Boston Public Radio Podcast

BPR Full Show 9/13: Honda Civics

Is our country in a civics education crisis? We got your thoughts. Fabiola Mendez & Elsa Mosquera are our guests for Live Music Friday this week, ahead of the free Fiesta en la Plaza taking place throughout Latinx Heritage Month in Boston. Ela is the co-founder of Agora Cultural Architects, who organized the festival. Fabiola is an award-winning cuatro player.Boston Globe reporters Jessica Bartlett & Mark Arsenault talk about their latest Spotlight reporting on Ralph de la Torre and the collapse of Steward Health Care.Transportation secretary Monica Tibbits-Nutt joins for her first-ever interview on BPR. She talks about ongoing projects for MassDOT like the East-West Coast Rail, Cape Cod Bridges, the Allston Multimodal project and more. Then we read your texts on the court case between an estranged couple fighting over who gets to keep the $70,000 diamond engagement ring. Retired federal judge Nancy Gertner joins us from her "she-shed" in the woods and reacts to new GOP efforts to block mail-in ballots in swing states, a New York appeals court rejecting two new attempts by Trump to lift his gag order in his hush money case. And, she has thoughts on the engagement ring case. Then we opened the phone lines to debate the merits and pitfalls of kids getting cut during sport tryouts.

Broadcast on:: 13 Sep 2024
Audio Format:: other

Support for Boston Public Radio comes from Massachusetts Maritime Academy, the Commonwealth's Leadership University. They offer a hands-on learning environment, helping to prepare their students to be global leaders in careers on land or at sea, maritime.edu. And imagine exhibitions. Harry Potter, the exhibition, is now open. You can experience the filmmaking of Harry Potter through interactive sets, props, costumes, and more. Let's at harrypotterexhibition.com. You're listening to Boston Public Radio live from the Boston Public Library, streaming on youtube.com/vbhnews. And that's right. If I speak first, it means Margery is not here. She's still recovering from her latest bout with COVID. I hope she's doing better and we hope she's back on Monday in the interim extraordinary Boston Globe business columnist Shirley Young is filling in. Hey Shirley, how are you? Hi, Jim. Nice to see you. Wow. That was impressive. In any case, our text question of the day, there's a case before the state's highest court about who gets to keep a $70,000 ring after an engagement falls apart. We can't wait for the courts ruling, so we're going to let you decide who gets the ring and how do we get to the point where an engagement ring can cost more than the average annual income in the United States. But first, an important question. Could much of the cause of our polarization and dysfunction in politics in this country be addressed if we placed a little more emphasis on civics education in school? We were prompted by an Annenberg Constitution Day Civic Survey, which found that more than a third of Americans could not even name the three branches of government and it gets worse. A little kicker came with a question about the First Amendment. Most everybody did know about the freedom of speech. Only 40% knew about freedom of religion, 30% freedom of the press, less than 30% knew about the right to assembly, and just about one in ten had even heard about the right to position the government as part of the First Amendment. It gets worse. A little more than 20% of respondents thought the First Amendment included the right to bear arms. Is civics education the answer? How much of a difference would it make with so many people's heads in the sand about just about everything? Massachusetts, by the way, has made efforts at mandates, and while civics education is included in the framework for social studies, curriculum, they've held back on a formal mandate because I have no idea why. But they have. Again, we love your thoughts would civics education at least be part of the cure for what ails our politics, would your kids have any civics education school? How old are they again? 9/11? 11 and 13. 11 and 13. 11 and 13. I mean, I assume they learned something. You assume? I assume they learned something. Oh, that's a good one. I mean, because we learned... Well, I guess... You assume they learned some... Oh, you mean about civics? About civics. Or at least they talk about... I mean, the other day, though, I mean, a lot of the civics my kids get, you know, it's when we sit around at home and have dinner together, you know, let's say we sit down as a family two or three times a week, you know, because everyone's got different schedules. And we often talk about what's going on that day. We often talk about politics. The other day, September 11th, we said, did you learn about September 11th today in school and they did? Well, that's good. It was good, you know. And so... But of course, they're in a, you know, a family of ones a journalist. I have, you know, my job is to stay on top of the news and top of what's going on. You know, I... Well, not the same as the school having a well-fought-through curriculum about how government works, how you intersect with government. I mean, it's great that you're doing whatever you and your husband are doing at home. I don't know if you're listening yesterday. Sue was here. Sue was talking about her grown adult daughter, Ruby, who's a really smart kid, who when she was discussing Rudy Giuliani with her in a recent time, she said, "Oh, is that the guy who was in Borat?" Oh, really? And he was in Borat, by the way. And that's a really smart young woman, by the way. I am a huge believer, by the way, I should say. I don't have data, but I really believe, if you know more, ignorance starts to disappear. Polarization becomes less. I mean, we're going to talk a little bit later in the day with Nancy Gertner, former federal court judge, about challenges to mail-in voting by Republicans in some swing states. People don't understand what the rules are. They don't understand about when they should be counted, what's constant, all that sort of stuff. And it seems to me, basic education could provide some commonality and some better feeling about your fellow men. I should say, by the way, it is not just the average citizen. Donald Trump proved the other night, at Tuesday's debate, he has no idea how the hell a bill becomes law or how you effectuate a particular policy. Here he is talking about closing down the border. Go down to Washington, D.C. and let her sign a bill to close up the border, because they have the right to do it, they don't need bills, they have the right to do it. The President of the United States, you'll get him out of bed, you'll wake him up at four o'clock in the afternoon, you'll say, "Come on, come on down to the office, let's sign a bill." If he signs a bill that the border is closed, only has to do is say it to the border patrol who are phenomenal, if they do that, the border is closed. Well, that was clear. Either he signs a bill or he doesn't need a bill, he can do it on his own. And by the way, it's not just him. Another person who's run for President about 20 times, never lost an election, is the classic definition of narcissism. By the way, she's a local woman. This is Jill Stein on the Breakfast Club, revealing she doesn't know much about how the legislature in Washington works. Here's the host, Angela Rye, and then you'll hear Stein. How many voting members in the United States House of Representatives, Republican, Democrat, and independent? How many total? How many total are there? What is it? 600. No. No. It's 435. How many of you here knew was 435 members of the House of Representatives? Well, that's okay. I mean, it's not spectacular, but it's a little better than Jill Stein. A lot of abstentions. So we want to know if you think that civics education would make a difference. It would be another mandate, another thing in the curriculum, less time on reading and whatever, but I think it's huge. How about you? I mean, callers. I'm sorry. Let's do it. Yeah. Let's go to Donna. Donna in the car. Hi, Donna. Good morning, guys. Hi. Hi. So I was saying to your screener, I've got two kids, one's down college, one's in high school. And the only time they had any civics education was in middle school for half a semester. And I will say both kids learned from that. But where I think some of the fault is when I was a kid, once a week, I had to actually cut out an article in the newspaper, pasted on something. And summarize the article. And this was an elementary school, like, what's this great? And I feel that I learned about things in real time, real life, I could relate the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, to things in real life. And we're doing the kids a disservice by eliminating no one talks about current events. I asked my daughter, who's a junior, I'm like, why aren't you talking about the election and all these things? And her answer was, Mom, I think it would be too polarizing if people are afraid to talk about it. Hey, can we get back to you for a second? How did the education you got around these issues form you, if at all, as an adult citizen in our democracy? Did it have an effect on how you participate, how you debate your neighbors? What's the impact? I feel like you've had a slight impact on the social worker by trade. And I feel like, in terms of doing the right thing, looking out for your fellow neighbor, I had to learn what the law was to some degree and where the rights are. And that does make it a little bit easier to reference that when arguing with people that are either ignorant or have their own spin on it. Donna, thanks for a great first call, we appreciate it. My favorite study like this came out of the, I don't know what the place was called, it was published in the Minnesota, Minneapolis Tribune about a decade and a half ago. And it asked people how many could name all five members of the Simpson family, not O.J. but Homer, and somewhere in the neighborhood, a 25% could name all five. How many could name all five freedom is guaranteed by the First Amendment, one in 1,000 in the survey, which I think shows what matters more to people. 877-301-8970, where do you want to go Shirley? Let's go to Chris in Swansea. Hey, Chris. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. I am a retired history teacher. Great. Oh, wow. I've been retired for six years. The Massachusetts State Standards for high school students, we spend a month on the Constitution in ninth grade. Great. I taught it every way that I could, to all learning games, have, divide the class and have, have them pass a bill and try and get it through the other side. You name it. The kids are just not retaining this. I don't know what to say. Wait a second. They're not retaining it. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Because it's a one and done kind of thing. Is that why they're not retaining it? It's a one shot, one year kind of deal. Is that why they're not retaining it? So, so sophomore year, they go on to world history too. They pick up after the Civil War in 11th grade. It's world history and then senior year it's elective. And that's the Massachusetts State Standards unless they've changed them since I retired six years ago. No, well, we actually spoke to the former Secretary of Education this morning, Paul Revel, who's a regular on our show, and there have been efforts to mandate some additional civics curriculum, but they haven't become a reality. Chris, thanks for your call. We appreciate it. You know, one of the questions I have is, you know, why aren't kids more interested? You know, and I think about my own, my younger son's habits. I mean, I kind of have to blame YouTube. I mean, he knows more about the Costco guys, you know, on YouTube and TikTok. I mean, they're filling their brains with these, you know, they're using their phones and they're filling their brains with other stuff. Yeah, but there's a, Darce Kern's good one was here the other day and she was here not just to talk about what's going on in the world, but to promote her book that was just issued that day, which is the first book she's ever written for young leaders. And it was about the young, both Roosevelt's, Abe Lincoln and Lyndon Johnson. And the reason she did it is one because she doesn't think there's enough history in the minds of young people. But secondly, she believes, and I am 100% on board, which is the answer to your question, the key to everything is storytelling. Kids and adults don't retain data and hard numbers. It just goes in one ear, as they say, and out the, you know what, but stories people retain. And so I think if it was tied to stories about things that happen as a result of this provision or that effective teaching, and there are a lot of spectacular teachers, I think they do retain it and maybe they even say, I'll prefer that to whatever else is occupying my attention. Betty and Dedham, your next on Boston Public Radio. Thank you much for calling, hi. Hi, one-time listener and I've gotten through a few times. We're glad to have you. I certainly think teaching civics would be very valuable. I think that I'm a history buff, I graduated many years ago, and I've always stayed in touch with politics and history, and I do a lot of reading on my own. And I just think if you get in the habit, you start to enjoy it. The other thing I think that's important to note is that any immigrant that comes to this country and wants to become a citizen, has to pass a civics test. That's a great point. So many times immigrants know about civics than we do. Boy, that is a spectacularly important point to make. Just have everyone take the test, right? Betty, thanks. All our kids take the test. You know, Joseph M. texts from Boston. I'm a recent college graduate who works in state government. I learned my civics from Schoolhouse Rock, and I've had to learn as I go, a film we were discussing a little bit earlier. You know, a lot of great text points. Let's hear them. First time using your text system. Well, that's very exciting to show. I know. This is great. So one texture said, I guess it says in Connecticut, we had a mandatory civics course in high school, and another thinks that, this is Mary from Framingham, civics most definitely needs to be mandatory on a remedial level for people running for Congress. No. Well, you know, the Jill Stein thing we played a few minutes ago, the goal of this is not to diminish our candidacy, which should be diminished. But the woman wants to be president of the United States and is guessing that there's 600 members of the House of Representatives. I would suggest maybe she does a little civics education before she decides to run for yet another office and lose yet another campaign. And by the way, not that matters, but for those of you who think that Trump's election was a bit of a problem in 2016, her margin in states like Wisconsin, meaning Jill Stein's or what cost Hillary Clinton, the presidency, Jerry in a car, your next on Boston Public Radio, Jim Brownie and Shirley Leung. Hi. Yes. Hi. Hi. Jerry. Yeah. Hang on. I'm trying to get you off. What are you making another call? Order the bagel and then call us back when you're done. Okay. No. Okay. I just like to take you off this car. Thank you. Hear me better. Yeah. You're welcome. I did not teach history, but like the history teacher, retired history teacher who called, I do think civics should be part of classroom courses every semester, though, as a separate class, a civics class, unto itself, starting in first grade or if it can be in the starting age appropriate, so that every, by the time somebody, perhaps white males, 16 over, by the time they graduate high school, they will have a full knowledge, a thorough knowledge of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, all of the amendments and then when someone starts gaslighting them about what is the first amendment, what's the second amendment, hopefully a lifetime of education will pop up to the head and understand that that's just not accurate. And like the college just before me, I've often wondered, until I'm very passionate about this, I'm often wondered if I could pass the test that immigrants pass to become citizens and I'm going to find out, I'm going to take it. Well, you know, Jerry, since you made it in admission, I'll make it a mission I was going to make when I was quoting from the Annenberg study for Constitution Day, I didn't even know there was a Constitution Day. I think it's September 17th, I'm not sure that's the most important piece of information, but we all have holes in our knowledge, Jerry, thank you for the call. Remember when the then campaign manager for Donald Trump, I guess in 2015 or '16, went on Meet the Press with Chuck Todd and talked about alternative facts, Kellyanne Conway, of course, that was the first formal, I think, pronouncement, that there's fake news and real news, the answer is, there's only real news, there are only real facts. And maybe this is naive, but I think that if people have a common set of information and facts, even if all disagreement doesn't disappear, because of course it is not, at least you have a common starting point. You know what I mean? Yeah. And it seems, and what's a great line from a former Senator Mornahan, you're entitled to your own opinion, you're not entitled to your own facts. I'm sorry. And I think part of the thinking behind that is if you have the same facts, it's much more likely, you can have a normal, sane, non-confrontational discussion. You know, another caller brought this up about, you know, reading the newspaper and having an assignment at elementary school, the same thing here, another text or something, seventh grade, a seventh grade civics class, credits his teacher for teaching us how to read newspapers, critically, you know, read articles, editorials, op-eds from the left and right, you know, I mean I love, I was thinking, oh, maybe