The World and Everything in It - April 19, 2021

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Good morning!

The authority of Native American law enforcement over non-Indians is fought out at the Supreme Court.

NICK EICHER, HOST: That’s ahead on Legal Docket.

Also today, the Monday Moneybeat. Two pieces of good economic news, best in about a year with retail sales up and filings for unemployment benefits down.

Plus, the WORLD History Book. Today, the 60th anniversary of a standoff with Cuba.

BROWN: It’s Monday, April 19th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Myrna Brown.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

Up next, news with Kent Covington.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: After outcry, Biden plans to lift refugee cap in May » President Biden plans to lift the cap on refugees allowed into the United States by next month, erasing President Trump’s historically low limit.

But that came after Biden initially seemed to leave his predecessor’s cap in place, upsetting many, even in the president’s own party.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan said Sunday that many misunderstood the process.

SULLIVAN: The president wanted to go at this in two steps. The first step was to change the allocation so that people in Africa could literally get on planes this week, and the second would be to raise the cap as we were fixing the system and its processing. He took the first step this past week. He will take the second step in the weeks ahead.

The president signed an emergency declaration on Friday. It stated that President Trump’s cap of 15,000 refugees “remains justified by humanitarian concerns and is otherwise in the national interest.”

But it went on to say that if the cap is reached before the end of the current budget year, then the president may move to raise the ceiling.

That set off a flood of criticism from top allies.

But White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki later said the president is talking with advisers to determine how many refugees could realistically be admitted by Oct. 1st—the end of the fiscal year. But she said it’s “unlikely” Biden will be able to boost that number to nearly 63,000 as he proposed in his plan to Congress two months ago.

U.S. likely to resume Johnson & Johnson vaccine use this week » The United States will likely resume use of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine no later than Friday. That according to the president’s chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci. But he said the CDC may place new restrictions on the J&J vaccine.

FAUCI: Not sure what that will be, whether that will be age or sex, or whether they’ll just come back with a warning of some sort. I don’t want to get ahead of them, but I believe we’ll be back with some sort of indication a little bit different than we were before the pause.

The CDC paused use of the vaccine after rare cases of blood clots were tied to the shots.

The reports are rare—six cases out of more than 7 million U.S. inoculations with the J&J vaccine. The clots were found in six women between the ages of 18 and 48. One person died.

Authorities stressed they have found no sign of clot problems with the most widely used U.S. vaccines— from Moderna and Pfizer.

U.S. hits vaccine milestone amid virus resurgence » Meantime, the United States hit a major vaccine milestone over the weekend. Half of all adults, roughly 130 million, have now received at least one vaccine shot.

Biden administration, Chinese government announce climate change cooperation » The Biden administration and the Chinese government have agreed to cooperate to curb climate change.

U.S. special envoy for climate John Kerry made the announcement in a joint statement with his Chinese counterpart on Sunday.

China is the world’s biggest carbon emitter, followed by the United States. Kerry said he’s urging China to curb its use of coal.

KERRY: We’ve had too much coals. Other countries have had too much coal, but China is the biggest coal user in the world.

President Biden has invited 40 world leaders, including Chinese leader Xi Jinping, to a two-day summit on climate change beginning Thursday. The United States and other countries are expected to announce more ambitious targets for cutting carbon emissions later this week.

Police: FedEx shooter legally bought guns used in attack » Police say the former FedEx employee who shot and killed eight people last week at a facility in Indianapolis legally purchased the guns he used in the attack. That despite red flag laws designed to prevent that.

The suspect, 19-year-old Brandon Scott Hole legally bought the two assault-style rifles in July and September of last year.

SOUND: VIGIL

Many gathered for a vigil over the weekend to honor the eight victims killed in the attack.

FedEx ground representative Ryan Henry told mourners,

HENRY: It’s hard to find the right words for moments like this. I’ve found that best we can do is give each other strength and support, and that’s what we’ll do in the days and the weeks ahead.

FBI special agent Paul Keenan said agents questioned Hole last year after his mother called police to say that her son might commit “suicide by cop.”

