June 15, 2025 • 29 mins
The Red Cross is focusing on sickle cell in their annual Dr. Charles Drew Blood Drive. PEMCO insurance asked drivers why they speed. A bill is moving through the Oregon Legislature that would require schools to consider climate science and sustainability when reviewing educational materials. Governor Tina Kotek discusses wildfire funding and the contempt order against the Oregon State Hospital.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Welcome to local Voices. I'm brad Ford. This week, the
Red Cross raises awareness of sickle cell disease during the
annual Doctor Charles Drew Blood Drive. Do you speed when
you drive even a little? You're not alone? Pemco Insurance
ask drivers about their habits. A bill moving in the
Oregon legislature would have school districts consider climate science and
sustainability when reviewing educational material, and Governor Tina Kotek addresses
(00:27):
wildfire funding and the Oregon State Hospital. The American Red
Cross will hold the twentyeth annual Doctor Charles Drew Blood Drive,
highlighting the need for a diverse blood supply, Saturday, June
twenty first, from seven thirty in the morning to two
o'clock in the afternoon at the Red Cross Portland Blood
Donation Center in North Portland. The blood drive also honors
(00:49):
World Sickle Cell Day and international effort to increase public
knowledge and an understanding of sickle cell disease. Rebecca Marshall
from the American Red Cross Cascades Region joints on Local Voices. Rebecca,
who is doctor Drew.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Yeah, Doctor Drew is a bit of a hero at
the Red Cross. I mean his portrait hangs and all
of our donation centers across the country. But he was
an African American doctor, a surgeon, and a researcher who
developed techniques for blood storage and established large scale blood banks.
They call him the father of the blood bank.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
And think about it.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
You know, before he came along, the ability to store
and transfer blood wasn't near what it was today, and
his work really did save so many lives, you know,
over the years. He was the first American, he was
the first Red Cross Blood Bank director, and really we
just honor his memory every year. This is the twentieth
annual blood drive in honor of his name. But it
(01:46):
also ties into World Sickle Cell Day, which we see
that correlation and that connection quite a bit.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
So what is sickle cell and how common is it?
Speaker 2 (01:55):
You know, I've learned so much about this disease since
I came to the Red Cross. You know, it's the
most genetic blood disorder and it can cause things like anemia,
tissue damage, strokes. But really it's the terrible, terrible pain
that people are in when they suffer from sickle cell.
It's when your blood cells aren't soft and round, they're
(02:15):
hard and shaped, like a sickle and it just hurts
when your blood flows through your body. And the only
relief these folks gets is when they get a blood transfusion.
It alleviates the pain. And some people need these over
and over throughout their entire lives to alleviate that pain.
And then on top of that, we are always looking
for sickle cell people that can donate blood that may
(02:37):
have that marker to help combat sickle cell because it
does prove, it has been proven that if you can
find that match from a donor of the same race
or ethnic group, it does help folks that show that
match when they're trying to get blood to combat the disease.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
So really the best way to help is to donate blood.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
It really is, and you know, this with you specifically,
is just really a call out to our African American donors,
our Black donors out there who may not have given
before or haven't in a while. You know, we need
you and these folks really need your commitment to this
as well, especially this time of year. We just really
want to put that fine point on it.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
You know, is there any cure for sickle cell disease?
Speaker 3 (03:20):
There's not, And that's the thing that makes it so sad.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
The best thing that we can do is give blood
that transfuse blood into the patients to alleviate them with
that pain.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
I mean yeah, with the pain and with the other symptoms.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
And that's one of the reasons why we're really putting
the push out for the for the donations for this
and again, if you know it comes together on this,
This Charles Drew blood Drive in Portland is such a
great partnership with the Sickle cell Anemia Foundation and some
of the fraternities and sororities in the area. It's it's
look at it, look at it like a party, but
we're all doing really good things at this party. And
again that's happening on June twenty first, from seven thirty
(03:55):
am to two pm and everybody who donates gets the
Charles Drew T shirt but also a fifteen dollars Amazon
gift card. Amazon dot Com gift card will be automatically
mailed to people that donate. So we try to incentivize people,
not just the snacks, Brad, We try to incentivize people
to come on in and roll up their sleeves.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Of course, now if people can't make this event, but
still want to be able to give blood. What do
you want them to know?
Speaker 2 (04:20):
Well, rinse and repeat in some ways. Because we're in
the summer months. You know when we see a drop
of blood donations in the summertime because you know, a
reduction of school blood drives, summer vacations are happening, people
are traveling. And then compound it with the fact that
people need blood in hospitals because trauma injuries go up
this time of the year because of that outdoor activity.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
So there's that one two punch.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
So that's why you'll be hearing us really make that
push for making blood donation part of your summer plans.
It would a great thing to do with the family.
Go down there, give blood, do something really good and
then beyond, you know, to the next vacation or what
have you.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
And really simple to do.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Just go to Red Crossblood dot org. There are blood
drives happening all over Put in your zip code at
redcrossblood dot org and it'll line up all the places
in your area that are collecting blood.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
How does the process of giving blood work? How do
you start?
Speaker 3 (05:16):
Yeah, it's really simple.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
You'll end up doing a quick screening or questionnaire. They're
just going to ask some general questions about your health
and about your lifestyle and making sure that you you
know you do have you don't have any at risk behaviors,
but also that you're healthy when you come in. That's
a really big piece of it. They'll test your blood
pressure and I'll do Actually they're not even doing the
(05:38):
pin prick anymore. They can actually test your hemoglobins by
not sticking your poking your finger, so that's good news.
And then after you ask those questions, you'll just sit
and wait. The blood draw itself takes about oh ten minutes,
some people a lot less, and then you go have
some snacks and you're on your way, so you know,
door to door it's about an hour, and it you
(06:00):
know you've made a contribution to help more than one person,
because your blood donation can save more than one life.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
How often can you give blood?