that's a Boston Globe, you know, business model, maybe we need to, maybe we need to go into the schools and do more in the schools. I love that. And by the way, GBH, one of the great things GBH does, they have tons of education and curricula. It's not mandatory, obviously a lot of school systems, but in a couple of fabulous texts, Rick and the Car, this is really moving. I love civics. That's why I bought a Honda. That's the depth of knowledge. Most young people have civics, and Mitch and New Bedford makes another excellent point. Why do we have to learn about the Constitution when even the Supreme Court ignores it? Another five point, but at least you know how they ignored it. If you knew what the hell you were talking about, 877-301-897. Should we go to Doreen in the car? Sure we should. Hi, Doreen. Hi, Jim. How are you today? I think I'm fine. So surely. Hi. Good, good, hi. I just wanted to remind you when you said something about storytelling, I've taught social studies in the past, and I went back to the old-fashioned schoolhouse rock because they had something about how does the bill become the law, and then you could also engage students by making them, put them in scenarios, and they get very engaged in topics of the day. I remember way back in the '90s, when Nelson Mandela was getting out of jail, my students wouldn't let that go. We had to move on to a different topic, but they came in every single day talking about what they saw in the news. So it doesn't take a lot to engage them, but I definitely think that the old-fashioned schoolhouse rock is a good way as far as I remember how a bill becomes a law when I was a kid. That's fabulous, Doreen. Thank you. You have a little something you want to add to this, Shirley? Yes, you know, we were talking about the signal. I also grew up watching schoolhouse rock and listening to, "I'm Just a Bill." I think we have a little sound of it. Here it is. I'm just a bill. Yes, I'm only a bill, and I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill. Well, it's a long, long journey to the Capitol City. It's a long, long wait while I'm sitting in committee, but I know I'll be a law someday but today I'm still just a bill. That's pretty great, by the way. That is pretty great. Schoolhouse rock. I'm just a bill. 1975. I didn't realize that. We're talking about whether a civics education, comprehensive, not one-shot deals, someone just called a minute ago and said, "How about starting in first grade kind of thing?" Would help lessen the tension and conflict and polarization, not to mention the fact that it would be nice to have an informed citizenry, it would be nice to have informed people who are running for president, too, is a nice thing. Where do you want to go? Let's go to Rosemary in North Falmouth. Hey, Rosemary. Hi. I'm a long time listening to first-time call-up. Thanks. I am a retired faculty member from Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing. Oh, wow. I had a lot of bright students. I taught policy and politics as one of my classes, and I would ask them when I first started teaching them the first class, who the US senators were, just one from each state if they could give them their US senators. Most of my students could not give me one, but it stepped off. The kids who came from Vermont, they knew just not only both the senators, but they knew that Congress person. Oh, wow. And I daughter-in-law's from Vermont, and I used to say to her, "How come?" And she said, "Well, number one, we're small, so we know everybody." But number two, we have to take civics in high school. That's correct. And therefore, we learn it in high school, and we don't forget it. You were a nursing professor, and you taught policy and politics to nursing students? Yes, sir. That is fabulous. Yes, sir. Because if we are the largest group of health care professionals, and if nurses are not at the table, then we will be always the one who are behind the eight ball. Good for you. And the physicians have the money, but we have the numbers, so nurses have to be at the table. Rosemary, that was fabulous. Congratulations on that. You know what that reminded me of when she said the students didn't know how their senators were? They were this guy's name. I was at NECN, which means it was more than 11 years ago, and I had a business guy who was running for governor, and I can't remember his name. And I said, "You've never held office, so why should people consider you?" He said, "I've been very engaged in local politics and policy with my local officials." And I said to him, "Who's your state senator, and who's your state rep?" You know the end of the story. He had no idea who either of them was, and he dropped out like two days later. Do you remember that guy's name, or no, neither do I. In any case, it'd probably be a good thing if you knew who you're representing. I'm not going to embarrass you. Yes, I am. Do you know who your Rep. Senator? Let's see. Do you know who your Congress person is? I do. Well, Lynch, Warren, let's see, Driscoll, Timelty, there was just an election. Well, that's actually, that's pretty good. Thank you for not asking me. I appreciate it. Brandi Fluker, Oakley also, I think, represents part of me. You're bragging a little bit now, I think, yeah. But I won't admit that I didn't know Ayana Presley was my Congress person until I voted the other day. I won't admit that, so we don't need to discuss it. Let's go to Kate. In Bridgewater, you are next on Boston, public radio, hey, Kate? Hi. Hi. Thanks for taking the call. Sure. A lot of your callers, while I was on hold, made some point. But my main point was, I do a lot of community organizing, and I found that people are being taken advantage of, that when they don't realize what their own rights are, he had a contested election one time in the city of Brockton that got fairly nasty, and somebody had created a Facebook post, and then a scrupulous lawyer will remain nameless, sent him a cease and desist letter demanding that he take down his own post. And I'm like, what is this? You have free speech, you know? And it was so manipulative, so people need to know their rights and be able to stand in community with each other because, you know, or they get taken advantage of. That is a beautiful angle on this, Kate. Thanks for the call. Kevin in Hudson, Texas, says, I'm a professor of education. I can tell you, there was very intentional that the U.S. curriculum moved away from civics and towards social studies. It's better we learn the major exports of Algeria than our rights and responsibilities under the constitution. It makes us easier to control. Wow. By the way, speaking of politics, CNN just had a poll on the screen. You know that Donald Trump said he's not going to do a third debate, one with Biden, one with Harris, because he's won both debates, so why does he need to do it anymore? Reuters just published a poll a few minutes ago. The people they polled, 53%, thought that Harris won the debate, 24% thought that Donald Trump did, so I guess he wasn't including that particular poll. We have time for another call or two there, Shirley. Wow. We've got a lot of teachers and educators calling in. We do. It's very nice, actually. So, yes, it is. Karen from Fall River. Hey, Karen. Hi, how are you? Great. I've spoken to you before because of Marjorie's connection. Anyway, I'm just tired. Marjorie's a Fall River woman for those three people who don't know. Go ahead, Karen. I'm sorry. She is. So, I'm a retired history teacher. I taught US history for almost 20 years in Fall River, both the middle and high school levels. Basically, what we're looking at is that the history, the history standards in Massachusetts are an inch deep and a mile wide. We have to cover all kinds of stuff in US history, and there's no one approved civics course. So, what they've done at the high school level is that graduating seniors, unless they're in an advanced placement class, is supposed to do some type of a civics class, a civics project, which is not really particularly effective. They folded it in at the high school level, at least in my experience, into a course around public responsibility, some voting rights, things like that, but it's not really a course in government. And if you look at the elementary and middle school levels, we're so focused on math in the L.A. because of the MCAT that those kids tend to get almost no social studies or history instruction. So, we're pretty much failing to create an educated populace right from, you know, the get-go in that position. We really appreciate your sharing that information with us. Thank you, Karen. A lot of teachers, because they care about it, and they know about it. Yeah. Can we go to this anonymous text, or I love this one? You, of course, can. Read away. Michael Hamilton taught my kids so much about the American Revolution and the history around that event. Maybe Lin Manuel Miranda should produce more of these masterpieces focused on a new part of American history every five years. Well, you know, this relates to- I love that. I love that. When I was mentioning the thing that Darce Kern's good when I was saying about storytelling, it's a variation on a theme. When the- when the teacher said Schoolhouse Rock or somebody who mentioned Schoolhouse Rock. Yes, yes. You learn something in an entertaining- It's- it sticks in your head. It sticks in your head, yeah. Well, you learn from Hamilton. That's right. For those of us lucky enough to have seen Hamilton, you do retain a lot, because it's beautiful storytelling, beautifully written, beautifully performed, beautifully all those kinds of things. Wow, Schoolhouse Rock. That's like 50 years. It is. Like everything is like 50 years. You know what I mean? I still remember it. I can still remember. I think that when we're- they were playing that song, it's- it's the guy's the little scrolly, right? The scrolly on the steps. That's- We had Graham Nash on the other day, formerly at Crosby Stills National in the Holley's, and we were talking- he's doing a concert with Judy Collins, I think. This week or next- well, sometime in Boston, that's why he was on, and obviously we brought up the brilliant song written by Steve Stills, Sweet Judy Blue Eyes, that is obviously about the woman he was in love with at the time, Judy Collins, who was 54 years ago. Wow. Sweet Judy Blue Eyes was 54 years ago, and then Margie and I saw Mick Jagger, who's about 110. So everything really is, he's like 80, or he is old, and can this man move. In any case, that was a great call. Thanks so much. That's all the time we have. Thanks, everyone, who called and texted. After a quick break, it's time for Live Music Friday. Heading into the Latinx Heritage Month, we're celebrating the launch of Fiesta on Aloplaza with Quattro, virtuoso, Fabiola, Mendez, and folks from the fabulous Agora Cultural Architects. Live Music Friday is next, don't go away. We're listening to Boston Public Radio 897 GBH. Welcome back to Boston Public Radio. Jim Brody. Marjorie still has COVID thing. Hopefully she'll be back Monday, surely the young business columnist for the Globe is filling in. We're streaming live on youtube.com/GBHNews, and on Tuesday, when we return to the library, the attorney general, Andrea Campbell, will be with us for an hour for obviously asked the attorney general. One reminder of our text question that we'll get to right before one today, the highest court in Massachusetts just heard the case of who gets the hold on to a $70,000 engagement ring after the couple split up, Texas, your thoughts at 877-301-8970. In the meantime, welcome to another live music Friday on Boston Public Radio. This Sunday, September 15th, at City Hall Plaza, the group Agora Cultural Architects kicks off their second annual Fiesta on Aloplaza. It's a week's long string of free events to celebrate Hispanic or Latinx Heritage Month. The group's co-founder Elsa Mosquera joins us now. Elsa, it's great to see you again. Welcome back. Thank you for having me. They're screening movement. We'll she'll play everything. They're hosting lectures, salsa dancing, as well as fabulous, and I'm going to repeat it one more time. Totally free live music. One important piece to all of us is the woman standing to our right here, virtuoso cuatroista, Puerto Rican-born Fabiola Mendez. She'll be performing at City Hall Plaza. On Sunday, she's here now for a sneak preview where there are Fabiola Mendez trio for information and events included in the festival, go to culturalagora.com for now. Here's Fabiola performing, aginaldo hibarro. [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Music ] [ Applause ] >> Fabiola Mendez trio, which by the way, Fabiola, has the head of the library, David Leonard, tapping his foot over there, I should say. That was absolutely spectacular. Thank you. And she's joining us here on the set. >> Thank you. >> I'm sure I'm not the first person to say this, but that was Fabiola, Fabiola. And I was hoping you could also introduce us to the members of your band. Who else is here with you today? >> So I have Georgie on the guitar and David on the bongos. [ Applause ] >> Before we find out about what's happening over the next few weeks, which is the primary reason you're here, a lot of people are watching and listening saying, what is that thing? I know what it is. What is that thing that you were playing? >> So this guitar is called the cuatro, and it's a Puerto Rican folk instrument. It's actually the national instrument of Puerto Rico used mainly for what we call "hebaro music" or the folk music, country music from the island. >> Didn't you have -- when you went to -- when you enrolled at Berkeley, I'm going to get this -- almost totally right -- that professor who you reported to didn't even know how to play the instrument. Is that correct? >> Yeah, that's correct. >> So do you teach him, how did that work? I mean, what did you do? >> Well, you know how music is a universal language, and when we know the notes, you know, C-D-E, dole-Ray-Me, we can speak -- you know, we know what we're talking about. So I just had to tell the professor, this is how this instrument is tuned. >> That's good. >> And they were like, okay, I can kind of see how it would work. So I studied with guitar teachers. >> Five pairs, right? >> Five pairs, that's correct. >> So one last stupid question, and then we'll find out what the thing. If it's a quatro, why does that -- is that a stupid question? >> That is -- no, that is a very legit question, and I get it all the time. >> Oh, this is with me. Thank you, I appreciate it. >> So the quatro in Puerto Rico, when it was first developed in the 19th century, it had four strings. >> Oh, okay. >> So people called it quatro. They were double strings in the instrument. But as the instrument evolved, the shape of it changed as well. So it originally didn't look like this. For those of you who are just listening, the instrument looks like a small cello. >> Yeah. >> The shape of the guitar -- I mean, the size of the guitar, but the shape of the cello or the violin. >> Yeah. >> But it used to look for -- >> It's like the mandolin and the guitar had a baby. >> And the guitar had a baby. >> Right, exactly. >> Yes. But now it has five double, no one wanted to change the name to sing. >> Oh, yes. [ Laughter ] >> That's great. So also tell us a little bit about this festival that's going to be happening on City Hall and I guess all month long, right? >> Yeah. Again, thank you for having me. >> I was thrilled to have you. >> It's -- don't we all deserve to hear more, Fabiola? >> We will. >> That's what we represent, right? >> We will. >> So that is the reason we're celebrating again. I have to thank, once again, the city of Boston for partnering with us and for understanding how important it is to have events free and public and celebrating Hispanic Latino culture and heritage. As I said last time, we are really underrepresented. So I feel that these big fiesta, where everyone can learn exactly what you're doing, what we do, how we do it, celebrate together, it's very important. So we're extremely excited to do this again. >> Also, you had this incredible, a very startling statistic, right? About the percentage of the Hispanic population, Latino population in Boston versus how much is dedicated to arts and culture related to Latino -- the Latino culture. Talk about that. Has there any progress been made in a year? >> Well, we're definitely working tirelessly for that to make that percentage a little better, but what I said last year, that 1% of the whole programming of Boston, it's Latino events or Latino arts, it's a shame. We are 20% of the population of the city is Latino. So it's really terrible. In our case, I have to say that first, we've gotten the support of our foundation. We are supported by Mellon. And that has definitely helped in the work that we're doing. So this past year, we brought five artists from the island, from the Archibile of Puerto Rico, that is really not heard before. So through Boricorida, we brought five artists from the island. One presenting in October, Janney. We are now curating the stage and on a common stage, so every Saturday you can hear Latino music in the city of Boston. We are working also to, you know, that I have a partnership with Arlington Street Church, some steps away from here. And in the basement of that church, we have created Groma, which is now like the Latino Arts Center, you can go to GromaSpace.com and you see all the programming. So I feel that we've made a lot of progress. >> Last year was 1%. So what do you think it's this year? >> I have to go and count it and I'll let you know next year. >> It's been 1%. >> I am sure it's like it. >> I am sure. >> I am sure. >> I have one more number to this conversation. It's not just the 20% of the population in Boston is Latino. Close to 100% of the growth in the population in Boston over the last 20 years has been Latino. That's on a