Richard Epstein;

Guests:

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others,” so said Napoleon the pig in Orwell’s Animal Farm. Maybe so. Maybe not for long.

The debate over the legal rights of creatures is gaining ground. Orangutans, bonobos and the bottle-nosed dolphin are filling texts and animal rights courses at law schools. Advances in recognizing the dignity of animals include the National Institutes of Health’s announcement this week of a $20 million grant, funding a sanctuary for chimps retired from the testing lab.

But whether these intelligent animals belong beneath the scalpel at all could someday be a question for the Supreme Court. With a chimp on the stand. So-called lower forms of life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness.

Guests:

Richard Epstein, Professor of Law at at the University of Chicago

Paul Waldau, professor at Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine, adjunct Law professor at Boston College, author of “The Specter of Species-ism”

Corporate Fat Cats are on the run. America’s workers are being pinched in a falling economy. Is this Labor’s big moment? Personal portfolios are in the dumps, job security’s rare and benefits are evaporating.

Recent polls show that more non-unionized people would vote for a union if they could, though only 13.5 percent of the workforce is organized, nearly sixty percent of Americans approve of unions. It goes beyond polls and theory.

On the West Coast, longshoremen are locked off the docks and lots of businesses are feeling the pain. In Boston, a janitor’s union comprised mainly of immigrants is re-introducing the bosses to the social and fiscal pressures of shame, claiming exploitation and connecting with the public.

Guests:

Elaine Bernard, executive director of the Trade Union Program at Harvard University and a long-time activist

Barry Hirsch, labor economist at Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas

Rocio Saenz, deputy trustee of Local 245, the Service Employees International Union In New England.

In the complicated world of higher education, here’s a message for students that actually fits on a bumper sticker: Get good grades in high school, and you can go to your state college, free. Okay, it’s a long bumper sticker; but rewarding achievement sounds so simple, so good, so right.

And as college tuitions skyrocket, many states are creating scholarship programs that reward students based on academic excellence, rather than financial need. Merit-based awards get great marks from parents and politicians, but critics charge they shut out the needy students whose grades and test scores don’t measure up. At the same time, some of that merit money helps out the parents who really don’t need it.

Guests:

Patricia Marin, Associate Researcher, The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University

Glenn Newsome, Executive Director, Georgia Student Finance Commission

and Ken Fridsma, Director of Financial Aid, Grand Valley University, Allendale, Michigan

Christina Sedor, freshman at Georgia Tech and Hope Scholarship winner

Chasing the vote in Minnesota, and chasing Saddam Hussein out of Baghdad; not two stories you’d expect to find under the same headline, but the debate over Iraq is creeping into the campaign rhetoric of an election that’s only a month away.

War and politics, you can’t have one without the other, but Congressional campaigns are supposed to stick to domestic issues, right? Maybe not. Republican pollsters are telling their candidates to run on national security and Iraq. Democrats are shying away from the topic of war, betting that voters care more about social security and prescription drugs. But it’s an election. A lot can happen in a month.

Guests:

David King, professor of public policy at Harvard JFK School of Government

Chris Gilbert, chair of the political science department at Gustavus Adolphus College

Whit Ayres, pollster with Ayres McHenry.

Sometimes a whisper is worth a hundred public hearings. Certainly if you are the former First Lady, looking to catch the current president’s ear.

Nancy Reagan is said to be quietly lobbying George W. Bush to change his position on stem cell research. “A lot of time is being wasted,” says Mrs. Reagan through a leak to the New York Times. “A lot of people who could be helped are not being helped.” A parade of medical researchers has said the same at the Senate.

Meanwhile, the president’s own Council on Bioethics can’t decide if public money should be used in furthering research, so it is calling for a four-year delay. The debate cuts to the very nucleus of bioethics and the nexus of politics and science.

Guests:

Janet D. Rowley, deputy dean for research, Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, member, President’s Council on Bioethics

David Prentice, Professor of Life Sciences, Indiana State University

George Annas, chair, department of Health Law, Boston University School of Public Health

The debate is on, at least in the back roomsand hallways, among members of the U.N. Security Council. At issue is a draft resolution laying down a tight timetable for inspection and disarmament of Iraq.

The draft, put forth by Britain’s Tony Blair and President Bush, reportedly contains forciful language pushing for “unfettered access” and reserving the right to use “all necessary means” (read: military force) if there’s resistance. President Bush says that all previous U.N. resolutions “are being unilaterally subverted by the Iraqi regime,” and he wants something stronger. However, what he asks for from the U.N. and what he gets, may be quite different.

Guests:

Nancy Soderberg, Vice President of the International Crisis Group, andFormer US Ambassador to the UN Security Council

Elizabeth Neuffer, reporter for the Boston Globe covering the United Nations, author of The Key to My Neighbor’s House