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Every two months, you can give blood, and platelets are
a different beast. You know, platelets are the ones that
cancer patients often need. And you can give platelets every
two weeks, which is pretty incredible. And platelets only have
a shelf life brat of about five days, and that
is just such a need for cancer patients. So if
you have more time, like two hours, and you can
(06:29):
sit and watch a movie and they'll actually pull the
platelets out and put your blood back in. That's another
wonderful way that you can give. But for Red Blood.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Donations, it's every two months and it takes about an hour.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
Now, is there an easy way to find nearby blood drives?
Speaker 2 (06:45):
It's so easy again, if you go to redcrossblood dot org.
You can just type that in and your zip code
in and then it'll launch those for you. Also, we
have an app of a Red Cross Blood app, which
is really cool.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
It's free.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
You just go to your playstore, your Apple app store
and type it in and it'll tell you all kinds
of things like where the blood drives are.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
It'll tell you where your blood is going, which is
really cool.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
After you donate blood, you can actually track it find
out where it ended up.
Speaker 3 (07:12):
I love that piece. It'll also tell you last.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Time you donated, what your blood pressure was, or anything
that you might have been tested for when you went
in will show up on your app.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Wow, give us the details one more time for the
doctor Charles Drew Blood Drive.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Oh, I'd be happy to it's happening on Saturday, June
twenty first. I'll be there as well as some of
our partners that'll like I said, it's a really fun
event to come on out and check out. We'll be
there drawing blood from seven thirty am to two pm
at the Portland Blood Donation Center. So that's in North Portland,
thirty one thirty one North Vancouver Avenue. It's the big
(07:48):
Red Cross building at the base of the Fremont Bridge.
But we were going to have all kinds of events
going on that day in food and snacks, and it's
really a celebration in memory of doctor Charles Drew and
encouragement to keep fighting sickle cell disease as best we
can here in the Northwest region.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
Terrific. Rebecca, thanks for joining us on Local Voices.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Thank you, Brad.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
That's Rebecca Marshall with the American Red Cross Cascades Region.
The Pemco Insurance Company has surveyed drivers on their perceptions,
attitudes and actions on speeding. Jennifer Horton from Pemco Insurance
joins us on Local Voices. What does the study find?
Speaker 4 (08:25):
The Pemco study found that Northwest drivers say they'd drive
safely in neighborhoods, but they're pointing the fingers at other speeders.
Eighty percent say they often drive the appropriate speed. Only
thirty percent think other drivers do the same. That speeding
is widespread among the majority of drivers, with nearly two
(08:47):
thirds of drivers admitting to speeding occasionally and almost a quarter.
About twenty two percent admit to speeding frequently. The reason
is because everyone else is doing it. Sixty six percent
of people cite that that is their justification for speeding.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
Do most drivers think it's okay to speed a little,
thinking the cops will give them some leeway, some grace.
Speaker 4 (09:09):
Most drivers do believe in a buffer zone, but that
is a myth and it's a concern. Seventy two percent
of drivers believe they won't get pulled over unless they're
significantly above the limit. And this matters because speeding is
dangerous for everyone on the road. Slowing down can prevent
accidents and crashes.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
Well, do you think this says about drivers in general?
It sounds like most of them speed to some degree.
Speaker 4 (09:36):
I feel like there is a difference, and there's this
consistent disconnect between what drivers believe they can get away
with and the actual risk that they pose, whether you're
on the freeway driving through your neighborhood, speed matters and
slowing down can save lives.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Jennifer, thanks for joining us on Local Voices to discuss
the Pemco Insurance survey on speeding drivers. A bill is
advancing in the Oregon legislature there would incorporate climate science
and sustainability in public school curriculum when it comes up
for review. The bill passed the Oregon Senate this week.
Democratic Senator Sarah Gelser Bluen explains the bill.
Speaker 5 (10:15):
House Bill thirty three sixty five is one of those
bills that my constituents, especially my younger constituents, really wanted
me to be aware of. I started hearing from students
and educators about this bill early in the session, and
I was pleased when it finally landed in the Senate
Education Committee. House Bill thirty three sixty five will make
(10:35):
certain that whenever Oregon's academic standards are reviewed, consideration will
be given to incorporating climate science and sustainability principles and
concepts into student learning opportunities. This does not require new
reviews or that all of these reviews occur at once. Instead,
this is blended into regular reviews, and it will reflect
(10:59):
the reality of challenges and questions that our students have today.
In fact, the origin of this bill came from students
who are looking for opportunities to figure out how to
get their questions answered about climate, about a warming planet,
and about how that impacts their lives, how they can
(11:20):
talk about it, how they can learn about it, and
how they can form their own opinions about it.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Republicans Senator Noah Robinson opposes the bill.
Speaker 6 (11:29):
The problem is this is we're not teaching science, as
he pointed out, we're teaching in civics geography. This is
a scientific issue. I can very easily show that the
temperature of the Earth has fluctuated over thousands of years.
I can show that the temperature that the Earth has
been warming for the last several hundred years. It's pretty
easy to show that there's no correlation between the release
(11:51):
of CO two and the gradual warming of the Earth.
I can show that storms aren't getting worse, the hurricanes
aren't getting worse, are the same.
Speaker 7 (12:01):
This is a.
Speaker 6 (12:01):
Good solid data on this, and yet that's not what's
going to be taught right now. Already in the current environment,
we are scaring children. Children are afraid that their world
is going to end. They haven't been taught enough science
to evaluate the subject carefully. And indeed, on the other side,
it's all dependent on very complicated computer models. And then
(12:24):
when you show the predictions of these models are wrong
and have been consistently wrong, and they keep modifying them
and it doesn't fit the data, we just go on
down this path. But this has become a political issue
and we are scaring children. Oregon's kid governor, who she was,
came into our committee room at one point. Virtually it's
(12:45):
a very nice fifth grader. Her platform with climate change
because she's been told by adults that this is a
big issue that she should work on it, try to
do what she can.
Speaker 7 (12:55):
To stop it.
Speaker 6 (12:57):
Policy out of Salem. We have multiple bull bills out
of this chamber. We have carbon reduction goals. All of
these things are being pushed by the state. They are
not based on science. We don't discuss the science here much.