typo, close to 100% percent. Are there venues for Latin music? I mean, you're a star beyond our board. I mean, I think people know that well beyond our borders. But in our city and surrounding communities, are there venues? Are there places to play other than special events like this? >> I would think only of one place that is a restaurant that hosts Latin music during the weekends. >> What is it? >> It's La Fabrika in Cambridge. >> Of course. So that's right. >> Yeah. So I would say that's the only place that comes to mind right away. >> That's Ben's name's place, I think. Isn't it? I thought he owned it. I think he owned it. >> Yeah, I'm not sure. >> Okay, good. That's great. So I think that I can think of that if I'm like, oh my God, I'm craving some salsa or some Latin music, I go there. But I don't know if there's others besides chroma that are doing this work to present Latin music. >> So what are we going to get over this period of time? In addition to the Fabiola and her colleagues on Sunday, what's going to happen? I gave you a little touch, but fill in some of the blanks there. >> I mean, Fabiola is definitely our star of that day. But we start with Edmar Colon, a fabulous saxophone player that is with the help of Celery T series. So thank you for the support. Then we have Fabiola. We have meta movements to give some salsa lessons. And we end with a fabulous Colombian singer-songwriter Manuela Sanchez. So it will be some cumbia and some bouderengue and some Colombian music to end up the night. >> And to find out information, culturalagora.com, tell us what Agora cultural architects does when it's not doing the festival. >> We are really busy trying to make Latino arts more in their in the main stages. As I said, we have Chroma Space, which we are now programming full year long. We have a big project called Buricore, which is mapping Puerto Rican arts organizations in the northeastern part of the United States. And with that, bringing five Puerto Rican artists to Boston, Hartford and New York. We are now, we have created a new ticket platform to make sure that we have a community of Latino and Puerto Richenos buying tickets. The platform is BodyTix.com, so we've been working on that to make sure that we have some sense of what the community is and how it's growing. So there you can also see the programming. And obviously partnering around the city with different organizations. So I have to say we're working tirelessly with Emerson College, with Celery T series, with Boston Landmark Orchestra, with the Boston Latin Quarter and High Square Task Force. Really, the key has been partnering with community assets and with other arts organizations to help us bring Latino arts to where it deserves to be. >> Fiesta and La Plaza starts on Sunday. We met you when you're doing the Landmark Orchestra thing, right? >> That's right. >> And did I read that you started playing this instrument when you were six or something? >> Yeah, six years old. >> And you were ridiculed by your friends? >> Yes. >> Because you picked the Quattro? >> Yes. >> Tell us about that. This instrument had this stereotype that it's because it's a folk instrument. It's meant for the people that live in the country, in the mountains, or for the elders, not for young people. So when I was six and I was playing this instrument at school, my friends would be like, oh, that's an instrument for all people. And I'm like, what? >> Why'd you pick it? Why'd you decide? >> Well, my family, we celebrate Puerto Rican culture and folk music. I grew up around a lot of Quattro, a lot of this music. And my family, you know, they planted the seed of love for my identity, you know, where I come from, who I am. So from a very young age, I wanted to, especially after hearing those comments, I was like, how can I change and help change this mindset? Especially among people in Puerto Rico that have that stereotype. Over here, I come with the Quattro and people are so welcoming of this instrument and joyful to hear it. So I want to just give a little bit of who I am and share a little bit of who I am everywhere I go and bring this instrument to light. >> Are there new Quattras? Is that the right word? >> Quattras does. >> Quattras does, after you, it's virtually or no? >> Yes. >> There have been quite a few that have graduated already and there are some that are coming in for this semester, so very proud of that. >> And during Hispanic Heritage Month, you have an NPR Tiny Desk Concert. That was released. >> Well, that is huge, actually. >> So tell me about that. That's a big deal. >> It is. So we had the amazing honor and blessing to be invited to record our Tiny Desk Concert for the Hispanic Heritage Month lineup. So it's coming out in September, late September. So stay tuned to the NPR Tiny Desk website. >> By the way, those who are not familiar with the Tiny Desk Concert series, the last person I saw on the Tiny Desk series was Taylor Swift. I mean, this is a huge, huge kind of thing. So you have to join your bandmates in a second. What are you going to play for us this time? >> So we're going to play an instrumental piece entitled Capuyito de Alelli. >> Which means? >> It's a flower. >> Oh, it's a flower? Is that what it is? >> It's the center of the flower. >> That's a beautiful answer. It really is a beautiful answer. >> Thank you. >> It's really great. Do you want to rejoin your colleagues? >> Yeah. Thank you so much. >> So also, tell us a little bit about Fiesta on La Plaza. Will it be every weekend or is it every weekend throughout September? Tell us more about it. >> There are three dates in September. So we, the first, the Fiesta welcome is this coming Sunday that I hope everyone joins. Then the next Thursday, I believe, is the 19th. We have a panel with our Latino artists. It will be all the City Hall Plaza. >> At the City Hall? >> Everything. It's really all the City Hall Plaza. So that panel of artists will be moderated by Cristela Guerra. And we have movies from Puerto Rico. Documentaries coming from Puerto Rico. And then on the 27th, I believe it's a salsa night. So we will end up with all for free coming to dance for a salsa night. >> Did you have salsa last year, too? >> It was so fantastic that people really asked us to finish the Fiesta with that. So that's what we're doing. >> Oh, that's great. >> So please join us and come. And if you have time in trauma today, we have a Puerto Rican rapper P.J. in Suela, which we're excited to bring. >> Okay, and again, it's free, cultural-a-g-o-r-a.com. And here they are, again, the Fabiola Mendez Trio. [APPLAUSE] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] >> Fabiola Mendez Trio, spectacular. Thank you all, Trio, that was great. >> We've been listening to the Fabiola Mendoza Trio. And thank you, Quattro Verteroso, Fabiola, Fabiola. And then also we've been hearing from Elsa Mascara, principal and co-founder of Agora Cultural Architects. Jim, I think next year we're going to just also dancing, right? >> One of us will, that's true, one of us will, that's right. >> So Fabiola will perform with her Trio as part of a free concert series this Sunday at City Hall Plaza, as Agora kicks off their weeks long fiesta on La Plaza. I think there's three events right at City Hall Plaza. For more information, you can go to culturalagora.com. Coming up after the new news, we talk with two globe spotlight reporters about their latest on Stort Healthcare CEO Ralph de Latorre. Stay with us. You're listening to Boston Public Radio 897, GBH Live in the Boston Public Library. It's streaming at youtube.com/GBHNews. >> Welcome back to our number two, Boston Public Radio. We're live at the Boston Public Library, streaming at youtube.com/GBHNews. Margry is obviously out today, still having some COVID repercussions. We hope she's back on Monday filling in his Boston Globe business. Hello again, Shirley. >> Hi. >> Reminder about our text question of the day. Remember, we get to your text just a little bit before one o'clock on this question. There's a case before the state's highest court about who gets to keep a $70,000 engagement ring after the wedding thing fell apart. 877-301-8970 is where you text. We can't wait for the court's rulings. We want you to decide. And while you're doing that, how do we get to the point where an engagement ring can cost more than the average annual income in the United States? But first, yesterday, Stuart Healthcare CEO Ralph de Latorre again skipped a Senate hearing where he would have been made to answer for his company's failures and his own lavish company paid for expenses. Congress is set to hold him in contempt for failing to show up for them. He may even go to jail. Just as he failed to show up for the thousands and thousands of people who relied on his company for care in Massachusetts. We're joined now in Zoom by Jessica Bartlett and Mark Arsenal from the Boston Globe. They're just two of the team of spotlight reporters, not only detailing dillatory self-enrichment, but the destruction and deaths he has left in his wake. They've done fabulous reporting. Jessica and Mark, we really appreciate your giving us some time. >> You're welcome. Thanks for having us. >> Pleasure. >> We did not tell you, Jim, that this is a globe takeover. >> Apparently it is, yes. >> You know, we've got the co-host. >> In this case, it could be. >> You've got Mark and Jessica. So, a few weeks ago, the spotlight team that you guys are part of, you delved into the lavish spending of the stored healthcare CEO Ralph de Latorre. And it was beyond the private jet and yachts that we've been reading about. And, you know, so while the hospitals were starving for cash and, you know, life saving equipment being repossessed, and I think one hospital couldn't afford a breathing box. So, what, what, tell us more about why, how Ralph did this, and how did you guys report this story out? >> Jessica, why don't you start? Go ahead. >> We looked at financial documents, bankruptcy documents, and talked to a number of different people and found that Ralph had on a number of occasions dipped into company funds to fund both, like his private lifestyle. So, not only the jets that were taking steward officials, you know, to places that really didn't have much to do with the corporate business, but also we found that steward had paid $3 million for a donation to a school that Ralph's sons attended. And, you know, we talked to experts that questioned why a health system would be giving money to a school, nonetheless in the name of Ralph de Latorre. And so, there were a number of times where it seemed Ralph had enriched himself on the backs of the company dime. >> You know, Mark, you start this piece with an enraging example. I mean, it's a story of a loving son, Ralph de Latorre, who pledges, in his mother's name, $10 million, to fund a new science center name at the school, at a school outside Dallas, his kids attended. Where did the $10 million to honor his mother come from? >> Well, at first, we thought that it would have come from the de Latorre family fund, because that's what the school said. That's how the school promoted the event. But looking deeper into that, that appeared not to be the case because this, you can check the documents, the tax documents filed by that de Latorre family fund. It never had that much money in it. It certainly didn't record any giant donations to his kids private school. So it came out later through bankruptcy documents. It would confirm at least a good sizable portion of that money, if not all of it, was coming from Stuart healthcare. Well, at the same time, Stuart hospitals, doctors, nurses didn't have the equipment or tools to properly do their jobs. >> Jessica, you and I, we both sit in the business section of the Boston Globe. And reading your stories, I couldn't help but wonder two things. Where's the board on this? All right. And second, Stuart healthcare, I mean, it's owned by private equity. I thought they watched the bottom line like a hawk. So how come the CEO could get away with spending money on, you know, on jets? And I think there was like a condo in Spain as well. I mean, who was watching, how come no one's watching the books? >> Well, a number of board members at Stuart are executives at Stuart. And so there doesn't really appear to be much of a difference in terms of oversight. We've asked the board members several times for comment on this. They have yet to engage with us. And so it is an outstanding question. You know, where was the board? Why weren't they overseeing this more? Why wasn't there more culpability on their part there? In terms of the private equity lens, keep in mind that Cerberus had an ownership stake in Stuart up till 2020. And so, you know, during that time, Cerberus was very focused on the bottom line to the detriment sometimes of patient care. And so oftentimes you had, you know, cost cutting reductions in staff, all with an emphasis on the bottom line, which did benefit to some degree the private equity firm. Ultimately, Cerberus exited with over $800 million in profit and then once they exited, you saw Ralph kind of upping the number of times that he was taking money out of the system. So there was some degree of oversight when Cerberus was there, particularly folks on the bottom line, but to their benefit. But we do see a lot of things escalate even after Cerberus' exit. You know, Mark, just to get the rage quotient a little bit higher, could you describe some of the other self enrichment that you report on from the apartments, the condos, the travel, the management fees in the millions of dollars, pick one or two and fill in a blank or two, if you would please, Mark. I don't know, I like, I like the boats. You know, I like the boats. I like the, I think that's a, that's an easy one for people to grasp. I mean, the owners of Stewart took a more than $100 million distribution from the company in January of 2021 in the middle of a pandemic. And then shortly after that, DLT already bought a yacht valued of more than $40 million. And again, a lot of the story that the examples in the story that we published just this weekend happened around this time, after they took this big distribution after he bought the boat. You know, people died at Stewart hospitals after not receiving the professionally accepted standard of care due to a lack of supplies or a lack of staff. You know, we, we want to talk about what you've both mentioned, what was going on in terms of patient care or non-care, while Dilitori was enriching himself. But a bit, a small controversy erupted in our show a couple of days ago, not directly between them, but we, Senator Warren was with us a few days ago and had something to say about Dilitori. The next day we asked Governor Healy about the same thing, and they had a difference of agreement and maybe you can settle it. Again, here's Senator Warren and then the governor. What the heck is Ralph Dilitori doing still in charge of Stewart hospitals? The chain is now in bankruptcy. That means there is a bankruptcy judge that has some oversight. But Dilitori is the guy who's still in there. He's got access to all of the information. He's the one negotiating the deals on which hospitals are closed. This is in bankruptcy right now. It has, you know, it's out of Ralph Dilitori's hands, and he's got to be focused on lawyering up because he is going to be investigated or prosecuted. So Jessica, can you settle this dispute? Who isn't, is Dilitori still have any control over decisions that are made about Stewart healthcare? Dilitori is still the CEO of the company. He has not been removed from the company. It is in the auspices of the bankruptcy court. And so there's more oversight. There's patient ombudsman who are paying more close attention to what's happening kind of beach at each hospital. All of the sales process needs to be approved by a bankruptcy court. So there's certainly more of a degree of oversight than there has been, but Dilitori has not been, Dilitori has not been removed from the company. Well, let me ask you, Jessica's thing with you. The reason I not only asked the question of Healy, Governor Healy, because Senator Warren approached this, but it seemed to me that if he had any control, even if it was limited, comparatively speaking, that one of the parties to the proceeding like Massachusetts might ask the bankruptcy judge to remove him. Has there been any attempt to remove Dilitori completely from any authority over the finances and operation of Stewart healthcare? I think there was certainly a desire to do so. Public officials mentioned that they wanted that to occur. I think Healy herself early on in this process that he shouldn't remain in charge, whether Massachusetts officials have that authority in the bankruptcy court. I'm not sure, but it's a question. If I can answer that, of course, is that I mean, Dilitori, by all accounts, is still the largest owner of Stewart. So he's not just an employee. He owns the thing. I mean, it's his company at this point, a lot to a large extent, but I think goes a long way to explaining why he's still there. I'm here to mark Arsenal and Jessica Bartlett, who are among the spotlight team members who've done wonderful reporting, exposing both Dilitori himself and the consequences of Dilitori's behavior. Jessica, can you talk about the story that ran Sunday in the paper where the spotlight team chronicled at least 15 patient deaths at Stewart healthcare hospitals, not only here in Massachusetts, but across the country, related to really kind of mismanagement of these hospitals? Yeah, so we looked at a variety of different public records spoke to over 100 different former and current Stewart employees to look at instances in which patients died that could be tied in some way to a corporate decision making. And so this does not count like medical errors or anything like that. And what we found, also through a review of federal investigations into Stewart, was that there