Officers reportedly seized a pump-action shotgun from Hole’s home after responding to the mother’s call. Keenan said the gun was never returned.

Indiana has a “red flag law” allowing police or courts to seize guns from people who show warning signs of violence.

The law is intended to prevent people from buying or possessing a firearm if they are found by a judge to present “an imminent risk” to themselves or others.

Authorities have two weeks after seizing someone’s weapon to argue in court that the person should not possess a gun. Officials have not said whether Hole’s case was brought before a judge.

I’m Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: a question of national sovereignty at the Supreme Court.

Plus, a Cold War foreign policy failure.

This is The World and Everything in It.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: It’s Monday, April 19th, 2021 and we’re here for another week of The World and Everything in It. So glad to have you along with us today! Good morning. I’m Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

The justices are back today for oral arguments after taking a break. We’re now in the final sitting for this term.

Today, two cases from March.

First up: A case at the intersection of the sovereignty of two nations: the United States, and Native American reservations.

Here are the facts.

Police officer James Saylor is a member of the Crow tribe of Native Americans. He was out on patrol along a stretch of highway that runs through the Crow reservation in southern Montana. Around 1 a.m. on a cold night in February 2016, he saw a pickup truck idling on the shoulder of the highway. Engine running, lights on. This area has spotty cell phone reception, and thinking the driver might be in trouble, Saylor pulled up behind the truck to inquire.

BROWN: The driver, Joshua Cooley, told Saylor he was just tired. Yet some of Cooley’s statements didn’t quite add up. Officer Saylor leaned on his experience, called for backup, and conducted a search of the truck. That turned up weapons and methamphetamine.

Eventually, a grand jury charged Cooley with intent to distribute meth and with possession of a firearm. But his case was later dismissed.

Our legal beagle Mary Reichard takes it from here.

MARY REICHARD, CORRESPONDENT: Here’s the reason the court dismissed the case.

Cooley’s lawyers argued that officer Saylor lacked authority to detain and search him.

Cooley is not Native American. And although Officer Saylor stopped him on a public roadway, he did so within reservation boundaries.

So Cooley wanted the evidence against him suppressed as ill-gotten. And so far, he’s prevailed on that theory.

Now the federal government and Native tribes ask the Supreme Court to overturn those decisions, because it sets a dangerous rule for indigenous people. It would complicate policing on reservations.

Here’s lawyer for the government Eric Feigin, Deputy U.S. Solicitor General.

FEIGIN: It will also force tribal officers to curtail otherwise reasonable policing activities when a suspect claims to be non-Indian or the officer isn’t sure about Indian status or the status of the land that he’s on. The holding lacks any meaningful support, substantially chills tribes’ ability even to enforce their own laws against their own members and endangers everyone on Indian reservations.

Feigin pointed to treaties, laws, case law, and long standing practice allowing for search and seizure of non-Indians on reservations.

A quick aside: Native Americans have a unique legal status in the United States. In many ways, their lands are countries within a country. But the legal details of those “many ways” have yet to be worked out, fully.

On the other side, lawyer Eric Henkel argued for Cooley, the truck driver. Henkel asked the justices to focus on the simplest case, staring them in the face.

HENKEL: The issue here is about inherent tribal authority over non-Indians. Through decades of consistent opinions, this court has delineated the scope of that authority to exclude police power over non-Indians. Especially on non-tribal lands such as the public right of way here, where Officer Saylor seized and searched Mr. Cooley.

Not this place, not this person. No jurisdiction, period.

The 9th Circuit’s rule is the right one, Henkel argued: tribal officers can stop someone, yes. But their first order of business is to find out whether that person is Native American and subject to tribal authority.
But if tribal officers can’t establish that fact, they can only detain and turn the person over to state or federal authorities for “apparent” or “obvious” violations of law. No search, no seizure allowed.
The hypotheticals came flyin’ in to test the limits of such a rule.

Justice Samuel Alito noted it’s not so easy to figure out whether someone is a tribal member or who owns what land. Suppose the tribal officer has reasonable suspicion that a person is driving drunk?