And we know that it is a political issue. So
when we insert this into our public schools and it
(13:19):
will be I mean, it's nice that it's the bill
is better. The current version was far worse. But we
know what will happen. This stuff will be incorporated into
the curriculum and it won't be an even handed discussion
of the science. It's going to be very political. We
all know that. And when we do that, we are
indoctrinating children. We are not teaching them science. We're not
(13:41):
teaching them math. We're not our children need to learn
to read. Our children are not learning to read. We
need they need to be able to do math. They
need to do basic things. These things are not political.
Math is not political. Reading is not political. Geography is
not political. It shouldn't be. These are basic things that
children need to learn. When we want to get into
(14:01):
the science of climate change, they can study it on
their own. There have plenty of time to look at
it when they're older. But inserting this language, which we
know will be picked up gradually, gradually, inserted into the
curriculum is going to hurt educations for children. It's going
to become as a substitute for actually learning. We're going
(14:22):
to terrify them further because they feel their world is ending.
And for children, it's much much worse than for adults
who can look at things reasonably, And it's going to
harm them. So I am strongly opposed to this measure.
I think we need to reconsider it. And I know
these votes are usually considered everyone's for it coming in,
and I know a lot of people is it's an agenda.
(14:44):
But we need to vote this down and we need
to stop doing this, and we need to start worrying
about exactly what we're going to do to fix the
problems in education, because this is definitely the wrong track.
It's the wrong direction. And show me I'm wrong down
the road road when they actually show the graphs I've
prevented you presented to you here in classrooms, it's not
(15:06):
going to happen.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Democratic Senator lou Frederick supports the bill to add climate
science and sustainability to public school curriculum.
Speaker 7 (15:14):
Our job, in my view, in terms of education, is
to have kids looking towards the future. We don't know
what that future looks like. We do know that there
are some things that affect that future, and some of
those things are scientific, and some of those things are
political and social and dealing with geography, and so part
(15:34):
of the issue is to try to make sure that
we are teaching kids about what may take place in
the future. With the knowledge of the past and a
knowledge of the basic patterns and the issues that are
a part of them. That's math, and that's science, and
that's history, and that's geography, and that's literature, and that's
(15:55):
art and those all of those things, and the idea
of making sure that climate change as a question is
part of that is something that we want to look
at in terms of the future. This is not just
as much as some folks would like to put it.
This is not just a scientific issue. There's a whole
(16:16):
lot more to it than just a scientific issue. And
I think that we need to look at the potential
in terms of climate change. And yes, we have seen
changes in terms of how we look at climate change.
One of the people I got a chance to spend
time with several years ago was Carl Sagan. The time
I was talking with him, it was in the late
eighties early nineties. He was talking about concerns about our
(16:40):
solo a nuclear winter, because at that time we were
worried about whether we were going to blow ourselves up
or not. At that time, that was the big issue
we began to look and we managed to get past
that particular point, but then we started looking at well
as well at the carbon dioxide issues and how that
was affecting the rest of the world. So these are
(17:02):
issues and things that we want to look at. And
when I look at when I talk with I do
something a little differently than many folks do in the future.
When they talk with young people, I don't ask them
what they want to be when they grow up. I
ask them what problem they want to solve. And part
of that, part of their problems is they're concerned about
the droughts and the heat, and the and the tornadoes
(17:26):
and the hurricanes and anything that deals with weather and
as well as climate change. They want to know about that.
So this is an idea of making sure that this
is part a piece, not the whole thing of of
the curriculum that we that we that we look at
in this in this situation, So I do trust that
(17:46):
we have smart teachers, smart parents, smart school boards, smart
state school boards, and others scientists as well who are
going to look at this this particular issue and make
a difference and bring it forward. That's what this is about,
is looking to the future, making sure that the kids
have an understanding of what the future might look like
(18:07):
and what the knowledge of the past brings to that future.
That's what this is all about. That's what we're talking
about here to to I have some idea that that
what we've been teaching in the past has not been
political is uh is a curious a curious concept because
we have been teaching in many cases that there's nothing
(18:28):
wrong with what nothing going on, that's that's important. We
now know that there are some things that are important,
and this is this is one of the reasons that
this particular bill was brought forward.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Republican Senator Fred Gerad opposes the bill.
Speaker 8 (18:41):
I think our forefathers were probably smarter than us, and
that is on controversial issues. They simply said that some
schools might want to teach something that another school might
not agree with. They should have that right to teach it.
The other schools should have the right not to teach it.
(19:02):
That's the premise of the school system in this state.
And that's why school boards are so important. By doing
what we're doing, we undermine the school boards. And I
think that as a travesty. You can agree with your arguments,
and I'm not going to disagree or argue which is
right and which is wrong. I have my own personal opinions.
(19:25):
But the thing is, no matter how you dice it,
you're undermining the school boards. And I think that is
a travesty in the state. And I think we have
to get away from that and go back to the
school boards because with the way that things are looked
at in different parts of the state might not be
the same in another part of the state. And we
(19:48):
need to go back to the power of the school board.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Democratic Senator Sarah Gilser blue and carried the bill on
this floor.
Speaker 5 (19:55):
In this debate, I heard my colleagues speaking about science,
about health, about history and geography, and economics and civics,
and using the tools that come from those disciplines to
put forward the very diverse perspectives that we all have
on this floor. I may look at this a little
(20:18):
bit differently than than some others on this floor. I
appreciate the concern and the hesitation and the lack of trust.
I certainly have things that I don't trust, as you
all well know.
Speaker 9 (20:36):
And education.
Speaker 5 (20:37):
I love education. Education is incredibly powerful. The senator from
the Sanim district talked about our forefathers, well, I would
speak about our fore mothers. Over in Newburgh. They were
Quaker women and may not well known be well known
for being anti suffragette. They opposed women gaining the right
(20:59):
to vote in part because Abigail's Got done Away was
openly for that, and she liked whiskey and they did not.
But also their argument was let the men waste their
time with politics while we work on changing the world
through our schools. So I think the idea of the
power of schools, the power of education, is really important.