were 15 deaths that could be tied to corporate decision making, 16 injuries, and at least 2000 people, according to federal regulators, were put at risk in these hospitals during these circumstances. And so all of this, we found that in terms of how many times federal regulators had flagged kind of the loudest alarm against the company called the media jeopardy. They had done so 32 times in the last five years, which was nearly three times as many as other Medicare certified hospitals. So it wasn't just that the corporate decision making had put patients at risk and that we had found connected to deaths, but that systematically, Stewart hospitals have been worse by quality ratings by federal rankings by investigations of last period of five years. You know, Jessica's thing with you for a second, correct me if I'm wrong, I think it was your story in January, which was the first I read about, I hope I pronounced her name right, Sunjita Rashid. The first death I had read about because of the repossession of a device in embolism coil that arguably could have saved Ms. Rashid's life and that started this horrible saga, at least in the public's eyes. Can you briefly tell us what happened to Ms. Rashid? Yeah so Sunjita Rashid, 39 years old, went into St. Elizabeth's for a pretty routine birth, had a normal birth, but started bleeding afterwards. And the nurses had been saying for weeks that the hospital did not have an embolism coil, it's a device that's used to stop internal bleeding. That memo had not gone out to everyone, and so in the operating room when they're trying to resolve Sunjita's bleeding, they realized they don't have the embolism coil. Now nurses knew that they didn't have it because the vendor had come in a couple weeks prior and repossessed it, saying that Stewart had not paid the bills. And so that was the first kind of time we witnessed that Stewart corporate decision making had harm patients, that it wasn't just that operations were being delayed, that patients weren't getting high staffing, which is certainly serious in its own regard, but that things had gone even further and that patients had been actually harmed as a result of these corporate decisions. You know, and there are other markets up to you, but there are other stories that I think are worth spending a minute on about the pain that families suffer by the loss of someone they love. Could you, would you share another one with us, please? Yeah, I mean, these are all really tough cases. I think Gilberto Melendez Broncaccio, who was a Quincy guy, who was 31 years old, a beloved nephew, beloved uncle, had some mental health problems that were often managed with medication. Sometimes he didn't take it because it didn't like how the medication made him feel. And on one of those occasions, he suffered some delusions, Quincy police found him and did the reasonable thing and brought him to the hospital. They brought him to Carney, Stewart Hospital and Dorchester, and when he was there, you know, he was restrained both physically and chemically. And the doctor has said that he was not to be left alone. I mean, he has experienced respiratory problems and the policy would be if a H was being restrained, they needed to be monitored one on one. But the hospital didn't have enough people to monitor him one on one, and he was left alone. And no one was there to do anything where his heart stopped. No one was there to call the alarm. No one was there to resuscitate him. And 19 hours after he went into a Stewart Hospital, they wheeled his body to the morgue. And as the stories that you guys are recounting of what happened in Massachusetts, the last Sunday story also talked about what happened at a, it was at Glenwood Hospital in Louisiana. That was, it seems like that was the far worse among the worst or perhaps the worst Stewart care hospital. Can you talk about what happened there? Yeah, yeah, I went to, I went to West Monroe, Louisiana reporting this story. I went to Glenwood. A lot of things happen there. It led to Stewart chain in immediate jeopardy findings, which has just just mentioned the most serious findings against the hospital by hospital regulators. I had nine such findings in the last five years, which is a staggering amount. It puts Glenwood in the top 10, worst, or I would say maybe the bottom 10 nationwide. I was more, more than 6,000 hospitals. One was that in 2021 during COVID, people in the COVID ICU were getting mold infections in their, in their breathing passages. This is a really serious situation. The mold is called Aspergillus, and it's extremely hard to treat. It's really hard to survive. Most people die when they get this. But the understaffed infection control department at Glenwood hospital didn't really begin an investigation until they had already had three people with this infection. As it turned out, five people got it, and four people died. The cleaners that the hospital had hired didn't have the right equipment to clean in a medical environment. The hospital actually later admitted to federal regulators. So, yeah, Glenwood was a really tough case. And it's difficult because it's, it's a community hospital, like a lot of these steward hospitals in an area that's not real wealthy and an area that really depends on that hospital, which started as a public hospital in the 1960s. And I think it's really going to a lot of people. And I remember what I, what I heard down there from a lot of people I talked to was, they just can't understand how a company can just come into your community and wreck your healthcare. You know, can we talk briefly, Jessica and Mark about the consequences, if there are going to be any. Before we do that, I should say that there was legislation pending on Beacon Hill, a hospital oversight bill that B.U.R. reported was initially passed in response to Stewart's financial turmoil. I, no surprise, I think probably to most of our listeners, it didn't pass in time for the legislature's five months vacation. And the Speaker of the House said it was too important to get lost in the shuffle and get watered down, but it was obviously not important enough to delay a vacation a week. So forgetting what Beacon Hill will or will not do, at least in the next few months, we read in the globe that Malta had brought criminal charges against the Latorian and a number two person in the country. And I always worry that if the Sacklers are not in jail, no CEO is going to be in jail for what he or she does to real people. But starting with you, Jessica, there are U.S. attorneys, including one here, who are looking into these behaviors, again, massive self enrichment at the same time that the company is losing hundreds of millions of dollars. And, as you both reported, cut back on life-saving services. What is the status, as best you know, of investigations into the Latorian Stewart? Yeah, so the personal spending that you bring up is one of the focuses of a grand jury investigation in Boston that's looking into Stewart. There's also a separate federal investigation into Stewart for potential corruption in its international business. And so those two things are happening simultaneously. You also have Dr. Delator was called to testify yesterday at the Committee on Health Education Labor and Pensions, I'm sorry, the Health Committee. And though he didn't appear, the Health Committee plans to hold a vote to hold him in contempt next Thursday, which could carry both criminal ramifications as well as civil ones. And then you also have federal legislators who are trying to pass increased transparency and tighten oversight of private equity nationally. So there are some things happening, but it's a question that you raise it as a good point. I mean, so often we see white collar crimes in particular, not have the full ramifications that they should. And so it's an outstanding question whether these things will ultimately result in any lasting change. You know, Mark, I have to say, I shouldn't even be asking a legal question, but I'll say my thing is, I'm sort of a backseat lawyer, even on the lawyer. But when I read this embolism coil story that Jessica wrote in January, I said, all you have to demonstrate is at the same time that the equipment had been repossessed that would have saved Ms. Rashid's life. That the company was spending X amount of dollars on the entertainment and happiness of their CEO. So it seems to me the connection is not that tough. Do you know if the Attorney General is going to be with us on Tuesday, meaning our Attorney General Andrea Campbell, do you know if the state is looking into any of these issues, either criminally, civilly, whatever, do you know? Well, it'd be a dereliction of duty if they weren't, I'll be looking forward to her answer when you have her on. So alive. So alive. So I have to say you all, is there anything we missed, by the way, that you think it's important for people? First of all, people should read every single piece of this online. There's some sections, hard copies of it. It is really an important story if you care about your fellow humans and your families. Anything Jessica or Mark that you want to impart before you go, Mark, take it away. I would say we have, the piece on Sunday has a sidebar where we recount what happened to the 15 people who died after not getting the right care. I would hope that people would read about all those little capsules and read about the human beings that were harmed by this company's practices because that's why we did this story is to bring some accountability for those people. Jessica, anything you want to add? Yeah, I would note that this is a situation that hasn't just affected the families that have lost loved ones or the individuals who have been harmed, but it really is reshaping health care for the entire state. We have what was once a nine hospital system that is now going to be divvied up amongst a bunch of other health systems that will fundamentally change the structure of Massachusetts health care. We want to mention nationally, you've got health care systems nationally that are being sold to different operators. And so the ramifications of one company that had really consolidated a number of community hospitals will last for decades. And that'll be something that we're following too. What does this mean for the state health care system? What does this mean for these communities long term? What are the ripple effects of all of this harm that we see year after year? Jessica and Mark, can't thank you enough for your work and your time today. Thanks so much, really appreciate it. We've been speaking with Jessica Bartlett, medical reporter for the Boston Globe, and Mark Arsenault, his investigations reporter. I think this is the end of the globe takeover of GBH. You never know. You can see more of their incredible reporting on this stored health care at bostonglobe.com/spotlight coming up after a quick break. The Secretary of Mass.Monica Tibitz-Nuts, she is here. You're listening to Boston Public Radio 897 GBH Live from the BPL and streaming at youtube.com/GBHNews. [Music] Welcome back to Boston Public Radio. Marjorieagan still has COVID. We hope she'll be back Monday. She'll be the young great business columnist at Globus Filling in. We're streaming live from the bostonpubliclibraryyoutube.com/GBHNews. The Attorney General Andrea Campbell will be here Tuesday for an hour to answer your questions and ours. We'll obviously discuss through health care among other things. Here for I think her first time in Boston Public Radio is Secretary and CEO of the Mass Department of Transportation. Or Mass Dot is Monica Tibitz-Nuts to talk about, I don't know, Sumner Tunnel, Cape Cod Bridges, East West Rail, low income fairs. And I'll tell you something, Marjorie and I really support, I don't know how you feel about it. We think there should be tolls in the New Hampshire border. I don't know what you think, but we can discuss that at some point. Secretary, it's great to have you. Thanks so much for being here. Thank you for having me. Our pleasure. All right, so you're here. You brought us gifts, actually. That always works, by the way. I have to be honest. How long did you bring? Oh, we've got hats, we've got cones. What is this code? What is this? It's from the Sumner Tunnel. Is this like a stress code? Yes. How often are you using that thing? Quite often. I bet you are. Thank you. You're very generous, very kind. Thanks so much. Thank you. So, Secretary, you are almost been in your role for a year. A year and two days. A year and two days. So, what has it been like? What has it been like because you were a long time advocate. You were on the T board. So, what does it like to be the Secretary for the past year? It's been amazing. I think this is the type of job you dream of when you do the work I do. And being able to be on this side. Being on the board is very, very different than being actually internal with the staff. But it's been exciting. We've been able to actually do a lot of projects that have been very difficult and have been able to do them in a way that I don't think the public ever thought we could. Do you have a couple of examples of things that at minimum, even if not to completion, have made dramatic moves forward in the year you've been around? I would say the Sumner Tunnel. First of all, as everyone knows, we needed to close it down for two months last summer. With all the work we've been doing on weekends, we were able to shave it down to just one month this summer. And we will be done with weekend closures in October, two months early. Oh, wow. Yes. Are you done? That's it? We will be done. It's finished. No more closures. Done. Wow. That's great. What else? West East Rail, which has been a passenger rail project that people have been dreaming of from a very long time. It's connecting Boston all the way out to Pittsfield and then Albany, New York. Being able to get $108 million for the Springfield track has been huge. I don't think anyone thought we were going to be able to do that because as everyone knows, that's a very hard connection for a lot of people. We have the inner core. There aren't a lot of rail options and we're continuing to move forward with that project as well. What's the, I mean, Richie Neil, I think people know if the Democrats take control again, you don't build East West Rail, he's going to defund Massachusetts. So there's a pretty good reason for you to do it. He's a key financial guy. What's the realistic status in the timetable for both that and North South Rail, which we've been talking about for centuries in Massachusetts? So for West East Rail, the $108 million part of this project, we will be active in most likely 2028, having those two additional trains out there. North South Rail, this is a project that's been talked about for 20 plus years. Congressman Molten recently has done some research with Harvard Kennedy School on this. We've been in contact with him and what we're doing now is really putting together what it would take for Mass Dot to do a feasibility test of that project. How about the, every time I drive to the Cape, I was just in the Cape a couple of weeks ago, every time I drive over the Saginaw Bridge, if I were religious, I'd cross myself, but I am not religious. It is, to me, scary. I know we're committed to rebuilding the bridge. It's got a few hundred million dollars from the feds, but that's well short of what the actual cost is going to be. Are we going to be able to fill that hole and actually get this done? So for the Saginaw, we have $1.74 billion. We have more than enough to do the Saginaw Bridge, yes, and begin the planning for the Borne Bridge. And just so you know, you don't need to be praying to anyone. We have no unsafe bridges in Massachusetts. If it was unsafe, it would be closed. Well, there are. I mean, even if it's not unsafe, there is a category or descriptor short of unsafe that hundreds of bridges are. What is it, deficient or whatever they need? Structurally deficient. I mean, that's fairly nerve-wracking for mere mortals. Should it not be? It shouldn't be. Why not? Structurally deficient means that we need more rehabilitation of it or full replacement. If it's unsafe, we close it. And we do have bridges within Massachusetts that are completely closed because they are not safe for travel. We're talking to Monica Tibbetson, who is, of course, the Secretary of Transportation. So before you became Secretary, you championed a reduced fair program for low-income writers. And I think recently the state opened up applications, right? Yes. You want to, I think you were hoping to get 60,000 people as part of this program. So how is it going? I mean, are people signing up and when will this? I don't know if maybe it's already started. It started on September 4th. And as you know, this is a project I've been working on in three different positions for a little over 10 years. And anyone that watched that vote, I was getting teared up. This has been something that we've been pushing for. And the amount of difference this is going to make for millions of writers is amazing. This is a 50% discount off of your tea fair. And it's across the entire system. commuter rail, ferry boat, subway, and bus. The overwhelming response just from September 4th has been amazing. And now we're really pushing out that information to the community groups and making sure that everyone understands that this is now available to them. And how many people you think will use it? Honestly, I would probably say in the millions. But we are not sure at this point. I would say in the next 12 months we'll have a much better idea. So can I ask you the next question? Is your advocate hat? Because you have to be nicer to the legislature as a Secretary. Why did it take us so long to do something that almost everybody in the transportation advocacy community believe was the right thing to do and so many other major cities have done it before? Why the delay? It's very