ALITO: Let's say the — the person has a European Union driver's license and shows plane tickets showing that the person arrived in San Francisco two days ago. So it's pretty clear that this person is not an Indian but would present a danger if allowed to continue. What can the tribal officer do there? Just let the person go?

HENKEL: I think, if the conduct rises to the level of a potential, you know …

Henkel answered it’s fact dependent, but imminent public safety breaches would permit a tribal officer to detain the suspect. Justice Alito pressed further:

ALITO: Can the officer ask the person to come out of the car and perform a field sobriety test?

HENKEL: I don't believe so. No, he can't.

ALITO: So he just has to let that person go?

HENKEL: He can call and radio in to state or federal authorities to come to the scene.

ALITO: Well, I thought you said that the person can't be detained during that interim period.

HENKEL: Well, if he's assess — if he's trying to ascertain Indian status.

ALITO: No, the person is not an Indian, 99 percent clear not an Indian.

HENKEL: He could certainly ask the individual to stay there while he contacts law enforcement. But can he officially detain? No, I do not think so.

ALITO: It's voluntary. All right. So does it depend on the severity of the offense? What if it is a situation where he has reasonable suspicion that this person is a murderer?

HENKEL: No, I don't think he has enough because reasonable suspicion is such a low threshold.

Henkel’s answer didn’t satisfy many justices as far as I could tell. It didn’t sit well with them to allow a criminal to continue on within a reservation on the slim tendril of questionable ethnic identification.

Feigin, for the United States, summed it up with what the tribes are asking for:

FELGIN: It's not the authority to do a full-blown arrest. It's not an arrest in their own authority that kicks off an adjudicatory process. It's just investigation and detention in a complementary role. If the state or the federal government says, no, we don't want this person, the tribe has to let him go.

I think that argument will win the day. It does seem reasonable to let tribal officers protect their own people and property within reservation boundaries, no matter the suspect’s ethnicity. However the court decides, a ruling here has ramifications for tribal sovereignty, law enforcement, and the rights of non-Indians. And it’s a chance to clarify a really fuzzy area of the law.

The last case today presents facts each of us could possibly encounter at some point. Mistakes do happen.

In 2011, a man was negotiating to buy a car from a dealer. Sergio Ramirez and the salesman came to an agreement over price. But everything came to a stop when the salesman ran a credit report on Ramirez.

He’d been flagged by a consumer credit reporting agency as a potential terrorist.

This Ramirez was not a terrorist, although he apparently shared a name with one. Still, Ramirez felt wronged, and sued the agency, TransUnion. He served as lead plaintiff in a class action of 8,000 people who were also mistakenly listed as potential terrorists or drug traffickers.

That lawsuit brought a $40 million award.

TransUnion appealed, arguing that most of the plaintiffs suffered no actual injury. The injury Ramirez suffered could be identified; that is, he was denied credit.

Thousands of people in the class had no such concrete injury. Listen to TransUnion’s lawyer, Paul Clement:

CLEMENT: I mean, if the risk didn't materialize, at that point, I think that's a cause to sort of break out the champagne, not to break out a lawsuit.

Not so fast, argued Ramirez’ lawyer, Samuel Issacharoff. It’s quite a jolt to get pegged as a terrorist. That’s not nothing. And his clients weren’t even properly notified that they’d been flagged as potential criminals. It affects their reputations.

Therefore, his clients have clear standing to sue and receive damages. Now, you’ll hear Issacharoff use the acronym “OFAC.” It stands for Office of Foreign Assets Control. That’s the government’s list that TransUnion used to flag people. TransUnion used that list along with other sources.

ISSACHAROFF: TransUnion created an explosively high risk of harm by placing OFAC designations not in the secretive desk drawer but in the readily acceptable credit files of innocent Americans. Being labeled a potential OFAC match is not a misreported ZIP code. It is the scarlet letter of our time.

Congress passed a law called the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 to protect people’s credit records. Congressional intent is therefore quite clear.

Lawyer Clement, for TransUnion, pounded on the “much ado about nothing” aspect.

