we're asking that you act on the portion of the map relative to the embarcadero stanek street bridgeto have recommended approval of. it would be bifurcating, to be consistent with the last issue to take an action on the embarcadero scenic sign issue. all the other mapping issues to a later date when you will address those planning code issues. commissioner moore: i appreciate your explanation. that does not change how i feel about it. commissioner sugaya: mr. sanchez, if lenders to do correctly, -- if i understood you correctly, the motion has already been made. the motion affects what would be item no. 6 which is adding the embarcadero -- excuse me.

stanek toppled what is going on with your tax dollars and the laws that can affect you each day of this session with david collins. you can see his session previews on our website, wbaltv.com, click on session 2012. >> to twin brothers accused of burning and killing of people are back in court for their retrial. travers and tremaine johnson will once again face animal cruelty charges. >> a jury of nine women and three men have been chosen to decide the fate of travers and tremaine johnson. the prosecution is hoping to get a guilty verdict the second time around but the defense insists their clients are innocent. after almost two days of selection from a pool of more than 200 jurors, a jury is finally seated thursday afternoon in the retrial of twin brothers tavis and jermaine johnson who are now 20 years old. in late may of 2009, the then- 17-year-old set of people on fire with an unknown flammable liquid. phoenix would die several days later at a pennsylvania animal hospital. the twins were put on trial on -- in february of 2011 but the jury could not reach a verdict and a mistrial was

. >> i see or have seen 3 stanek -- strands of arguments in your brakes. one of them is echoed today. the first strand that i have seen is congress can pass any necessary laws to affect those powers within its rights. because it made a decision to affect mandatory issuance of insurance, that it could also obligate the mandatory purchase of it. the second strand icy self insurance affects the market. and so, the government can regulate those who self-insure. the third argument, i see all of them as different. what the government is doing and i think it is the argument you're making today, what the government is saying is if you pay for -- if you use health services, you have to pay with insurance. because only insurance will guarantee that whenever means for health care that you have will be covered. because virtually no one, perhaps with the exception of 40% of the population can afford the massive cost if the unexpected happens. this third argument seems to be saying, what we're regulating is health care. when you go for health services, you have to pay f