difficult to fund something like this because of the size of the tea. And we really needed the legislature and especially this administration to take that leap, put the money in the budget so that we could take that vote and know that we're going to be able to fund this. So I would say this administration really pushed the legislature on this. I want to talk about money because we've been talking about transportation on this show off and on for 25 years since we started. And at least to me as an outsider, the buck has almost always passed. Occasionally the needs of a particular year are met. But then I think at least you'll disabuse me. If you disagree, heads go in the sand. Before we get to that, the topic came up the other day that the globe did in an editorial about filling was kind enough to give us a few days ago the GMD answering all questions, which based upon some of his predecessors I think is a great act of transparency. Even if people don't agree with everything he says or does. And a caller asked him about the issue of late night service, which he knows has been tried and then undone for a variety of reasons. Here's part of what the GM had to say. I have been talking with my operations folks regarding the potential for later night service. One of the things I'd like to do is see how we can improve, as I think I mentioned earlier, off peak service in general. The frequencies, whether it's midday, late night, I think those areas are something I need to look at. And they want to look at it. I come from a system that was 24/7. And I also know that maybe the ridership is not as strong during those periods, but those people that use the system during those periods do it because they need to. You know, one of the things the globe editorial mentioned that I'm sure you care deeply about is the equity issue. A lot of low wage workers working in restaurants, things like that. Don't have a car. Can't afford a ride share thing. After the tee shuts down, I think it's at 1230. Where is this in your mind in terms of the possibility of is it would it be a third go or whatever it is? Another try at late night service. This is something I think the GM hit on this. We have to do a lot of research on this. As you know, this has been tried numerous times. And I think you hit on this. This general manager is very transparent. The other thing is this general manager is on the system and actually talking to riders. I think when you combine that with the work that our planning teams can do, we will get a better idea if this is something that is feasible in the future. Where is it in your -- I mean, what's your perspective? I understand that obviously the teas have to be across the eyes out of the funding found. But as a concept, is this something that's on your priority list? I think for me, more access and more options is always at the top of my list. How we do that, that's what we have to put that time in for. But anything we can do to give people the option of being able to get to work, get home, get to recreational activities and not use a single occupancy vehicle, that is always my number one priority. You mentioned Phil is on the teal at the time. You took a little heat a few months ago for not being on the commuter rail from your hometown, driving your state-owned financed EV. And you took criticism, which by the way, in the spirit of full disclosure, Margie and I echoed for not riding a line that is one of the lines that you have responsibility for. Have you since and what's your take on the criticism and whether you should be doing it? I have. And I think the thing that's really important to point out, I don't live within an MBTA service area. My community is not served by the MBTA. We are served by a regional transit authority, monochuse it, which is what I use. And around my community, I also use the Worcester RTA. And I think that really talks about regional equity. And I think for a secretary, I am one of the few that have not lived within the MBTA service area. You know, I have to say, just staying on this just for a second, Margie Egan asked Charlie Baker about not riding the tee a few years ago when he was governor. And I think I'm being fair to the governor. He was really aggravated by the question. And here's a little piece of what Baker said. This is 2019. I rode the commuter rail for a lot of years. I rode the tee for a lot of years. I talk to people all the time and ride the public transportation system. And I'm not a virtue singular, I guess is what I would say. I think my job is to try and make the thing better. And given what we inherited on that thing, I'll put our record up against any of our predecessors. Do you regret not having done it up front? I mean, it seems to me, even if it's, as you described, maybe not in your catchment area or whatever, you are the leader of the transportation system. And it does send a message if you ride, if you don't ride, particularly when they're a lot of unhappy people. No, is that a fair criticism? Here's the thing I will say. I've only lived in a community outside of the MBTA district for four years. The previous, almost 15, I used the public transit system every single day. I never drove whether to go to work, whether to go to school or recreation, never. Until I moved outside of that service area, that's all I used. How do you take criticism, by the way? I don't know you well enough to know. When you're in a high profile place, you've been an advocate, as Shirley said before, and all of a sudden, you're on the other side of the thing. And the same advocates, including some, I'm sure you work shoulder to shoulder with or criticize. As a human, not as a set. How do you react to that? How did you react to that? I've been doing positions like this for a very long time. I got criticized on the board about different stances. It is my job to listen and even listen whenever they're saying things that might not be particularly nice. It is a perspective and it is important to me. So one of your predecessors, Secretary Pollack, I remember she used to talk about taking all the modes. You know, she would drive, she would take the community rail, she'd take the subway. Do you find yourself doing that to check out all the modes? And I don't know if there's one mode that you're like, you know, this needs a lot more room for improvement. Maybe it's something that we ever heard about. There is no mode in the MBTA system that I've not used. And for our RTA's, I'm probably out of the 15 used between six and eight of them. Regional transit. Yep, regional transit authorities. My favorite mode is the boat. The boat. I love the boat. It is nowhere near where I live. I have no reason to ever be on the boat. But we took a ride on the Lynn Ferry. If I could move to use that, I would literally do anything. So Monica, can we talk about this task force? Because it was the statement I made before Unfair that legislatures, they occasionally deal with the year in front of them because it's a crisis. But they have rarely, at least in my 30 plus years here, confront the big problem on transportation fund. Is that a fair statement, would you say? I don't think it's unique. I think that's the big thing. In the United States, it's not unique. The budget from every fiscal year, the next fiscal year, you really do need to focus on that. Because if you look at the projects we're doing, they don't come up every year. Okay, but this task force that was appointed by the governor, that I think you, co-chair, am I right about this, on funding, which has an end of the year reporting date, can you tell us what the mandate was, what it's supposed to do, what it is doing, is the report going to be on time, what's the deal? We were put together as part of an executive order. And this was really to tackle what you've been talking about for a long time. How do we fund beyond a fiscal year? How do we look out to the next 10, 20, 30 years? And this governor tasked this group with putting together every possible option there is. Looking internationally, nationally, how have other systems, how have other states paid for their transportation? And that's what we build into this toolkit. And we will deliver that by December 31. And then that really is for the legislature, for the administration to take that information and then make their decisions from there. Can you also talk a little bit more about the MBTA? Oh, can we sell them? Sorry, can we sell them? Okay, all right. It's the fiscal cliff. Oh, go to the church. Yeah, the MBTA fiscal cliff. I mean, that's something that's staring at you right away. It's not long term. So how are you looking to resolve that? That's coming up. We've had a fiscal cliff for decades. This is a very high number, but every time someone talks about this, it happens every single year. What we're doing is the work of the task force, and we're also working with the GM to look for every efficiency that is possible. And I think anyone that has witnessed the work he's doing, he's bringing more people onto the system, he's making a much more efficient system. And by the end of this year, we're going to have those options, which we haven't had before. But the difference right now is that far a few people are writing the subway rails because of the hybrid workplace. So you can't -- how do you work around that? More people are coming back. They are coming back into the office. And we continue to work with those employers, with those educational institutions to help push them to encourage their employees, their students to use it. The other thing the GM has done a great job is actually working with those employers to get reduced fares for their employees. That will get people on the system. Even if it's not every day, taking those cars off the road, one, two, three days a week, is going to make a difference for everyone commuting independent of what your mode is. So we understand the numbers. We asked Philip Engness the other day, we had some minor disagreement. I thought I had read that on the T itself, we're only at 51% of pre-COVID ridership. Is that right or did I underestimate it? Depends on the mode. So what does that make you flesh out? So commuter rail is about 94%. Some of the other modes are less. That 50 to 60 is an average across the board, which is actually a little bit higher than the national average. Can we get back to the task force for a second? I don't want to dwell on history. I'm sure I better remember you at a speech mention. One of the things should be looking at tolls on the New Hampshire border. The governor, I think it's fair to say chasing you. But then when she came here a few days later, and one of us, Marty, I said, "Why should anything be off the list?" She said, "Oh, it isn't. Everything is on the list. That can stay on the list, too." Is there any direction from above, meaning from the governor's office, from legislative leaders saying, "Do not put X on this list. It has no chance on Beacon Hill. It's going to put me in a political tough spot." Or do you have the level of independence that I think the taxpayer would like you to have? The governor has made a firm statement that tolls are off the table. Every other option will be in that toolkit. And then from there, what they want to trim, that's really going to be up to the legislature and the administration. For whatever it's worth, I mean, obviously it matters much more than she says to you. She did say to us right after that incident that everything is on the table, including those, but obviously subsequently she has said something else. And how detailed there's been criticism from some advocates as well that the -- well, I don't even know if there are recommendations. What comes out of this task force is going to be more list-like rather than comprehensive and detailed. Is that true or is that not true? It is going to be comprehensive and detailed. It's not just a list of the options, but also talking about what the financial implications would be, what the equity implications would be. And this is looking across the entire transportation system. So when you talk about bridges, we talk about roads, all of that is included. This report is going to be lengthy. So as you know, I'm a devout Fairmont line writer. You love the Fairmont line writer. I also -- I'm growing -- I'm coming back to the red line, so -- but I also drive, too, you know. And I want to speak on behalf of drivers, too. There is so much traffic. There is so much congestion. I mean, do you experience that? Are you doing -- what are you doing to address the traffic? When I come in on the roadway, I'm on Route 2 and the Pike. I feel your pain. What we're doing is we're monitoring it. We're looking at the causes of this. Is this an intersection issue? Do we need to be diverting people to other roadways, mainly focus on how are we getting people out of their cars? And that is the biggest focus. That's going to make the biggest impact. The other thing is getting people living closer to where they work. And that's really where you get that intersection of transportation and housing. You know, one of the solutions -- remember, New York City almost had congestion pricing until the governor pulled out the rug about a minute and a half before it was about to start. Right after that happened, we asked Mayor Wu about it, and whether she'd consider it for Boston or would support it. From Boston, and she said we can't do that until the T is fixed. Essentially, I'm paraphrasing what she said. We need an option for people if we're going to put something like that in place. Governor Baker wouldn't even consider a pilot, if I remember correctly. Where are you on congestion pricing? And do you agree with her analysis that until the T is doing better and ridership is better and it's more efficient than we can't do congestion pricing? Congestion pricing is going to be in the toolkit. It has to be. This is something that many people have pursued, I think, more successfully internationally. When she's talking about the concerns about congestion pricing ahead of the T, I am in agreement on equity. You have to make sure that people have other options and not be punitive if people have no choice but to drive. Okay, you're about to go, what's the one thing that keeps you up at night in your first year? Tell the truth. What's the one thing that's driving you in the most nuts, so to speak, about your job or the task in front of you? I would say, honestly, my commute is probably the thing that keeps me up at night. It's all about me. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, why, why, how so? It's one of those things where it is a lab for me. I am out there, I get to experience the things that people are complaining about. And so for me, every morning is spent either listening to something like the Big Dig podcast and trying to make myself feel better about my job. Keep it in the morning, keep it in the morning, keep it in the morning, just go ahead. Exactly. I love it. Or I'm thinking about, okay, what other transit options could we put here, where are the places we could develop housing? Not really, truthfully, is the stuff I think about. We're about to run out of time, but the question that Ian Coss asked at the beginning, and the question he went to address in the nine part wonderful Big Dig was, can we still do big things? How do you answer that question? Absolutely. You do. You think that we're not poisoned or whatever it is by the rising costs and mistrust in government? You think we can do it? We have $3 billion of federal grants in one year. We can do big projects. We're doing the bridge? What do you mean we? You're doing the damn bridge? What are you doing? The same Massachusetts. Did you apply to work? I did not. Let me tell you, I would not hire her. So like I can say, Secretary, we really appreciate your time and hope you come back soon. Thank you so much. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right, we've just been hearing from Monica Tibbetts, not -- The new boss of Shirley, the young apparently. She's the Secretary and CEO of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. I feel your pain because your commute is stressful. Because you're not just -- you're not stressed out by the traffic, but you're thinking about how can I make this commute better for everybody, right? She just said absolutely. So after a quick break all day, we've been soliciting your text on this question around who gets to keep the engagement ring when the engagement falls apart? We'll read your text next. They're really, really good. Listen to Boston Public Radio 897 GBH live for the BPL and streaming online at YouTube.com at GBH News. Welcome back to Boston Public Radio, Shirley of Young Sitting. And for Margry, I'm Jim Brody, live at the library streaming YouTube.com/GBH News. Diamonds might be forever, but not every relationship is bound to stand up. The time often couples get engaged, don't even make it to the older. Some estimates say one in five engaged couples won't end up saying I do. So for those one in five, which partner is entitled to keep, if there is one, an expensive engagement ring? That's a question before the state's highest court. In a case involving a $70,000 engagement ring. Yesterday we talked about asking your guests to pay to attend your wedding, like buy a ticket. All day we've been soliciting your text asking who should be allowed to keep the ring as a connection yesterday's. Am I the A-hole? How do we get to the point where engagement rings cost more than the average annual income in the United States? What are the texts you're saying, Shirley of Young? Wow. People have so many opinions and they're so good. Wow. What are they saying? All right. I've loved Cheryl in Boston. If they can afford a $70,000 engagement ring, I honestly don't really care about their issues. They're in an entirely different category of life stress scores. I like that. What else? That is good. All right. This is another one. Meredith and Rochester, the answer to the $70,000 engagement ring seems very straightforward to me. If a breakup occurs before the wedding, the right and gracious thing to do is return the ring. If the breakup occurs after the wedding, it's hers. All hers. Under this scenario, the breakup happened before the wedding. I guess she would have to return the ring. There's another text that I thought was perfect. The story in the globe, which I thought was very interesting. Apparently, the sale of law is in the state on everything but one issue, the law in Massachusetts says broken promises around weddings are not actionable, meaning you can't file a lawsuit. The woman in this situation, her argument in this case before the SJC is, is an interesting thing that the only law around engagements that allows you to sue is one around return to the ring who benefits from the return of the ring nine times out of ten, the man. Here's my favorite text from Mike and Arlington. This is why the exchange of rings for engagement should be mutual. Each partner gives the other a ring. That's what my spouse and I did as well as two other couples I know of, but there's still the problem of the inflated and totally market driven high prices of diamond jewelry we didn't use diamonds. Isn't that the solution? It should be a mutual exchange rather than, in most cases, not all, a man to woman kind of experience. No? Yeah, I like that. She doesn't like that. I'll tell you about it. She's just thinking about going to work for the tea, so she's preoccupied. Go ahead, Cheryl. Well, I always thinking, what would I do? I think the solution might be maybe the man sells the ring and then they just split the proceeds. That's the possibility. She doesn't want to give it back at all. She says she's entitled to it. He gave it to her. I'm keeping it. Because they had a relationship and so like they could split it. How do you feel on the underlying issue, well, not the underlying issue, not the issue before the court, but the whole issue, I mean, again, if you have 70 grand and you choose to spend it, you're entitled to do that, but how does that strike you that somebody spends more than the average annual income in the United States on an engagement ring? How does that strike you? Well, it depends on how much money he has. I mean, what it feels like a billionaire says $70,000 is nothing, right? I know, but it isn't the question of affordability for him in this case. It's a question of, it just feels a little like he doesn't it? I mean, it does feel a little icky, but I was wondering how much I was, I was wondering if we ever saw a picture of the ring. I can't remember. Did you get an engaged ring? I did, I did. It was not $70,000. If it hadn't happened, would you give it a back? Maybe not. Maybe not, okay. Fairly. We're done. I think I'd like to keep it. By the way, they heard all our argument on September 6th, a decision will probably come in a few months. So after the one o'clock news, it's retired federal judge Nancy Gertner, you're listening to Boston Public Radio 897 GBH, live from the BPL. [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] Welcome back to Boston Public Radio. I am Jim Brody. Shirley the Young, Boston Globe Business Columnist is sitting in for Margry, who still has COVID. We hope she'll be back Monday and is doing well. We are streaming from library at youtube.com/vvajews. Join now on Zoom for another dishable on the dock up by retired federal judge Nancy Gertner, senior lecturer at Harvard Law School at a BPR contributor. I just warn you, I believe, by looking at her, she is at the same location where she alleged that a squirrel ate the modem a few months ago and her segment was cut short, so cross your fingers. Hello, Judge Gertner. How are you? Hello. It's been six. That's what you say. Oh, that's great. They tell the squirrel that or not? I didn't mention it. Okay. Wait, how did the squirrel get in? I have a -- it's not in the cabin. I have a line from the main house connecting my study, my shed, my she shed, to the mother and the animal started chewing it. Oh, wow. Oh, wow. Oh, wow. So, Judge Gertner, we were dealing with a legal question just before you got on air. This was about who gets -- a case that's, I think, headed to -- It's at the SJC. -- SJC. Who gets the $70,000 diamond engagement ring if the engagement gets called off? What's your -- what's your take on this? I have no idea. This is a -- this is the question -- the question is whether the -- if the engagement is called off, the ring should be returned to the man? Yes. Yes. There's a lawsuit over this. It should have -- you know, and there was never a wedding. There's no wedding. Right. When hell of an engagement ring. I have the foggy stuff. I have the foggy stuff. Judge, I have the foggy stuff. That's exactly what Clarence Thomas said in the case recently. In any case, so, Nancy Gertner, you've -- I believe it's -- fair to say not a huge fan of the current Attorney General, Merrick Garland. And I don't mean as a person, but in terms of performance. We all have heard Donald Trump talking about weaponization of the justice system as recently as the debate. The other night, Merrick Garland decided it was time to speak to his employees and fight back. Here's Trump and then a little bit of Garland. It's called weaponization. Never happened in this country. They weaponized the justice department. He will not allow this nation to become a country where law enforcement is treated as an apparatus of politics. Two things, Nancy Gertner, one, the underlying issue, the attack on the justice system and individual judges and prosecutors, and two, how you think the Attorney General Garland addressed it. The attack is ridiculous. The attack is truly ridiculous. You know, there are two ways of looking at all the cases against Trump. What is the way he's looking at it, which is to say weaponization? The other is to say he has actually done real criminality, and it's about time that the justice system recognized that. In other words, his escape in prior to years, prior years is a function of people not wanting to take him on, and now they finally did. It doesn't make any sense. The state cases, whatever the -- we're certainly not, you know, controlled by the Democratic Party. No one whispered in Fannie Willis's ears, no one whispered in Bragg's ears, that is to say, to bring these charges. They brought these charges and brought them to Fort Grand Jury in each case. In the Bragg case in New York, a jury found Trump guilty. If anything, the Department of Justice has been so scrupulous that legitimate prosecutions have been delayed because Garland did not want to immediately go after Trump. Now, again, going after Trump for attempting to overturn an election is not, you know, choosing to go after someone for driving, you know, on the wrong side of the road. These were serious charges and seriously contended with. I think that Garland, in fact, has been too timid. The story, at least the reporting is that he chose not to bring any charges immediately after he took over the Department of Justice, didn't even want to investigate Trump. And, again, the reporting suggested it was the January 6th committee of the House that really called the question and finally pushed him to do this. By that point, the amount of time that courts attempting to be fair have given to Trump's challenges have led to these charges not being ready until, not being brought before the election. So, the Department of Justice, it seems to me, has not remotely been weaponized because the charges are real and substantial and troubling and should be something for which Trump has become accountable. Weaponization is, you know, is if you have a, I have this a bad way to put it, a trumped up charge. I mean, when I find really amazing about Trump's comments, I mean, it's so rich that he said this because it hasn't been saying that when I'm elected president, I'm going to throw all these people in jail, right, if I'm elected, if they try to go after me. So, you know, I don't know why he said this at all. And I agree with you, Judge Gertner, I feel like all his charges have been, they've been fair game. Well, I mean, the thing about Trump, which is actually quite smart, is that he invariably takes those accusations and then implements them. You know, it's like he, in other words, he, Project 2025 is talking about really weaponizing the Department of Justice, replacing civil servants who, whatever you think of them, are actually barred from participating in political activities, replacing them with political appointees. So, Trump's response to the argument that the, that all these prosecutions were weaponized against him, an argument which has no basis, is to go ahead and, and seek to try to in fact change the, the prosecution so that he can control them so that they will be tilted in his direction. We're telling a former federal judge, Nancy Gertner, you know, one of, I think we'll all agree that one of Trump's great skills is to take both sides of an issue within a very short period of time. Here's Donald Trump, first endorsing mail-in voting and then excoriating mail-in voting. Here he is. It's time to start thinking about let's vote. So important. This will be the most important election in the history of our country. So whether it's mail-in ballots, early voting, voting on the day, you've got to get out and vote. It's very simple. We want to get rid of mail-in voting. It's really, it's really almost comical except that it's about voter suppression. And the reason we brought it on the agenda today is one of the tactics of the Republican Party, at least in my estimation, is clearly a voter suppression. What the GOP is doing in a number of swing states, including Pennsylvania, is suing to ensure they hope that unless every technicality on a mail-in ballot is met, the ballots got to be thrown out. Some states require that a mail-in ballot be put in a separate envelope. The separate envelope be signed by a witness, that the witness put their proper address, their date, which of course has no relevance to the underlying thing. But their position is the strict interpretation law is critical. And the reason they have this position is because the overwhelming majority of mail-in ballots happen to come from Democrats. Here do the courts usually stand on these technicality issues, which at least in my estimation don't attack the integrity of the vote, Judge Gertner? Well, so far courts have held--now again, these are state court issues. So far courts have held that these are just as you've described, that minor technicalities that don't vote are the core of the legitimacy of the ballot. But what's going on is a multi-front war in state after state, and particularly the swing states, to challenge this. And so all you need is one court to go in the other direction. That's the problem, because our elections are determined by state procedures. And so although the overwhelming majority of courts, in my view, have said the date on the ballot and technical issues should not be enough to throw out the vote, Trump's legal team is trying to go to state after state after state, actually just to swing states to get the one judge who'll throw it out, and that could spell the difference between success and failure. But let me be clear, even though these are state issues, are there relevant constitutional issues that could allow an appeal? Let's assume the votes are in. It's November 5th. I believe it's by 8 o'clock that every mail-in ballot, even if not counted, has to be submitted. Could a challenge to those mail-in ballots, particularly if their number exceeds the margin for the person who's not suing? Let's assume Harris wins by 1,000 votes, and there are 2,000 mail-in ballots. Are there any constitutional issues that could bring it to the Supreme Court, and the reason I ask is not just because I'm interested, but because that could delay the declaration of who the President of the United States is, potentially for months. Well, you know, and people, all of us who are commentators and people who write and speak about constitutional law, don't know the answer anymore about what the Supreme Court could do, because the community decision was so shocking. But there really is, I mean, the question, there's an open question about whether there's a constitutional right to vote that is enforceable by the federal courts. And so could the Supreme Court review this? Sure, because the Supreme Court seems to be willing to reach for anything. Should the Supreme Court reach it? No, but who knows, is the answer. You know, certainly issues with respect to racial disparity fit under the Voting Rights Act, whatever, left of the Voting Rights Act. And what we have found is that Trump's challenges have been focused on cities, big urban centers, where there's a larger percentage of minority voters. So with respect to that, there could be an argument that the enforcing technical rules in large urban centers in swing states has the purpose and effect of diluting the minority vote. And that would mean not that if Trump, I mean, that's something that the people who want these things to be treated as a technicality could raise. But if a judge in Georgia, for example, says that the fact that the date is wrong on the document is enough to validate the document, then it seems to me the voter, likely to be a person of color given where they are bringing these cases, would certainly make a voting rights claim. And that would go off the chain to the Supreme Court. Talking to Nancy Gertner, former federal judge, now at Harvard. Can we talk about Elon Musk? You can talk about whatever you want. I love this clip from Elon Musk. This is a clip about Trump's interview with Elon Musk, and he talks about where he'll go if he loses the election. And again, I told you that crime rates all over the world are going way down, which makes sense. In fact, the next time what we'll do is if something happens with this election, which would be a horror show, we'll meet the next time in Venezuela because it'll be a far safer place to meet than our country, okay? So we'll go you and I will go and we'll have a meeting and dinner in Venezuela. I was just thinking how for Trump, the election is quite high stakes. He either is president or he could go to jail. That is correct. And so, and I was thinking like, I guess it sounds like he will go to Venezuela. Judge Gertner, could that happen? Could he go to Venezuela and escape all his potential prosecution? No extradition treaty with Venezuela, by the way. Yes, he could do that. And that's why there's an issue that some have raised about whether Judge Chuckton, as a condition of bail for him in the January 6 case in D.C., should take away his passport. What would you do? I mean, by the way, I assume if there was a hearing he would do what he did at the bait the other night when I think it was David Muir asked him about his comment in that podcast I've lost by a whisker. He said obviously I was being sarcastic. I was joking, and I assume that would be his response. But it's for the judge to determine, what would you do if you had this case? And he made a comment like that that I'll be in Venezuela. He's got sentencing awaiting him in one court, state court, and he's got indictments pending in federal courts. What would you do? I take away his passport. Would you really? Yeah, you're holding the passport. The standard is given his wealth, and that passport he has the ability to go anywhere in the world. And that comment, plus his resources, and the passport would suggest that they should, in fact, hold his passport. He can say that he was only joking, it would be up to the judge to determine. But the standard, there are conditions imposed on bail that are not, you know, the standard is a relatively low standard, what you think will secure someone's attendance at trial. And if you think that there is a risk, and that's what you need, is a risk, then you take his passport. So would you not consider, it seems to me there are two options for a responsible judge like you were, either take his passport or let him keep his passport and give him a one-way ticket funded by the court. Is that something you'd consider or no? No. Okay. I mean, it's a great idea. Thank you. I'm Kurtner. We talk yesterday to Paul Revel, the former secretary of education, about the fallout from the affirmative action decision from the Supreme Court. And as you know, particularly elite universities are beginning to report on their freshman applications and acceptance rates. And a bunch of schools, Harvard, BU, Amherst, MIT, have seen drops in enrollment of black first-year students. It BU, yes, so you read us, down from 9% to 3%. Couple of universities, Princeton and Yale are actually fairly level, which is odd. But the question is not about the declining numbers. The question relates to everybody we've spoken to in the education area that was troubled by the affirmative action decision, which is everybody we've spoken to, says the goal is to craft something that would pass Supreme Court muster. And I wanted your opinion on what might. For example, one of the things we discussed yesterday with Paul Revel is the provision in Texas, where the top 10% graduates of every single high school in the state are admitted to, I guess it's the University of Texas, the state schools, thank you. And much to my amazement, Clarence Thomas has said he thinks that's a good race neutral method rather than what he considers to be the discrimination of affirmative action. Is that something or is there something else, socioeconomic factors, that you think would not cause the Supreme Court to strike it down as sort of a brazen attempt to circumvent their decision? Well, no, I think that that would actually work. And I think that there's an interesting question, right, is a, on the one hand, there have been challenges to legacy admissions and the term that