CLEMENT:  Nobody other than Ramirez complained. I do think there are a lot of people in this class who had it disseminated and maybe the person on the other end took a quick look at the birth dates, saw that they were radically different, and went ahead with the transaction. No harm/no foul.

If you’ve got a sense of déjà vu, perhaps you recall a case from 2016 involving Spokeo. That’s a people search website that aggregates data from different sources.

In that case, a man sued Spokeo for publishing false information about him. The case turned on whether he had standing to sue. He lost. That left plenty of unanswered questions, including the nature of harm required to have standing. Is risk of harm enough, or must it be harm actually suffered?

The justices let the hypotheticals fly on this one, too. What if a law allows damages for driving within a quarter mile of a drunk driver? You were exposed to risk, but didn’t know it. Enough to sue?

For TransUnion, the risk of harm does not matter if the risk does not materialize.

For Ramirez, Congress provided for the right to sue for violation of private rights, as in the case of defamatory statements.

Tough case, for sure, and several legal threads to sort out.

And that’s this week’s Legal Docket.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Here’s a man who’s serious about his calling.

SMITH: Hey Benny! [LAUGHS] Good to see y’all.

Officer L.C. Smith, patrolman, Camden, Arkansas, works a daily 8-hour shift at age 91.

SMITH: I love to meet people, help people, and do things for people.

He spent four decades as a sheriff’s deputy elsewhere in Arkansas, but retirement for him lasted about 30 days before he caught on in Camden as a rookie cop in his 80s.

SMITH: This badge and gun don’t make a police officer. You’ve got to respect folks. I wanted to be treated right, and I figure you want to be treated right.

Officer Smith turns 92 next month, and when does he plan to stop walking the beat? As he says, it’s not up to him.

SMITH: When the good Lord says so.

It’s The World and Everything in It.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Next up on The World and Everything in It: the Monday Moneybeat.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Two strong economic reports for you today: First, the government reports retail sales showed a big spike up—just shy of 10 percent in the month of March versus February. Overall, retail sales is a measure of everything you buy at stores and restaurants and online, and it represents the biggest share of how we measure economic growth—the GDP number, gross domestic product.

The retail sales rise represents the biggest monthly gain since last May, but we have to place a conspicuous asterisk on the percentage gain because it’s a rise over a fairly small number. And so we have a lot of lost ground yet to make up. But still, gains are better than declines.

And second, weekly claims for initial unemployment benefits. We’ve been watching the trend as the economy continues opening back up and people start working again. The jobless benefits claims fell to below 600-thousand, and that’s the lowest number since March of last year. It’s a significant drop.

Here now to talk about it is financial analyst and advisor David Bahnsen. He joins us now for our weekly conversation. David, good morning to you.

DAVID BAHNSEN, GUEST: Good morning, Nick. Good to be with you.

EICHER: The retail report generated a lot of chatter in the business press. And I think when the listener hears that retail sales jumped 9.8% in March, he or she might say, That’s great, you know, we're getting back. What do you say about that?

BAHNSEN: Well, I mean, there were a lot of data points this week that indicate us getting back and the retail sales growth is one that I guess you're right, average Americans will probably resonate with the most, but it is the one I'm least interested in.

The total retail sales number back in the peak levels of COVID declines. Were never as down as people would have guessed—even though you had virtually 100% decline in some of that travel, leisure, hospitality, food and beverage category—because e-commerce and and some of the like consumer staple purchases were up so high, grocery purchases were up so high.

So all that to say, I will never in any economic environment be primarily interested in what the consumer number says. Because I'm so much more interested in the production in the economy.

So it's an economic concept that is at the moral, and existential core of the supply side economic movement.

Unfortunately, a lot of people associate supply side economics with tax cuts. But the core philosophically, of supply side economics is and always has been, that you must produce before anyone else can consume, and you must produce before you can consume.

So you have the virtuous cycle of productivity, driving consumption, which drives more productivity, and provides incentive for all the above.

This is contrary to the Keynesian view of economics, Nick, which says that all economics feeds off of human demand to consume. And while there's no question humans enjoy consumption, it's a silly idea to dispute that, economically, humans were made to produce and consumption is a byproduct of our production capacity.