(21:22):
When I think about the difference between academic content standards
and academic curriculum, there is a real difference. I don't
think this is saying there must be a curriculum that
the state Board of Education puts together that says we
will teach students how to believe about climate change, what
(21:46):
to believe about climate change, what is real about climate change,
But instead that we will establish standards to equip students
to talk about the issue of climate change, regardless of
whether you fall on the side of climate change is
settled science or climate change is not settled science. For
(22:10):
students to become adults that debate these issues so we
can make decisions in a civically engaged place. People have
to be able to know how to build those charts.
So a standard might be use data have students? Can
students use data to describe different perspectives on climate change?
(22:32):
Can students learn to read maps? Can they learn to
see how communities shift over time? Economics? Can we look
at the impact of civic discussions about climate change and
how that impacts our economy? What is the cost of wildfire?
What is the cost of energy efficiency? How do we
(22:53):
balance all of these different ideas around current events or
issues that divide us. Our schools, for or ever have
taught diverse and difficult and controversial issues, and I think
the place that we get in trouble and I like
this bill. Obviously I'm carrying the bill. I'm going to
vote for the bill, But I would be disappointed if
(23:13):
this resulted in students being taught what to think. Instead,
I hope that it equips students with the ability to
think about challenging topics in a variety of different ways,
through a variety of different disciplines, so that they can
engage in furthering that conversation. We teach in our school's history.
(23:40):
We teach the Vietnam War, we teach the Cold War,
we teach the civil rights movement. We teach all kinds
of things that are incredibly controversial, and hopefully what those teachings,
what those classes provide, is the ability for students to
think and ask questions and challenge their teachers. Now I
(24:02):
am a person that I like to follow rules, but
I also am a little bit strong willed and runs
in my family. And like most students, I have a
cousin who was one of those that said, how does
this lesson impact my daily life? And it was some
sort of a math class and advanced math class. I
don't need to do this. How does it impact my
daily life? And the teacher said, well, you might grow
(24:25):
up to build houses. So she went home to my uncle,
her dad, who's a contractor. He builds a lot of houses,
and he could not do the math problem. And so
she went back the next day to say you were wrong.
Maybe that was not appreciated, but she thought about it.
She brought that evidence back. It's all about looking for
evidence to line up with your principles and to forward
(24:47):
those ideas. I think that's what this bill does as
it relates to the issue of local control. I want
to point you to page two, Linees twelve and thirteen,
which reads nothing in the subsection prevent school district or
public charter school from maintaining control over course content, format materials,
(25:08):
and teaching methods. And I think what that means is
that as this is implemented across the state, what it
looks like in the districts in the school districts in
my legislative district may look different.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
Than it looks in the in.
Speaker 5 (25:26):
The Senate President's school district. In fact, probably different schools
in my two house districts may look different because of
the ideas the students are bringing with them to these
conversations and the questions that they have. Ultimately, education is
about equipping students to handle controversial measures, to evaluate data,
(25:49):
to learn what they believe and what they trust, and
how to back up their own ideas with evidence. I
think that climate change, as this debate demonstrated, is an
important issue, a controversial issue, one that lends itself very
well to drawing on many disciplines to pull together that evidence,
(26:11):
to make an argument, and ultimately to try to make
sense of the world around us, the conversations we are
having and the decisions.
Speaker 9 (26:18):
That we need to make.
Speaker 1 (26:19):
It's Senator Sarah Gelzer Blue and on a bill that
passed the Oregon Senate to require climate science and sustainability
to be considered when school districts review educational materials. The
bill now moves to the House for reconsideration. Morgan Governor
Tina Kotech held a news conference this week where she
covered a variety of topics if she wants a bill
pass that would dedicate funding for wildfire suppression and prevention.
Speaker 10 (26:42):
I am frustrated that we're not further along, but sessions
not over yet. I continue to have lots of conversations
with legislators about the importance of having dedicated funding not
only for wildfire suppression, but for protecting our communities. I
have been, like I said, chatting with a lot of
legislators trying to figure out a package.
Speaker 9 (27:02):
I do want to clarify the position that I've.
Speaker 10 (27:05):
Had in case I don't know the last time we
talked about this on the Kicker, because I think there's
been some misinterpretation of that position. For me, it was
always about taking a portion of one time money to
actually set some money aside. And I just want to
remind people if the highest income earners in our state,
people who make over two hundred and fifty thousand dollars
a year did not get their kicker, we'd have about
(27:27):
three hundred and ninety million dollars out of the one
point nine billion dollar kicker to actually dedicate to wildfire
suppression and prevention. I think that's a good thing to do.
I'm going to continue to work with legislators. I'm looking
for bipartisan solutions here. It would be a terrible thing
to end this session without dedicated funding.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
A federal judges found the Oregon State Hospital in contempt
for not solving problems to get detained individual's care fast enough.
Kotech says it's a work in progress and takes time.
Speaker 10 (27:56):
We are making progress at the State Hospital when it
comes to our aid and assists population. We are reducing
the number of people who have been waiting longer than
seven days, which is part of the contempt order. And
we are looking to find more eval evaluators in community.
Speaker 9 (28:10):
Community based care in this budget.
Speaker 10 (28:13):
So I feel like we're making progress and the.
Speaker 9 (28:16):
Judge, I think just ran out of patience with us.
Speaker 10 (28:20):
We will certainly comply with the order as well as
the mitigation plan that is in her order.
Speaker 9 (28:27):
I will say that.
Speaker 10 (28:30):
Being fined on a daily basis is not the best
use of taxpayer dollars. I am working hard with legislators
to finish this session with key investments to help this population,
both at the state hospital for better evaluation and more flexibility,
but also community based placement. I have a significant ask
(28:51):
in for additional residential, secure residential capacity in the communities,
for folks to be not in jails and not in
the state hospital somewhere else where you can get the
appropriate care to then you know, be returned to the courts.
So we have a suite of things that we are
working on. I have support from legislative leaders to fund it.
(29:12):
It is frustrating to me that we weren't given to
the end of session to deal with that, but you know,
this is a situation we have, so we're gonna do
it the best we can, and I would ask legislators
and district attorneys and the courts to all work together
to make sure we can serve this population the best weekend.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
That's Governor Tina Kotak addressing a few key issues facing
the state during her news conference this week. Thanks for
listening to local voices. I'm brad board you can hear
past episodes on the iHeartRadio app under the podcast tab.