legacy admissions, particularly by now, would mean allowing wealthy people of color to be admitted, students are to be admitted. And whether or not on the one hand that is important to the mix in the school, but on the other hand, you're leaving out people who are going to Harvard College or Yale would make an even greater difference in someone who has the money to be a legacy admission. So quite important whether it gets around the affirmative action ruling, it really wouldn't be a bad thing to do. You know, one could, for example, in Boston take, you know, the valedictorians of the top five or ten from public schools on the theory that they have, you know, they are good students and should be admitted. And yes, socio-economic issues would be a measure as well. Your question to me suggested that this was a cover to increase African American admissions. That's what I intended in the question. Yeah. I mean, I think that's one way of looking at it. I mean, the other way of looking at it is that it's actually a way of introducing racial and economic diversity, which isn't a bad thing, it's not a bad thing at all. I mean, for example, you know, my father of gartner floor covering would drive me to Barnard College in the gartner floor covering truck until I told him that he had to stop a few blocks away because I was infected. I was in fact a first generation in college, first generation in college. So that's not a bad thing, you know, to be able to get that kind of mix. It's something I've said on the air before, which is the affirmative action debate in life you've got way later, 20 years ago, originally it was seen as essentially reparations. In other words, generation of wealth that was for whites and not for blacks, not because of anything anyone did this generation, but because of redlining and discrimination. And so it was in fact to make it up for past harms to the black population. Similar along the line, the courts thought and the litigators thought that the better argument was diversity. And diversity to some degree is important, but a less coherent argument. So the supreme ordinance that in previous rulings, well, you know, what about Asians? What about, you know, Samoans, what about this and that, if it's diversity, then every group has a claim to being in college. And that's true and a good thing, but it's not the same thing as the initial rationale for affirmative action. Tell me a former federal judge, Nancy Gardner. Yeah, I was really struck by how low the BU in northeastern, I mean, low single digits, how much they had dropped. And I wonder if, as we look at more schools begin to report in the Boston area, I wonder if it has something to do with, you know, Boston's history, you know, I'm one of more kid, you know, maybe a lot of prospective black students. Maybe they don't want to go. Well, the Boston's history existed before the Supreme Court decision. Right, but another reason not to come here, you know, I just wondered, I wondered out loud. I don't know, I just hope that the schools here take a deeper look at why our numbers are failing here in Massachusetts versus, I think Duke went up, you know, in terms of black and women. And as I said, Princeton and Yale are flat, so in any case. And if you have a Princeton and a Yale graduate right here, but go ahead, I'm sorry. I wonder whether part of the issue here is schools overreacting to make certain that they then would not be sued. That's, yep, that's probably true to me. Well, it's sort of like companies retreating on DEI, the first opportunity they have, even before their suit or barely threatened, except by some Republican attorneys general, and they used the opportunity to do what at least in my opinion, they wanted to do all along, which was retreat. You know, Nancy, we only have a couple of minutes left, but I wanted to ask you one last thing. We all know that the sentencing in the New York situation was put off till November by Judge Merchon, but we also know that in light of the redrafting of the indictments by Jack Smith, the case, January 6 case is now back in front of Judge Shuttkin, but the difference is not. And by the way, the redrafting of the indictments was to attempt to have them comport with the Supreme Court ruling on immunity. I believe you said this a couple of weeks ago, you thought based on what you knew that he had crafted them in such a way that they should be okay. But we all know for a while the first briefs, I believe, were supposed to be filed by the prosecutors, Jack Smith, Special Counsel, on September 26, and even though a lot of us are very disappointed, the American people will not have an outcome of a trial prior to voting, is there a decent chance that we'll know a lot more about what the Special Counsel thinks Donald Trump did in violation of law in that filing, or is it going to be one of those circumspect kind of things? I know it's speculative, but what's your take on this, Judge? He has to be clear. I don't think it can be circumspect. I mean, and I think it's not for the public necessarily. I mean, he has to do that for the judge. He has to say that, you know, when Trump called Pence, this is a list of the indictment, he was not calling Pence as President, to Vice President. He was calling Pence as Presidential candidate, as Presidential candidate, and they were talking about things that had simply no legitimate role in Pence's work. Pence was, it was completely ministerial, he was a bureaucrat, he simply had to stand up there and certify the votes. So I think it will be very clear, and the reason I think it will be very clear is if they want a quick, you know, ruling, then they have to make it very clear. By the way, I want to get back to the engagement ring. Please. Yes, yes. You have opinion. You have a decision. Go ahead. I don't have a decision, but it is a state law issue. In most states, seeing an engagement ring is a conditional gift, so I'm giving you an engagement ring on the condition that we're going to get married, if you don't get married, I get it back. I don't know what Massachusetts is going to do, because that is very much a state law issue. The majority rule is what I just described. So what do you think? Forget about the law. Forget about your judge. How do you feel about this? I think the gift being made from bringing back, I mean, personally, you know, I think that that's the fair thing to do, whether in fact the law mirrors that as another question. Judge Gertner, we hope you study up on that important issue before we see you next time, and congratulations on fending off the squirrel. We really appreciate it. Take care of yourself, Judge Nancy Gertner. Thanks so much. We've been speaking with the retired federal Judge Nancy Gertner. She's a senior lecturer at Harvard Law School and a BPR contributor. And after a quick break, a piece out of, yet again, another glow piece. This is by Cara Baskin. That's a great piece. She grapples with disappointment for kids and parents when they're little ones don't make the cut for school or Little League sports teams. We want to know how you parents have navigated this very real part of life for your kids, as well as your own stories of sports and rejection. That's next, you're listening to Boston Public Radio 897 GBH live from the BPL and streaming at youtube.com/GBHNews. Welcome back to Boston Public Radio Live at the library streaming youtube.com/GBHNews. I hope you've figured out by now, Marjorie is not here. She still has some COVID symptoms. We're hoping for Monday, Shirley Young, business columnist from the Globe, is here. Speaking of a go up, Cara Baskin wrote a great piece. So your kid was cut from the team. What now? She wrote. For a lot of kids, their first real taste, I guess, of true disappointment comes at school when they're passed over for extra curriculars, you know, a sports theme spot in the band, orchestra rolls in a school play until the end of the show. You want to hear from the parents out there, or the kids, or kids who became parents who suffered as a kid, if you're willing to share your thoughts. Have you been a parent who's had to comfort your kid who came up short? How are they doing now? What advice do you have to impart to anxious parents listening with kids currently trying out to play soccer, football, some other team thing where some of them are just not going to make the team? And have you been the kid on the other end of this whose hopes didn't end up lining up with the reality? How did it shape who you are today? I asked that because there's some people in Cara's story who 40 years later are saying it's one of the most traumatic experiences of their life, even decades later, and do you have advice for the kids making their way through the anxious period, missing out on the spot on the team? Are you opposed to your kid's basketball players? One of the 11 year old, the sixth grade as a basketball player, and we've been doing town travel since fourth grade, and we've done AAU since fourth grade as well. So I know a lot about these youth sports. So what kind of anxiety is a parent, and also what kind of anxieties your kid have about am I going to make it? Am I not going to make it? Am I going to sit on the bench? Well, I think it's very different when you get to high school. I think it is quite traumatic if you don't make your high school sports team because chances are you've spent years, right? Because you were like eight years old playing a sport, and then you get cut. Now we're not there yet, right, at high school level, but if I could play devil's advocate, we talk about this. When you're in the AAU, it's that the private sports industrial complex, you're paying hundreds of dollars to play, and sometimes, you know what, sometimes you want the best kids on your team, sometimes you want them to cut some kids. Oh my God, I mean some other kids. Some other kids because, you know, the kids who are weaker, you know, it's not good for them either because they don't get as much playing time. Yeah, I know you're really concerned about those kids. You know, they don't get as much playing time, and then you want your kids' team to win. That's what you care about. Exactly. That's true, too. So I can, and so, you know, but there are plenty of places to play. You know, you could play for Parks and Racks, even if it was a lot of opportunity to play. Okay, let me say I am not, by the way, I'm not one of those angry white guys who is in, you know, angry at participation trophies. When a kid is really little, let everybody be part of the deal. As they get older, you lose a lot in life. You fail a lot in life, and it seems to me the job of the parent, and the coach, and the teacher, whatever, is to work with a kid because, obviously, all of them, unless they're Jason Datum, or whoever they are, are going to fail at some point to make a team. Failure is good. And I don't know if it's good, but you can learn a lot from it. Right. I have to say. So you're agreeing with me? No. But let me tell you, since, yeah, I've told the story before, but obviously you haven't heard it because I asked you about before. You said it's particularly traumatic in high school. This was not traumatic for me at all, but it was incredible. My high school, but I went to a high school in Philadelphia. It was a very good basketball. And my high school basketball coach, Art McNally, was actually head of the NFL official. So he's a pretty big deal. Okay. So they're 15 players. I tried out for the team. 15 players left on the team. I was the 15th best, meaning the worst of the remaining people. And apologies. Thank God Marjorie is not here because she said, you're going to tell the story again. Yes, I am. One more time. So I was the 15th best. I wasn't cut. It's down to 14. I was the 14th were a best, meaning the worst. I wasn't cut. Final cut. I was finally cut as the 13th player. So I go to the coach afterwards, and I said, coach, thank you for allowing me to be part of this. I really appreciate it. I learned a lot. I'm really sorry that we had to cut you. And I said, well, I wasn't going to bring it up, but since you brought it up, I wasn't surprised. I was cut. I was surprised. I lasted so long. And he said, if you really want to know the truth, and this is a verbatim quote from Art McNally, the high school basketball coach at Central High School in Philadelphia. The reason was because the coaches and I met and couldn't believe that somebody this big could be this bad. So I have to say-- So you're entertainment. I was not traumatized at all, and the reason I wasn't traumatized is because-- I mean, despite that comment, he was kind to me. He said to me, I'm really sorry you didn't make it. I really know you tried hard, and I'm sure it was disappointed. But this notion-- I don't mean to disparage people because everybody has a different psychological makeup. But when I read Kara's story, and you feel help, I think when a kid feels-- we'll get to your coals in a second, by the way. When a kid feels totally devastated, it's because a parent hasn't done their job. They haven't prepared the kid for the fact, go out and have fun, try your hardest, work your hardest, if that's what you want to do. And if you don't make it, you don't make it either try again later or you do something else, but at least try and have fun. Is that-- No, I think that's right. Because as we all know, not everybody gets into the college they want to go to, or not everyone gets the job that they apply for, right? So you've got to confront failure, or at some point, but again, you've got to learn from your failure. I mean, there are lots of stories where people get cut from a high school sports team, and they found another love. Were you an athlete, brother? I mean, I wouldn't call myself an athlete. You played high school sports. You did? Yeah, I played field hockey and I played tennis. Oh, that's pretty impressive. Yeah, and then I didn't-- I would love to play tennis again. Actually, I'd love to play pick a ball again. Really? Yeah, or at least I'd like to learn how to play football. See, the problem is you're a normal-sized person. I am not-- and when you're this big, the expectation is you're obviously good at everything. I was not really good at anything. I was better than average because I was so big, but I was not better than average because I had any talent because I didn't. You didn't play-- how much you didn't play about a lot of basketball growing up? I would say not a lot of basketball. Yeah. I mean, before high school, I made teams, but I only made teams because I was the tallest kid. You're a tallest kid, yeah. Yeah. Anyway, by the way, an anonymous textor says, "It's not always about me, my friend. Since Marjorie isn't here, who will mention Jim putting his foot through the boat?" This is also true. I did try out for the crew team at the University of Pennsylvania, where I went to college, and it is true. And by the way, do you know these shells cost like thousands and thousands of dollars? Yeah, yeah. My 13-year-old's a rower. Yeah, he's trying to row. Well, the first thing the coach told us, Ted Nash was his name, who was legendary until he died and people found out he was a sexual abuser. Ted Nash said, "You have to be really careful when you get in the boat because it's really thin and fragile and the first time I got in the boat, I put my foot through it." So that was the end of my shell career in that. Thank you for bringing that up. 877-301-897. Again, we want to hear from parents, "How do you prepare your kids? Has there been disappointment?" And if you're a grown up kid, how have you dealt with the fact that I assume all of you were cut from something? Where do you want to start, Shirley? All right. Let's start with Kevin from Warren. Hey. Hi. Hey, guys. Hi. So I'm a, you know, I say little league baseball and I'm currently a baseball coach for my local town and my son's in it. And I think youth sports is much more important than they were when I was a kid. I think there should be more opportunities for kids to play in schools. AAU isn't hundreds of dollars, it's actually thousands of dollars for these travel teams. But a lot of people can't afford it. I think the battle of the computer and the screen is being won by parents who include their kids in youth sports. It can't be on a screen when you're playing a sport. You know, of course, with the varsity team, yeah, you're going to get cut if you don't bake it. But there should be other opportunities that don't cost thousands of dollars for kids to participate in. I wish I had said that, by the way. That's exactly what I was thinking this morning. You articulated it beautifully. If you can't make the first team or the varsity, you have another opportunity to play on whatever level team that is fun and allows you to compete a little bit. Kevin, that was a great first call. Thank you. Yeah, I agree with him because it does seem all or nothing these days. You know, like my 13-year-old, he wants to play soccer, right? But he never played soccer since he was five years old, so I'm like, it's too late for you. You said this to her? Yes. You couldn't. He couldn't. Well, because none of the leagues would take him. He would be laughed off the field because there's so many kids. I mean, we talked about the professionalization of sports, but it's true. No, that's a beautiful job of mothering. Little boy. What's his name? Ellis. Ellis, you'll be laughed off the damn team. Okay, Ellis? I don't say. I don't. You ever say what I'm saying to my friend? I just tell him, because I would love for him, I wish there were these kind of parks and wrecks. Yeah, that's what this guy is. What Kevin was talking about. Right. There needs to be more of that. But even for my 13-year-old to join in parks and wrecks, it's too competitive already. Because what happens is, and I'm guilty of this with my basketball player, he plays multiple teams. He does. He plays the town travel team. He plays the parks wrecks