David Kirp Says Head Start Funding Essential in Stimulus Package

San Francisco Chronicle, February 10, 2009 by David L. Kirp
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/10/EDS415Q7U9.DTL&type=printable

Every added Head Start dollar means new jobs for teachers, aides and staff, many of them poor women who are the economic anchors of their communities. Providing more Head Start slots also means that poor parents have time to find work or get the training they need to secure a decent job. The $1.05 billion that’s in jeopardy of being cut would create thousands of teaching and staff positions, in addition to the jobs generated when Head Start centers start buying cribs, crayons, cookies and computers.

Steven Weissman Questions Governor’s Move to Streamline Energy Agencies

Electric Utility Week, February 9, 2009 by Lisa Weinzimer
http://www.platts.com (requires registration; go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips for article)

“The PUC is accountable for both the environmental impact of [transmission] projects and the rate impacts of projects. If you separate those two, it increases the risk of a project being approved even if it doesn’t make economic sense,” Weissman said.

Christopher Hoofnagle Says Disclosure Law a Two-Edged Sword in Prop 8 Battle

The New York Times, February 7, 2009 by Brad Stone
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/business/08stream.html?pagewanted=print

“These are very small donations given by individuals, and now they are subject to harassment that ultimately makes them less able to engage in democratic decision making,” said Chris Jay Hoofnagle, senior fellow at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology at the University of California.”

Robert MacCoun Finds People Doubts Research When Results Contradict Beliefs

-MSNBC, NBCBayArea.com, February 6, 2009 by John Boitnott
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29017531/from/ET/

“Findings that support our political beliefs are seen as objective facts about the world,” said Robert MacCoun, a Cal professor of public policy, law and psychology. “But study outcomes that conflict with our views are more likely to be seen as expressions of an ideological bias by the researcher…. If we really want to inform citizens and affect public policy, American social scientists need to learn more about how conservatives view our research in order to root out hidden assumptions and communicate our research more effectively.”

-KGO AM 810, Consumer Talk, February 7, 2009 Host Michael Finney
http://www.kgoam810.com/sectional.asp?id=31284

“People find research much more believable when it supports their own point of view. When we find research findings we don’t really like, and we’re reluctant to change our views, we can avoid changing our views by blaming the researcher for being biased.”

-KQED Forum, February 11, 2009 Host Michael Krasny
http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R902111000

“When the findings are congenial, we find that people find social science quite credible, and if the study comes out in the direction of people’s own beliefs, they say, “No, that sounds right.” On the other hand, if the finding conflicts with what we know to be their beliefs from questions we’ve asked them, the people start saying, “If the study found this the researcher must be biased in some way.”

Franklin Zimring Notes Unintended Outcome of Federal Death Penalty Law

Daily Journal, February 5, 2009 by Rebecca Beyer
http://www.dailyjournal.com (requires registration; go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips for article)

Zimring said when the federal death penalty was reinstated it was with the goal of “using federal law to contradict state policy”—in other words, to have the punishment as an option in states where the death penalty doesn’t exist. What happened in reality, he said, was “exactly the opposite….” “What you had was tremendous redundancy,” he said. “The places that had high levels of death verdicts and executions were the places that had the concentrations in federal death penalty verdicts.”

Jesse Fried Questions Effectiveness of Executive Pay Cap

The New York Times, Room for Debate, February 5, 2009 by Jesse Fried
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/04/the-effects-of-capping-pay/

Boards’ fear of shareholder and Congressional outrage is likely to prevent them from increasing executive pay at bailed-out banks…. But the Treasury’s guidelines may not reduce the compensation of these bank chief executives, either. Bailed-out banks are likely to simply replace current sizeable compensation packages with restricted stock of similar value. And several years from now, if all goes according to plan, these executives will walk away with tens of millions of dollars.

Stephen Barnett Calls Argument in Prop 8 Case ‘Long Shot’

Los Angeles Times, February 4, 2009 by Maura Dolan and Jessica Garrison
http://www.latimes.com/la-me-prop-8-spending4-2009feb04,0,1608579,print.story

“Brown’s is stronger because it has never been tried before, so it’s got that going for it, whereas there is a lot of law about what’s a constitutional revision,” he said. Still, Barnett said he doubted that the moderate, Republican-dominated court would adopt Brown’s theory because he said it could have far-reaching consequences.”

Ann O’Leary Urges Obama to Strengthen Workplace Equity Legislation

San Francisco Chronicle, February 4, 2009 by Ann M. O’Leary
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/04/EDK215MH1U.DTL&type=printable

“Obama’s first bill signals the administration’s commitment to workplace equity. But in order to make serious progress on women’s equity and close the wage gap, Obama should urge Congress to act swiftly to expand job-protected family leave, ensure that workers have access to paid sick days, and provide incentives to states to follow California’s lead and adopt paid family leave (but make it even better than California’s law by ensuring that workers’ jobs are protected if they take the leave).”