Local Voices is a public affairs presentation from iHeartRadio.
Welcome to local Voices. I'm brad Ford. This week, the
Red Cross raises awareness of sickle cell disease during the
annual Doctor Charles Drew Blood Drive. Do you speed when
you drive even a little? You're not alone? Pemco Insurance
ask drivers about their habits. A bill moving in the
Oregon legislature would have school districts consider climate science and
sustainability when reviewing educational material, and Governor Tina Kotek addresses
(00:27):
wildfire funding and the Oregon State Hospital. The American Red
Cross will hold the twentyeth annual Doctor Charles Drew Blood Drive,
highlighting the need for a diverse blood supply, Saturday, June
twenty first, from seven thirty in the morning to two
o'clock in the afternoon at the Red Cross Portland Blood
Donation Center in North Portland. The blood drive also honors
(00:49):
World Sickle Cell Day and international effort to increase public
knowledge and an understanding of sickle cell disease. Rebecca Marshall
from the American Red Cross Cascades Region joints on Local Voices. Rebecca,
who is doctor Drew.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Yeah, Doctor Drew is a bit of a hero at
the Red Cross. I mean his portrait hangs and all
of our donation centers across the country. But he was
an African American doctor, a surgeon, and a researcher who
developed techniques for blood storage and established large scale blood banks.
They call him the father of the blood bank.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
And think about it.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
You know, before he came along, the ability to store
and transfer blood wasn't near what it was today, and
his work really did save so many lives, you know,
over the years. He was the first American, he was
the first Red Cross Blood Bank director, and really we
just honor his memory every year. This is the twentieth
annual blood drive in honor of his name. But it
(01:46):
also ties into World Sickle Cell Day, which we see
that correlation and that connection quite a bit.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
So what is sickle cell and how common is it?
Speaker 2 (01:55):
You know, I've learned so much about this disease since
I came to the Red Cross. You know, it's the
most genetic blood disorder and it can cause things like anemia,
tissue damage, strokes. But really it's the terrible, terrible pain
that people are in when they suffer from sickle cell.
It's when your blood cells aren't soft and round, they're
(02:15):
hard and shaped, like a sickle and it just hurts
when your blood flows through your body. And the only
relief these folks gets is when they get a blood transfusion.
It alleviates the pain. And some people need these over
and over throughout their entire lives to alleviate that pain.
And then on top of that, we are always looking
for sickle cell people that can donate blood that may
(02:37):
have that marker to help combat sickle cell because it
does prove, it has been proven that if you can
find that match from a donor of the same race
or ethnic group, it does help folks that show that
match when they're trying to get blood to combat the disease.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
So really the best way to help is to donate blood.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
It really is, and you know, this with you specifically,
is just really a call out to our African American donors,
our Black donors out there who may not have given
before or haven't in a while. You know, we need
you and these folks really need your commitment to this
as well, especially this time of year. We just really
want to put that fine point on it.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
You know, is there any cure for sickle cell disease?
Speaker 3 (03:20):
There's not, And that's the thing that makes it so sad.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
The best thing that we can do is give blood
that transfuse blood into the patients to alleviate them with
that pain.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
I mean yeah, with the pain and with the other symptoms.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
And that's one of the reasons why we're really putting
the push out for the for the donations for this
and again, if you know it comes together on this,
This Charles Drew blood Drive in Portland is such a
great partnership with the Sickle cell Anemia Foundation and some
of the fraternities and sororities in the area. It's it's
look at it, look at it like a party, but
we're all doing really good things at this party. And
again that's happening on June twenty first, from seven thirty
(03:55):
am to two pm and everybody who donates gets the
Charles Drew T shirt but also a fifteen dollars Amazon
gift card. Amazon dot Com gift card will be automatically
mailed to people that donate. So we try to incentivize people,
not just the snacks, Brad, We try to incentivize people
to come on in and roll up their sleeves.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Of course, now if people can't make this event, but
still want to be able to give blood. What do
you want them to know?
Speaker 2 (04:20):
Well, rinse and repeat in some ways. Because we're in
the summer months. You know when we see a drop
of blood donations in the summertime because you know, a
reduction of school blood drives, summer vacations are happening, people
are traveling. And then compound it with the fact that
people need blood in hospitals because trauma injuries go up
this time of the year because of that outdoor activity.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
So there's that one two punch.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
So that's why you'll be hearing us really make that
push for making blood donation part of your summer plans.
It would a great thing to do with the family.
Go down there, give blood, do something really good and
then beyond, you know, to the next vacation or what
have you.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
And really simple to do.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Just go to Red Crossblood dot org. There are blood
drives happening all over Put in your zip code at
redcrossblood dot org and it'll line up all the places
in your area that are collecting blood.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
How does the process of giving blood work? How do
you start?
Speaker 3 (05:16):
Yeah, it's really simple.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
You'll end up doing a quick screening or questionnaire. They're
just going to ask some general questions about your health
and about your lifestyle and making sure that you you
know you do have you don't have any at risk behaviors,
but also that you're healthy when you come in. That's
a really big piece of it. They'll test your blood
pressure and I'll do Actually they're not even doing the
(05:38):
pin prick anymore. They can actually test your hemoglobins by
not sticking your poking your finger, so that's good news.
And then after you ask those questions, you'll just sit
and wait. The blood draw itself takes about oh ten minutes,
some people a lot less, and then you go have
some snacks and you're on your way, so you know,
door to door it's about an hour, and it you
(06:00):
know you've made a contribution to help more than one person,
because your blood donation can save more than one life.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
How often can you give blood?
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Every two months, you can give blood, and platelets are
a different beast. You know, platelets are the ones that
cancer patients often need. And you can give platelets every
two weeks, which is pretty incredible. And platelets only have
a shelf life brat of about five days, and that
is just such a need for cancer patients. So if
you have more time, like two hours, and you can
(06:29):
sit and watch a movie and they'll actually pull the
platelets out and put your blood back in. That's another
wonderful way that you can give. But for Red Blood.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Donations, it's every two months and it takes about an hour.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
Now, is there an easy way to find nearby blood drives?