EICHER: And so now the jobless benefits number, David. These are initial claims for unemployment benefits. Weekly number. And we should start with some context: At the beginning of the Covid crisis that number exceeded 6 million and week on week. We watched it fall, and I remember talking with you about looking toward a milestone of 1 million, that hitting that number would be meaningful.

And again, context. Before the pandemic, the average filings for unemployment benefits were around 200-thousand. That was normal at a time we basically said, this is full employment.

Another piece of context: Pre-Covid, the highest weekly unemployment filings was around 600-thousand, so that should give a sense of the scale of the jobs turmoil in the country.

But the very latest number has now fallen below 600-thousand, and that’s for the first time since last March.

So again, is that kind of one of those milestones that you'll point to and say, that's a good number? That's a really good marker of progress?

BAHNSEN: Yeah, well, it is a really good number. But um, you have to understand the part of this that is being thought about and talked about, including by you and me on an apples to oranges basis, because when you talk about, we're so happy to have gotten millions down to 1 million, and we're so happy to have gotten a million now down to something with a five in front of it. And yet, the record was 2, 200, that's the average is 200, the pre COVID level is 200. Nick, we're not getting back to 200. When the government's paying people $20 an hour to not work.

It's not quite 20, by the way. So I want to make sure we're a little more clear. Estimates vary state by state, because each state has a little different formula and their own insurance fund for unemployment. But just on the the week by week, subsidy from the federal and state government combined, it's something in the range of $19 an hour.

And I think this is a massive story in our economy, that we have on one hand on the lower skill, lower wage side of the labor force, a huge incentive created by government policy for people to not do what you would think is the most obvious thing in the world we want people doing emotionally, existentially, economically, and spiritually and that's working.

And then on the higher end or or mid-tier end. There are just so many small businesses and companies that can't find the skill level they need of laborers, something in the range of four or 5 million job openings that require some degree of pedigree certification, expertise, and they can't fill those jobs.

Both of those things are two labor markets stories that we cannot lose sight of.

EICHER: David Bahnsen, financial analyst and advisor. Always stimulating conversation. David, have a great week and we will talk to you next time.

BAHNSEN: Thanks so much, Nick.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Monday, April 19th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: And I’m Myrna Brown.

I’m thrilled with the new website. Looks clean, works great, and it’s a lot faster. And I know I’m like a lot of people who browse sites on a mobile device . Clearly, the new wng.org had the phone in mind.

EICHER: Well, it did. Most of our web traffic is on a mobile device, we know that.

The team’s been busy on this for many months, and, you know, it takes a lot of work to make a simple website.

Complex ones, you can toss those up in a hurry.

But, really, the simplicity you encounter on the front-end requires a ton of complexity on the back-end, and that’s why we were saying the launch date was sometime in April—to give our team the time necessary to test it and work out the bugs.

But the great thing about it is it brings together everything we do at WORLD, and for you as a listener, your worldandeverything.org address takes you to the new page. Wng.org is our landing page for everything WORLD, but if you’re used to worldandeverything.org, that’ll still work and take you to our podcast page. Hope you find it useful.

BROWN: Next up on The World and Everything in It: The WORLD History Book. Today, an evangelical heavyweight turns another year older, a Cold War foreign policy failure gives the United States a black eye, and a major league milestone.

Here’s senior correspondent Katie Gaultney.

MUSIC: TAKE ME OUT TO THE BALLGAME BY EDWARD MEEKER (1908)

KATIE GAULTNEY, SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Baseball season is in full swing. And we can look back to April 22, 1876, as the start of Major League Baseball. That’s when players premiered the first game of the National League at Jefferson Street Grounds in Philadelphia.

The fledgling league had plans for other games that day, but they were all rained out; the only one that took place was the game between the Philadelphia Athletics and Boston. “The Bostons,” as they were called, eked out a win, with a final score of 6 to 5.

SOUND: BASEBALL GAME SOUNDS

It wasn’t a pretty game. Newspaper reports said both teams missed plenty of opportunities, but defense and baserunning were the keys to Boston’s victory. The Athletics didn’t have to wait long for revenge, though. They routed Boston two days later, 20–3.

