danger. Democrats maybe went out a little too hard on this. This is a seat the gop has held for 40 years in georgia. By 20 . By 20 . So, you know, this is clearly a win for the republicans and for trump. But i would say that i dont think we can look at the tea leaves and say automatically in 2018 this means republicans will keep the house. What was interesting about this race, and you touched on it, was how much california played a part, both in donations i mean, the democratic candidate raised this was the most expensive house race in history. Something like nine times as much money came from california as from georgia, to the democrats. And in almost all the ads that the republicans ran, they targeted not just the democrats but nancy pelosi specifically. And they really tied office to her. Even though he was far more moderate. I think that it speaks to some bigger divisions in the party that we could get to. But also its a little hard. All of the special elections weve had this year, the gop has won. But these are, again, in seats where they carry them by double digits last year and are losing by only a few percentage points. Its always smart to understand theres something going on locally in all these elections we may not see that may have a more direct impact on the outcome than what we see as National Issues and national politics. So you know, but president trumps ratings are low. Theres backlash against the Health Care Bill which we discussed earlier. Amid that backdrop, the democrats still lost four special elections. Not only in georgia but also in kansas, montana, and south carolina. Why is that . Why couldnt they get the job done . I have a joke that i say the democrats elect new jersey generals, nobody knows who the new jersey generals are until you mention theyre the team that automatically loses to the harlem globetrotters. Thats what the democrats seem to be doing. This goes back to the comment about not belonging to an organized party, being a democrat. Thats a real issue in our situation. The democrats lost to donald trump. Think about that historically. And they havent done anything to they havent learned from it, they havent had a real moment of reflection where theyve had something that they could say, hey, america, we got your message. They havent had a victory since donald trump. And theyre equally unpopular and nancy pelosi is as unpopular as donald trump in some cases. What do they need to do to show they connect with the fears and anxieties of Everyday Americans . Tap into what Bernie Sanders tapped into. The true reputation and legacy of the Democratic Party going back to fdr. Going back to the liberal democratic legacy of fdr i think is the only way forward for the democrats. The demographics of this country will meet them there if they move in that direction with the browning of this country. What we see through the current situation, the democrats dont have a strategy. They dont know what to do in terms of dealing with cultural issues that most people dont want to talk about but its culture that has driven the trump moment. Its culture that has driven the politics were dealing with. Its culture that plays around health care policy, et cetera. So for the democrats to not get that is i think a real issue that theyre missing on. They want to just continue on as usual. Take their constituent groups for granted and think thats going to be enough. But they have to do politics. Did you want to add something . Theyve got a great candidate running against paul ryan, the democrats. These four districts were republican districts, there was no doubt really the republicans had a majority. But theyve got a guy running against paul ryan right now, a democrat, whos wearing a hard h hat, hes an ironworker, thats all he does. Thats what the democrats have to do is connect with the working class and the people who really feel besieged. The same people donald trump spoke to, they ought to be democrats. Before we wrap up i want to turn attention to Something Else that a lot of people are watching, the Supreme Court is considering an appeal by the Trump Administration to allow an order restricting travel to the u. S. From six muslim majority countries. When do you think we can expect to hear the Supreme Court announce whether it will take that case or not . Well, there are two thing pending. One is whether to stay the Lower Court Decisions that have already put the ban on hold. Should that be removed, in a sense. The other is to review the case. Both of those orders i think will come on monday. And they could go in different directions. That is, they could deny the motion for stay but grant review and then hold argument in the fall or hold argument over the summer that the solicitor general has asked for an expedited argument schedule. I think youll see orders on monday, and of course heres another one where Justice Gorsuch is going to make the difference, the fifth vote on this most people think. Although the president has offended the federal judiciary by criticizing them along the way. It wasnt just the ninth circuit that ruled against the travel ban, it was also the Fourth Circuit which is based in virginia, which is not a liberal pa bastion. He hurt himself with the tweets he keeps putting out the chief justice doesnt want his District Court judges attacked. Its hard to predict on the merits where this goes. The virginia case which really had a ruling which said this is discriminatory, and the hawaii case which california has joins as friend of the court on behalf of our attorney general, saying the president stepped out of bounds with his authority granted by congress. The Supreme Court has options here. What could come down may not be as sweeping as either side wants. Its possible that theyll deny review, say it doesnt matter because we seem to be doing fine, theyre now vetting the procedures, and so lets just deny review and see what happens. Thats sort of the irony here. Deny review what does that mean in the Lower Court Rulings stand and for all intents and purposes the travel ban not enforced . This travel ban. The president could issue another travel ban tomorrow. The president has the authority by executive order to do lots of things with immigration. So this has become more of a political fight than it is really a legal fight. We will leave it there. We will look on monday to see if it comes down as you have predicted, rory. Pressures on. Thats true. Im always wrong. All right. Hell be tweeting that out. Yeah. Thank you all. Uc hastings law professor rory little, marisa lagos kqeds political and government reporter, and university of San Francisco political scientist james taylor, good to have all of you. Honda temporarily halted production at its japan facility after discovering attempts to hack its computer systems. This comes on the heels of a massive attack in may where companies in more than 150 countries were targeted and it affected hundreds of thousands of computers worldwide. Last week kqed had its own temporary outage when we noticed suspicious activity on our computers. All these incidents have something in common. Theyre called ransom ware attacks. They prompted us to dig deeper. Im at the office of an Electronics Frontier foundation in San Francisco to talk with Cooper Quinton about how ransom ware works. What is ransom ware . A type of malicious computer software, malware, that encrypts all your files so you no longer have access to them, you can no longer review them. Then it charges you to decrypt them. It usually asks for payment in bit coin, a type of digital currency. And on a computer screen, if youre attacked, what does that look like . I have a demonstration here. Heres my computer screen. And i have all my important files. Heres my picture of my cat. Heres other pictures of my family. Tax forms, et cetera. And i have this file here which is a file that was maybe sent to me by somebody that i know or it was on a usb drive or maybe i downloaded it from the internet. And it says silly fun time and tacos. Im about to run it because tacos sound great. When i run it, though, i get oops. All of your important files have been encr