Speaker 2 (06:45):
It's so easy again, if you go to redcrossblood dot org.
You can just type that in and your zip code
in and then it'll launch those for you. Also, we
have an app of a Red Cross Blood app, which
is really cool.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
It's free.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
You just go to your playstore, your Apple app store
and type it in and it'll tell you all kinds
of things like where the blood drives are.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
It'll tell you where your blood is going, which is
really cool.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
After you donate blood, you can actually track it find
out where it ended up.
Speaker 3 (07:12):
I love that piece. It'll also tell you last.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Time you donated, what your blood pressure was, or anything
that you might have been tested for when you went
in will show up on your app.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Wow, give us the details one more time for the
doctor Charles Drew Blood Drive.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Oh, I'd be happy to it's happening on Saturday, June
twenty first. I'll be there as well as some of
our partners that'll like I said, it's a really fun
event to come on out and check out. We'll be
there drawing blood from seven thirty am to two pm
at the Portland Blood Donation Center. So that's in North Portland,
thirty one thirty one North Vancouver Avenue. It's the big
(07:48):
Red Cross building at the base of the Fremont Bridge.
But we were going to have all kinds of events
going on that day in food and snacks, and it's
really a celebration in memory of doctor Charles Drew and
encouragement to keep fighting sickle cell disease as best we
can here in the Northwest region.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
Terrific. Rebecca, thanks for joining us on Local Voices.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Thank you, Brad.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
That's Rebecca Marshall with the American Red Cross Cascades Region.
The Pemco Insurance Company has surveyed drivers on their perceptions,
attitudes and actions on speeding. Jennifer Horton from Pemco Insurance
joins us on Local Voices. What does the study find?
Speaker 4 (08:25):
The Pemco study found that Northwest drivers say they'd drive
safely in neighborhoods, but they're pointing the fingers at other speeders.
Eighty percent say they often drive the appropriate speed. Only
thirty percent think other drivers do the same. That speeding
is widespread among the majority of drivers, with nearly two
(08:47):
thirds of drivers admitting to speeding occasionally and almost a quarter.
About twenty two percent admit to speeding frequently. The reason
is because everyone else is doing it. Sixty six percent
of people cite that that is their justification for speeding.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
Do most drivers think it's okay to speed a little,
thinking the cops will give them some leeway, some grace.
Speaker 4 (09:09):
Most drivers do believe in a buffer zone, but that
is a myth and it's a concern. Seventy two percent
of drivers believe they won't get pulled over unless they're
significantly above the limit. And this matters because speeding is
dangerous for everyone on the road. Slowing down can prevent
accidents and crashes.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
Well, do you think this says about drivers in general?
It sounds like most of them speed to some degree.
Speaker 4 (09:36):
I feel like there is a difference, and there's this
consistent disconnect between what drivers believe they can get away
with and the actual risk that they pose, whether you're
on the freeway driving through your neighborhood, speed matters and
slowing down can save lives.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Jennifer, thanks for joining us on Local Voices to discuss
the Pemco Insurance survey on speeding drivers. A bill is
advancing in the Oregon legislature there would incorporate climate science
and sustainability in public school curriculum when it comes up
for review. The bill passed the Oregon Senate this week.
Democratic Senator Sarah Gelser Bluen explains the bill.
Speaker 5 (10:15):
House Bill thirty three sixty five is one of those
bills that my constituents, especially my younger constituents, really wanted
me to be aware of. I started hearing from students
and educators about this bill early in the session, and
I was pleased when it finally landed in the Senate
Education Committee. House Bill thirty three sixty five will make
(10:35):
certain that whenever Oregon's academic standards are reviewed, consideration will
be given to incorporating climate science and sustainability principles and
concepts into student learning opportunities. This does not require new
reviews or that all of these reviews occur at once. Instead,
this is blended into regular reviews, and it will reflect
(10:59):
the reality of challenges and questions that our students have today.
In fact, the origin of this bill came from students
who are looking for opportunities to figure out how to
get their questions answered about climate, about a warming planet,
and about how that impacts their lives, how they can
(11:20):
talk about it, how they can learn about it, and
how they can form their own opinions about it.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Republicans Senator Noah Robinson opposes the bill.
Speaker 6 (11:29):
The problem is this is we're not teaching science, as
he pointed out, we're teaching in civics geography. This is
a scientific issue. I can very easily show that the
temperature of the Earth has fluctuated over thousands of years.
I can show that the temperature that the Earth has
been warming for the last several hundred years. It's pretty
easy to show that there's no correlation between the release
(11:51):
of CO two and the gradual warming of the Earth.
I can show that storms aren't getting worse, the hurricanes
aren't getting worse, are the same.
Speaker 7 (12:01):
This is a.
Speaker 6 (12:01):
Good solid data on this, and yet that's not what's
going to be taught right now. Already in the current environment,
we are scaring children. Children are afraid that their world
is going to end. They haven't been taught enough science
to evaluate the subject carefully. And indeed, on the other side,
it's all dependent on very complicated computer models. And then
(12:24):
when you show the predictions of these models are wrong
and have been consistently wrong, and they keep modifying them
and it doesn't fit the data, we just go on
down this path. But this has become a political issue
and we are scaring children. Oregon's kid governor, who she was,
came into our committee room at one point. Virtually it's
(12:45):
a very nice fifth grader. Her platform with climate change
because she's been told by adults that this is a
big issue that she should work on it, try to
do what she can.
Speaker 7 (12:55):
To stop it.
Speaker 6 (12:57):
Policy out of Salem. We have multiple bull bills out
of this chamber. We have carbon reduction goals. All of
these things are being pushed by the state. They are
not based on science. We don't discuss the science here much.
And we know that it is a political issue. So
when we insert this into our public schools and it
(13:19):
will be I mean, it's nice that it's the bill
is better. The current version was far worse. But we
know what will happen. This stuff will be incorporated into
the curriculum and it won't be an even handed discussion
of the science. It's going to be very political. We
all know that. And when we do that, we are
indoctrinating children. We are not teaching them science. We're not
(13:41):
teaching them math. We're not our children need to learn
to read. Our children are not learning to read. We
need they need to be able to do math. They
need to do basic things. These things are not political.