team. Maybe he'll pick, and then he'll segue into the AAU team. So you've got these. Have you told him that he's a loser like you told your other kid or not? Not yet. Okay. By the way, at Anonymous Techs, there sort of has a different position on the same thing. My kid plays hockey, it eats up all my money, and we can sleep time. I wish you would get cut. I'd buy him a mini bike. I mean, don't you think a lot of parents feel, are you traveling all the time to these things? Well, Ice hockey parents, I feel like 6 a.m. to get ranked time. Yeah. That's incredible. He's right. I feel bad for the ice hockey parents. Some of these basketball weekend tournaments where you're playing game after game, some of us are like, I hope they lose because I don't want to go to the next game. That's great. This is the most honest one we've had on the show in weeks. Sarah and Danvers, you're next on Boston Public Radio. Hey there. Hi. Hi. Long time listener first. I'm calling. We love that. Thank you for calling. Okay. So I have to agree with Jim that it is the parent's job to teach the kids really how to lose and also how to stick with something even if you're not the best. That's great. An example of my son was, you know, he excelled in academics and music and he swam for years and he stuck with it. And I remember his teacher saying, you know, I worry a little bit about him. He's never going to have a chance to fail, you know, before he gets to college. And I said, don't worry. You know, he swims in some of his swimmers, you know, that his teammates go to the nationals every year and he doesn't. And so, but he's stuck with it and he ended up, you know, swimming for Yale for four years. And I feel like all along, he never was one of these kids. It was so upset because he didn't win or maybe he didn't do his best time. I mean, I feel like we, I mean, not to pat myself on the back, but I feel like it was our responsibility to say, you know, you're not in this sport just to win and people have different strengths. And it doesn't mean that you don't stick with it. You sound like a great, great parent, great first call. Thank you, Sarah. Anonymous textor, Jim is discounting the fact that parents are just as invested. This is true. Therefore, they don't brace the kid for potential failure because they're equally invested and equally gutted when the kid gets cut. Another anonymous textor, kids need to learn and deal with how to lose and or deal with disappointment, something, some politicians nowadays never learned. Excellent point. Thank you, Mr. or Ms. Anonymous. eight, seven, seven, three, zero, one, eighty nine, seventy. Let's hear from Carol in Boston. Hey, Carol. Hi. How are you doing? We're good. Good. Thanks. This is a really timely discussion, I have to say, because my son just gets cut by his school's varsity soccer team and we had some like a really heartful conversations about it. I heard somebody earlier said that the parents didn't prep the kids well enough to go out and have fun. My point is, sometimes, regardless of what the parents say, the kids want to play for their school. Sure. They said their expectations so high and they try so hard trying to present their school when they get cut is a cut under confidence and it's like really hit them hard. So, regardless of how parents you prep your kids, when that moment comes and they cried the parking lot of the school, it is really heartbreaking for the parents as well. But I do agree that the kids need to learn from their failure. It's not necessarily a bad experience because they should learn from it and get how to emerge stronger after these experiences. But sometimes, it's not the kid alone. You're right. You're right. You're totally right. Don't go away, Carol. We both have a similar question. Yes. Carol, what did you say to your son? And how old is he? He is 13. Okay. So, I let him be proud for two days. I think he has the right to do that. And then, when he finally gets better and wants to talk about it, and I asked him what the coach told him when he got cut, does he agree with the coach reason that he got cut? That's a good one. And he said yes. I agree. But it's hurting. I said, "Understand that." But we can fail, but we never give in. You need to understand what you need to improve. Learn from it. One season doesn't define you. You can try for another season. So, I think we're getting on a good direction with him, but he also said, "If it was the coach of last season, I would have made it." So, that's my point I want to make. It's like, it is also the coach, different coach have different views. And we need to talk to kids about that, too. Carol, that was great. When your kid sounds like a grown-up, 13-year-old, thank you very much, pickable, Maggie, and Concord, who is often here at the library, Jim, I think it's time you tried pickable. Maybe Shirley can give you some lessons. No one gets cut in pickable. I didn't know that was true, but there you go. By the way, let me just say, we were hearing healthy stories, for the most part, in Carabescan's piece. Let me consider Anna, she writes, "Anna's now a 40-something foundational officer with biol accounts, a happy life, and yet one of her "core memories," as she puts it, is being one of the very few seniors cut from the field hockey team in the mid-'90s. "It was so deeply traumatic to my identity, and to this day, one of my biggest regrets was not just showing up anyway for the final day of tryouts to try to convince the coach I should still make it. I doubt I'd have made it, but at least I'd know I tried everything." It's a 40-year-old. I mean, I'm not criticizing Anna at all. I mean, that's her own reaction. But it's amazing that that kind of- Now, the question which isn't told in the story, and Cara can't know this, is how was the- I mean, it's sort of unlike my high school basketball coach, who was really pretty kind to me and warm, how did the coach cut Anna? How did they treat Anna? How respectful was it? You know what I mean? That kind of thing. Yeah. Where do you want to go? Let's go to Tim and Needham. Hey, Tim and Needham. Hey, yes, my daughter tried out for her first musical when she was starting middle school, and she's a fantastic singer, and she actually was very disappointed, got like kind of almost last place in extra part, you know, for a couple of different small roles. But she was really upset, devastated, I told her, "You're a good-ups singer, just keep trying it again, something will come up." The next year, she got the lead part. Oh. Wow. Well, that's a pretty happy ending. How did she react to when you- before she got the lead part, when you told her try again, it'll come to you, just keep trying. How did that cushion the blow for her there, Tim and Needham? Well, she's very self-conscious, so I wasn't sure whether she would follow my advice or not the next year, but she did, and you know, it worked out, so you just got to keep pressing, I guess. Tim, I'm glad she got it. I'm glad it worked out. Thanks for your call. We appreciate it. 877-301-8970. By the way, I didn't ask you, I asked if you're an athlete. Obviously you got cut from some- or did you get cut from some things? Of course not. Okay. Now, did you or didn't you? I didn't. I didn't. But I still remember, I know you laugh, it's like people remember. I still- No, I'm just saying I still remember, you know, when I tried out for the field hockey team, in high school, and you try out, you run your mile, you do your schoolwork, and then you go into the girls' locker room and you want to see your- we want to see if you made the list. I still remember that first time. It was so nerve-wracking, so you know, your hearts and your chest, wondering if you made it. Did any of your friends not make it? Yeah, some of my friends didn't make it. And how was that? They're fine. They're fine. They're successful. And did they harbor any bad feeling? Not that it was your fault. I don't think so. No, I don't think so. But I love one of the parents who said, Carol from the soccer mom who said, she told her son, "You can fail, but we never give up. I love that." I like that. By the way, Aidan, our colleague, says, "At the end of one of my more traumatic seasons of Little League Baseball, they gave me the trophy. I hope this is true." For quote, "Hit by the ball the most times." Is that really true? That's a beautiful story. It's really heartwarming. Thank you, Aidan, for sharing that with us. Harry and Woonsocket, Rhode Island, you are next on Boston Public Radio. Welcome to the show. Hi. Hello. Thanks for taking my call. Thank you. My daughter played record basketball all the way up to middle school. And I encouraged her to try out for the middle school team. And she made very clear to me that she wasn't going to make the team, so she wasn't going to try out. A couple years later, a freshman year in high school, a math teacher who was the women's basketball coach, said to her, "You know, I've had a lot of good managers. I think you'd be a great manager." And so he convinced her to help out with the basketball team, and she was the scorekeeper. So she scored deep all the way through, and it was a good team, and they made it to state play-offs. The first playoff game the coach told her, "You don't have to come score. They have official scorers and stuff." But she went anyway. She sat on the bench, and she scored the game. Well, right near the end of the game, all sorts of commotion ended up, and all the coaches are over at the scoring table, and the scores change it up and down on the scoreboard and everything. And my daughter tells the assistant coach, you know, it just shows him what she had, and he looked at it. When he goes over, he gets the coach and brings him over, and he's looking over her shoulder at what she did, and grabbed the book out of her hand over to the scoring table. He slams the book down on the table. They adjusted the score to the score she had, and the athletic director for the next four years credited her with a state championship because if she hadn't been to that game, the team wouldn't have advanced. That is like a movie. Oh, that's a great story. Oh, that's a great story. Kerry, raise your right hand. That is true, I hope, right? True. Yeah. By the way, I'm really glad, not only because it was a wonderful ending, thank you for the call. That's another thing, by the way. If you're really into, let's say, college basketball, and you can't, or high school basketball, and you can't make the team, figure out a way to protect what he raised in your hand. You did that? So my, my 11-year-old once two people- Oh, here we go, okay. He wants to play. He is not the one you said you're a loser too, it was the other one, right? Okay. I said, he wants to play in the NBA. He does. How tall is he, by the way? He's 5'4. He's not, he's not NBA- Okay, not yet, anyway, okay. Not yet. And, and everyone says, "Don't crush him, don't crush him, Cheryl. Don't crush his dreams. Don't say, you know, it's impossible to get, to get in the NBA. So I, I know not to say that. What do you say? I just said, "You know what? There are a lot of things you can do. You could work in the front office." Oh, you know, already getting ready. Right. You could, you work in the front office. You can, you know, maybe do analytics- You can park cars at the garden. That's another possibility. Is that what? That's fabulous. Well, at least I didn't say, "There's no way you're going to make the NBA. You know how impossible that is? I don't say that. Okay? That's pretty good. Okay. That was, again, the one she's nice to because he's got talent as opposed to the other one who's not, who's not quite the same situation. Let's just leave it at that, but whatever. In any case, Tina and Nahant, which is one of my favorite towns to say, I should say, Nahant. Tina, welcome to the show. Hello. Hi. How are you? Excellent. It's my fault. Thank you. I was calling just to say, you know, my kids are younger and they all participate in town sports. And the level of competition starts at such a young age that I'm seeing, you know, some of the sports, they don't even get, maybe not necessarily my kids, but some of the kids don't even get playing time because, you know, these parent coaches are just putting in the kids that are the best. And then so it sets up, you know, this unfair situation where those kids that could use a little more time and development of their skills are not even getting the opportunity. And then they end up quitting because it's so frustrating to be part of an activity and not being able to participate. That's a really good point, which is argues to that guy who called before, but maybe second level kinds of things. What are you going to say? Tina, you need to talk to the town of Nahant because the way we do it in Milton, Parks and Recs, no one, I don't think anyone gets cut, but it's when we play the town of Rec basketball team, everyone gets equal playing time. Is that true? Yeah. So that every, so I allow. If you make the team, you go. Yeah, like my 13 year old, I allow him to play town, play Parks and Rec basketball. He's not a very good player. No, he's not playing NBA. No, no, no, the 13 year old, he doesn't play soccer, and he's not very athletic, but he loves playing basketball, and he loves it. And so I feel like there needs to be different levels of support for everybody. Tina, that was a great call. Thank you. I love saying Nahant. Now joining us. You know, you want some crab? I've known you for, I have known you. You're look athletic. Yeah, he does. But was it ever an athlete when you were a kid? I did baseball and basketball and soccer. Oh, that's like serious. Wow. Wow. Wow. No. Okay. But you weren't, obviously you wasn't cut from any teams, or were you? Well, I cut myself from one of them, from flag football, because yeah, after about two minutes, I thought, yeah, I am never going to learn this. This is not going to go well. It's embarrassing when the ref is calling you out. So how far did you play, did you play sports through high school? Did you stop in high school? No, I stopped before high school. Yeah. Yeah. So I think it was through middle school. Yeah. So I wasn't the high school athlete. So do you ever get cut from any of those things? No. I don't think that we did that. I mean, they didn't cut anybody kind of thing. I don't think so. So it's not traumatic. Whatever you are. There was just kind of shame you into cutting yourself. That's probably what happened to me. Actually, it was probably Shirley, who was standing on the sidelines chasing Jared, you're not cut out for this. What do you think? I'm glad I wasn't going to bring that up, but since we did, what do you think of her treating her 13-year-old like that? Dashing his hopes and dreams at a young age. You need to understand reality at a young age, and then you either get inspired and rise up. I did all of this despite my mother, or thank goodness my mother helped me. It's good for that. Okay. Enough of that. What are you doing on that culture show? Which, by the way, is live physically at the library at two o'clock every Friday. It is a wonderful experience. You should be here. So what are you doing? It's super fun. We're going to, it's our week in review shows. Oh. So we're going to be talking about Taylor Swift's endorsement. Oh, that's great. And what the celebrity impact is. We're going to be talking about Dave Grohl. Everybody's talking about Dave Grohl. That is the nicest guy ever. What is the nicest guy ever? He announced this week on Instagram, he had a child outside of marriage. Oh. Yeah. You see what one of his daughters did? I assume you're going to say that. I'm going to be talking about it. I bet you are. We'll keep it to myself. Oh. What else? And we're going to be talking about this new documentary about psychics that is the rave, it's getting raves everywhere, and it's just about this culture of the documentary really looks at it doesn't even matter as long as you believe. So it's kind of a fascinating look at this thing that has really entranced everybody. OK. If you have time before your show, if you could call DCF about Shirley, that'd be great. I was going to do it at two, but if you can spare it, that'd be great. I was so worried that Shirley was going to say, Jared, you're not really cut out for the culture show, so maybe you should just go home at two. OK. Jared, thank you. We'll be listening at two o'clock and watching. If you're not here at the library, it should be here. We're done. Shirley, you were fabulous, as always. Are you going to cut me next time? Shirley, the young we'll see next time. Shirley Young from the Boston Globe. You can check out our podcast at 24/7, or our TikTok page of Boston Public Radio. Monday, B.U.'s Head of Journalism, that's Brian Magori, formerly of the Globe, Amherst College, Elon Stalvins, Evan Horowitz from the Tough Center for State Policy Analysis, breaking out all five ballot questions, Harvard's Khalid Jabron, Muhammad, our crew is Zoey Matthews, Aiken Connolly, Nicole Garcia, Hannah Lewis, engineer John the Claw Parker, Bill Piaptatellis on the board today, executive producer is Jane Bologna, special thanks to our BPL staff, Mattie Geier, Bill Francis, Kevin Pace, Jr., Juan Jose Cardenas, Sandra Lopez-Birk, and Brian O'Donovan, one of the greatest people I've ever met in my life, you know, passed away last year, founded the Great Rockport Celtic Festival. It's returned for its first year performances are now through this Sunday, the 15th, eight performances throughout the weekend celebrating musical traditions from Scotland to skin the Navy, information available at rockportmusic.org, that was a huge loss that is still being felt by all of us. Stay tuned to the culture show, We Can Review starts at two o'clock right after the news here at 89.7. Shirley, again, you're wonderful, I am Jim Brody. I'm Shirley now. We'll see you on Monday, let's hope Margry's back feel better, Margry, bye! Bye!