Of course, today’s baseball experience looks little like it did 145 years ago. Philadelphia’s current baseball venue, Citizens Bank Park can host more than 40,000 spectators. But the Jefferson Street Grounds only accommodated 3,000 fans at that first National League game.

MUSIC: IT’S A BEAUTIFUL DAY FOR A BALL GAME BY THE HARRY SIMEONE SONGSTERS (1960)

Moving from baseball bats to birthday balloons, we wish a happy 85th birthday to Dr. James Dobson, who was born April 21st, 1936.

SOUND: PARTY HORN AND CHEERING

Dobson was born in Shreveport, Louisiana, into a family of pastors. He once joked with a reporter that he learned to pray before he learned to talk. At the age of 3, he responded to an altar call led by his own father. Dobson never became an ordained minister, but his influence on evangelical culture is undeniable. The author and psychologist founded Focus on the Family in 1977. His parenting books and seminars have influenced Christian parents for decades. Here’s an excerpt from an early seminar:

DOBSON: You do not need anger to control children. That teacher who said, “I have to stay mad all the time to control my class,” you see, was using anger to control. It doesn’t work. Action is what controls. [CLAPPING]

His views on spanking, homosexuality, and roles within the family, generated a bit of controversy over the years. He parted ways with Focus on the Family in 2009 citing “philosophical differences.”

Dobson’s attention to family goes well beyond his ministry. He’s been married to Shirley for over 60 years, and they have two adult children. In a Family Talk video, Dobson recalled their joy over buying a new car two weeks before their 1960 wedding. But the joy was short lived. A mile away from the dealership, Dobson leaned over to plant a kiss on his bride to be…

DOBSON: Just as I kissed her, the guy in front of me slammed on his brakes, and as I looked up, there he was…

After paying the insurance deductible, he couldn’t afford the ring the couple had planned for the wedding. So he bought her a simple silver band. Then, on the wedding day, the organist was late, the AC broke, the candles melted and the flowers wilted as the temperature climbed to about 100 degrees inside. But, the Dobsons remembered decades later, a great marriage doesn’t depend on a good wedding.

DOBSON: The Lord put his blessing on our marriage, and that was the secret success of our relationship.

MUSIC: TURN YOUR HEARTS TOWARD HOME BY STEVE AND ANNIE CHAPMAN

And we’ll end today with a foreign policy debacle between the United States and Cuba. It’s been 60 years since the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion on April 20, 1961. That’s when Washington backed Cuban exiles invading Fidel Castro’s Cuba. But, a string of operational failures left no chance that the military effort would succeed in overthrowing Castro’s government.

KENNEDY: On that unhappy island, the news continues to grow worse, not better.

Washington was angry with Cuba for making American-owned oil refineries in the country property of the Cuban state—without paying for them. Cuba’s growing ties with the Soviets also worried U.S. officials. So, the CIA under Eisenhower began to plan and fund an invasion attack. They even trained anti-Castro revolutionaries in Guatemala.

President John F. Kennedy approved the operation, with two critical changes: limiting American air support and changing the onshore landing spot to a more remote location, the Bahia de Cochinos, or Bay of Pigs. Historians blame those changes for hamstringing the operation. Plus, Castro appeared to anticipate the invasion; in a matter of days, his forces had killed more than 100 exiles and imprisoned nearly 1,200 more.

KENNEDY: It is not the first time that Communist tanks have rolled over gallant men and women fighting to redeem the independence of their homeland.

Kennedy was reluctant to shoulder the blame for the failure.

KENNEDY: There’s an old saying that victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan.

To this day, Cuba still holds nationwide drills annually to prepare the population for an invasion.

That’s this week’s History Book. I’m Katie Gaultney.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Tomorrow: doing business in China. Beijing’s well-documented persecution of Uyghur Muslims is forcing U.S. companies to rethink their agreements with Chinese farms and factories. We’ll see whether the re-think leads to a re-act.

That and more tomorrow.

I’m Nick Eicher.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio.

WORLD’s mission is Biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

“Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.”

Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.