Math is not political. Reading is not political. Geography is
not political. It shouldn't be. These are basic things that
children need to learn. When we want to get into
(14:01):
the science of climate change, they can study it on
their own. There have plenty of time to look at
it when they're older. But inserting this language, which we
know will be picked up gradually, gradually, inserted into the
curriculum is going to hurt educations for children. It's going
to become as a substitute for actually learning. We're going
(14:22):
to terrify them further because they feel their world is ending.
And for children, it's much much worse than for adults
who can look at things reasonably, And it's going to
harm them. So I am strongly opposed to this measure.
I think we need to reconsider it. And I know
these votes are usually considered everyone's for it coming in,
and I know a lot of people is it's an agenda.
(14:44):
But we need to vote this down and we need
to stop doing this, and we need to start worrying
about exactly what we're going to do to fix the
problems in education, because this is definitely the wrong track.
It's the wrong direction. And show me I'm wrong down
the road road when they actually show the graphs I've
prevented you presented to you here in classrooms, it's not
(15:06):
going to happen.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Democratic Senator lou Frederick supports the bill to add climate
science and sustainability to public school curriculum.
Speaker 7 (15:14):
Our job, in my view, in terms of education, is
to have kids looking towards the future. We don't know
what that future looks like. We do know that there
are some things that affect that future, and some of
those things are scientific, and some of those things are
political and social and dealing with geography, and so part
(15:34):
of the issue is to try to make sure that
we are teaching kids about what may take place in
the future. With the knowledge of the past and a
knowledge of the basic patterns and the issues that are
a part of them. That's math, and that's science, and
that's history, and that's geography, and that's literature, and that's
(15:55):
art and those all of those things, and the idea
of making sure that climate change as a question is
part of that is something that we want to look
at in terms of the future. This is not just
as much as some folks would like to put it.
This is not just a scientific issue. There's a whole
(16:16):
lot more to it than just a scientific issue. And
I think that we need to look at the potential
in terms of climate change. And yes, we have seen
changes in terms of how we look at climate change.
One of the people I got a chance to spend
time with several years ago was Carl Sagan. The time
I was talking with him, it was in the late
eighties early nineties. He was talking about concerns about our
(16:40):
solo a nuclear winter, because at that time we were
worried about whether we were going to blow ourselves up
or not. At that time, that was the big issue
we began to look and we managed to get past
that particular point, but then we started looking at well
as well at the carbon dioxide issues and how that
was affecting the rest of the world. So these are
(17:02):
issues and things that we want to look at. And
when I look at when I talk with I do
something a little differently than many folks do in the future.
When they talk with young people, I don't ask them
what they want to be when they grow up. I
ask them what problem they want to solve. And part
of that, part of their problems is they're concerned about
the droughts and the heat, and the and the tornadoes
(17:26):
and the hurricanes and anything that deals with weather and
as well as climate change. They want to know about that.
So this is an idea of making sure that this
is part a piece, not the whole thing of of
the curriculum that we that we that we look at
in this in this situation, So I do trust that
(17:46):
we have smart teachers, smart parents, smart school boards, smart
state school boards, and others scientists as well who are
going to look at this this particular issue and make
a difference and bring it forward. That's what this is about,
is looking to the future, making sure that the kids
have an understanding of what the future might look like
(18:07):
and what the knowledge of the past brings to that future.
That's what this is all about. That's what we're talking
about here to to I have some idea that that
what we've been teaching in the past has not been
political is uh is a curious a curious concept because
we have been teaching in many cases that there's nothing
(18:28):
wrong with what nothing going on, that's that's important. We
now know that there are some things that are important,
and this is this is one of the reasons that
this particular bill was brought forward.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Republican Senator Fred Gerad opposes the bill.
Speaker 8 (18:41):
I think our forefathers were probably smarter than us, and
that is on controversial issues. They simply said that some
schools might want to teach something that another school might
not agree with. They should have that right to teach it.
The other schools should have the right not to teach it.
(19:02):
That's the premise of the school system in this state.
And that's why school boards are so important. By doing
what we're doing, we undermine the school boards. And I
think that as a travesty. You can agree with your arguments,
and I'm not going to disagree or argue which is
right and which is wrong. I have my own personal opinions.
(19:25):
But the thing is, no matter how you dice it,
you're undermining the school boards. And I think that is
a travesty in the state. And I think we have
to get away from that and go back to the
school boards because with the way that things are looked
at in different parts of the state might not be
the same in another part of the state. And we
(19:48):
need to go back to the power of the school board.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Democratic Senator Sarah Gilser blue and carried the bill on
this floor.
Speaker 5 (19:55):
In this debate, I heard my colleagues speaking about science,
about health, about history and geography, and economics and civics,
and using the tools that come from those disciplines to
put forward the very diverse perspectives that we all have
on this floor. I may look at this a little
(20:18):
bit differently than than some others on this floor. I
appreciate the concern and the hesitation and the lack of trust.
I certainly have things that I don't trust, as you
all well know.
Speaker 9 (20:36):
And education.
Speaker 5 (20:37):
I love education. Education is incredibly powerful. The senator from
the Sanim district talked about our forefathers, well, I would
speak about our fore mothers. Over in Newburgh. They were
Quaker women and may not well known be well known
for being anti suffragette. They opposed women gaining the right
(20:59):
to vote in part because Abigail's Got done Away was
openly for that, and she liked whiskey and they did not.
But also their argument was let the men waste their
time with politics while we work on changing the world
through our schools. So I think the idea of the
power of schools, the power of education, is really important.
(21:22):
When I think about the difference between academic content standards
and academic curriculum, there is a real difference. I don't
think this is saying there must be a curriculum that
the state Board of Education puts together that says we
will teach students how to believe about climate change, what
(21:46):
to believe about climate change, what is real about climate change,
But instead that we will establish standards to equip students
to talk about the issue of climate change, regardless of
whether you fall on the side of climate change is
settled science or climate change is not settled science. For
(22:10):
students to become adults that debate these issues so we
can make decisions in a civically engaged place. People have
to be able to know how to build those charts.
So a standard might be use data have students? Can
students use data to describe different perspectives on climate change?
(22:32):
Can students learn to read maps? Can they learn to
see how communities shift over time? Economics? Can we look
at the impact of civic discussions about climate change and
how that impacts our economy? What is the cost of wildfire?
What is the cost of energy efficiency? How do we
(22:53):
balance all of these different ideas around current events or
issues that divide us. Our schools, for or ever have
taught diverse and difficult and controversial issues, and I think
the place that we get in trouble and I like
this bill. Obviously I'm carrying the bill. I'm going to
vote for the bill, But I would be disappointed if
(23:13):
this resulted in students being taught what to think. Instead,
I hope that it equips students with the ability to
think about challenging topics in a variety of different ways,
through a variety of different disciplines, so that they can
engage in furthering that conversation. We teach in our school's history.
(23:40):
We teach the Vietnam War, we teach the Cold War,
we teach the civil rights movement. We teach all kinds
of things that are incredibly controversial, and hopefully what those teachings,
what those classes provide, is the ability for students to
think and ask questions and challenge their teachers. Now I
(24:02):
am a person that I like to follow rules, but
I also am a little bit strong willed and runs
in my family. And like most students, I have a
cousin who was one of those that said, how does
this lesson impact my daily life? And it was some
sort of a math class and advanced math class. I
don't need to do this. How does it impact my
daily life? And the teacher said, well, you might grow
(24:25):
up to build houses. So she went home to my uncle,
her dad, who's a contractor. He builds a lot of houses,
and he could not do the math problem. And so
she went back the next day to say you were wrong.
Maybe that was not appreciated, but she thought about it.
She brought that evidence back. It's all about looking for
evidence to line up with your principles and to forward
(24:47):
those ideas. I think that's what this bill does as
it relates to the issue of local control. I want
to point you to page two, Linees twelve and thirteen,
which reads nothing in the subsection prevent school district or
public charter school from maintaining control over course content, format materials,
(25:08):
and teaching methods. And I think what that means is
that as this is implemented across the state, what it
looks like in the districts in the school districts in
my legislative district may look different.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
Than it looks in the in.
Speaker 5 (25:26):
The Senate President's school district. In fact, probably different schools
in my two house districts may look different because of
the ideas the students are bringing with them to these
conversations and the questions that they have. Ultimately, education is
about equipping students to handle controversial measures, to evaluate data,
(25:49):
to learn what they believe and what they trust, and
how to back up their own ideas with evidence. I
think that climate change, as this debate demonstrated, is an
important issue, a controversial issue, one that lends itself very
well to drawing on many disciplines to pull together that evidence,
(26:11):
to make an argument, and ultimately to try to make
sense of the world around us, the conversations we are
having and the decisions.
Speaker 9 (26:18):
That we need to make.
Speaker 1 (26:19):
It's Senator Sarah Gelzer Blue and on a bill that
passed the Oregon Senate to require climate science and sustainability
to be considered when school districts review educational materials. The
bill now moves to the House for reconsideration. Morgan Governor
Tina Kotech held a news conference this week where she
covered a variety of topics if she wants a bill
pass that would dedicate funding for wildfire suppression and prevention.
Speaker 10 (26:42):
I am frustrated that we're not further along, but sessions
not over yet. I continue to have lots of conversations
with legislators about the importance of having dedicated funding not
only for wildfire suppression, but for protecting our communities. I
have been, like I said, chatting with a lot of
legislators trying to figure out a package.
Speaker 9 (27:02):
I do want to clarify the position that I've.
Speaker 10 (27:05):
Had in case I don't know the last time we
talked about this on the Kicker, because I think there's
been some misinterpretation of that position. For me, it was
always about taking a portion of one time money to
actually set some money aside. And I just want to
remind people if the highest income earners in our state,
people who make over two hundred and fifty thousand dollars
a year did not get their kicker, we'd have about
(27:27):
three hundred and ninety million dollars out of the one
point nine billion dollar kicker to actually dedicate to wildfire
suppression and prevention. I think that's a good thing to do.
I'm going to continue to work with legislators. I'm looking
for bipartisan solutions here. It would be a terrible thing
to end this session without dedicated funding.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
A federal judges found the Oregon State Hospital in contempt
for not solving problems to get detained individual's care fast enough.
Kotech says it's a work in progress and takes time.
Speaker 10 (27:56):
We are making progress at the State Hospital when it
comes to our aid and assists population. We are reducing
the number of people who have been waiting longer than
seven days, which is part of the contempt order. And
we are looking to find more eval evaluators in community.
Speaker 9 (28:10):
Community based care in this budget.
Speaker 10 (28:13):
So I feel like we're making progress and the.
Speaker 9 (28:16):
Judge, I think just ran out of patience with us.
Speaker 10 (28:20):
We will certainly comply with the order as well as
the mitigation plan that is in her order.
Speaker 9 (28:27):
I will say that.
Speaker 10 (28:30):
Being fined on a daily basis is not the best
use of taxpayer dollars. I am working hard with legislators
to finish this session with key investments to help this population,
both at the state hospital for better evaluation and more flexibility,
but also community based placement. I have a significant ask
(28:51):
in for additional residential, secure residential capacity in the communities,
for folks to be not in jails and not in
the state hospital somewhere else where you can get the
appropriate care to then you know, be returned to the courts.
So we have a suite of things that we are
working on. I have support from legislative leaders to fund it.
(29:12):
It is frustrating to me that we weren't given to
the end of session to deal with that, but you know,
this is a situation we have, so we're gonna do
it the best we can, and I would ask legislators
and district attorneys and the courts to all work together
to make sure we can serve this population the best weekend.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
That's Governor Tina Kotak addressing a few key issues facing
the state during her news conference this week. Thanks for
listening to local voices. I'm brad board you can hear
past episodes on the iHeartRadio app under the podcast tab.
Local Voices is a public affairs presentation from iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com