Jason Becker on Rhode Island’s education funding formula


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

beckerJason Becker worked as a consultant, with Brown professor Kenneth Wong and Mary-Stuart Kilner, to develop the state education funding formula that was presented to and then approved by the General Assembly in 2010 and is being contested by Pawtucket and Woonsocket at the state Supreme Court today.

In a deep-dive conversation into how the funding formula functions, Becker said he doesn’t think an adequate education for all public school students is a constitutional right in Rhode Island. Adequate funding is the basis of Woonsocket and Pawtucket’s lawsuit.

“That’s sort of the right philosophical frame and it’s sometimes the direct language used,” he said, “but that’s just not the language in the Rhode Island Constitution . There’s actually no right to an adequate education or an effective education. The only lines we have about education in the state Constitution is that the General Assembly should promote education.”

He also said “that local support for the system has not been there” in Woonsocket and Pawtucket and both districts could sue their city councils for more funding.

But he also suggested some improvements to the current system of state funding for local school districts. He said RIDE pays 40 percent of teacher pension costs for every school district regardless of need.

“And obviously,” Becker said, “communities don’t have equal ability to pay. And I don’t that’s very fair. And in fact I’m pretty sure Woonsocket and Pawtucket would be making more money through than almost any change that has been suggested in the lawsuit other than massively increasing the amount of school funding that exists at the state level.”

He also cited the state facilities subsidy as ripe for review. Currently, local school districts can receive upwards of 40 percent of state funding for local projects. But as a practical matter is mostly used by the towns that can afford to pay 60 percent of the costs of improvements.

“If we want to wonder why the buildings in Pawtucket and Woonsocket and Providence are in terrible condition  even though the state will pick up roughly 80 percent of the tab for any construction work that they do it’s because a lot of that money gets eaten up by East Greenwich, which can get 40 percent and can easily pay that other 60 percent,” he said.

We also spoke about why English language learners weren’t factored into the 2010 funding formula and he tries to explain the “quadratic mean” and how it helped Newport at the expense of Woonsocket and Pawtucket (my words not his!).

Listen to our entire conversation here:

Jim Vincent, PVD NAACP: legalizing marijuana is a social justice issue


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

jim_vincentOn the heels of the New England Area Conference of the NAACP calling on Rhode Island to legalize marijuana, Jim Vincent, executive director of the Providence chapter, said he will lobby legislative leaders this session to pass a bill that would tax and regulate rather than criminalize pot.

“I look at it through the prism of social justice,” he said. “How much money we can make, that’s not my issue or my concern. My focus is solely on the disparities in terms of the arrest rates.  ”

Vincent said a recent NAACP study shows that African Americans are arrested at 2.5 times the rate that white people are for marijuana offenses. The press release from the New England NAACP said nationally black people are arrested at 3.5 times the rate of white people on pot charges.

You can listen to our entire conversation here:

ProJo and Patrick Moore not to be trusted on climate change


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Patrick_Moore_(environmentalist)
Patrick Moore

Rhode Islanders can breathe a little easier this morning, because despite the careful, scientific predictions of climate scientists, “Global warming poses little threat.”

Hear that Sheldon Whitehouse? You’ve been wasting your time with all those speeches in the Senate, trying to awaken a recalcitrant Congress so as to act on what turns out to be not so big a deal. Take a chill pill, Senator, and sleep in. Patrick Moore has got this.

Who is Patrick Moore, you ask? Why he’s a co-founder of the environmental group Greenpeace, established in 1970. Moore joined the group in 1971. How does someone co-found a group that’s already a year old? That’s the kind of stupid question only a climate scientist might ask. Why are you trying to impugn Mr. Moore’s character?

The Op-Ed in today’s ProJo was created from testimony Moore presented last week to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, chaired by Sen. Whitehouse. In his presentation, Moore explained that there is no “proof” of the existence of human caused climate change, saying, “No actual proof, as proof is understood in science, exists.”

Philosophers of science are slapping palms to their heads as they grasp the simplicity of Moore’s statement. Like Alexander cleaving the Gordian Knot with his sword, Moore has cut to the heart of the problem. Sure, you might know enough about the philosophy of science to realize that there is no such thing as a “scientific proof,” but Moore is smarter than the rest of us, and knows better.

“Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science,” says evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa, as if he knows anything, “…all scientific knowledge is tentative and provisional, and nothing is final.  There is no such thing as final proven knowledge in science.  The currently accepted theory of a phenomenon is simply the best explanation for it among all available alternatives.”

So climate scientists do not have mathematical or logical certainty, because science does not deal in mathematical and logical certainty. Science creates theories based on evidence. All theories in science are held conditionally and they are either supported by the evidence, or they are not. Human caused climate change is as close to a scientific certainty as science can get, but the genius of Patrick Moore is that he ignores all logic even as he demands absolute logical certainty.

“‘Extremely likely’ is not a scientific term but rather a judgment,” says Moore, which is a statement most people would regard as an outright lie, but if he’s lying, why would the Providence Journal print this? Has the ProJo simply discarded any and all pretense of journalistic standards or (as is more likely) is the ProJo pursuing a whole new paradigm in the epistemology of science?

There is simply no way that the Providence Journal could be so irresponsible as to cull testimony from a climate change denier who has a history of lying, who abandoned the environmental movement for financial gain,  and whose company, Greenspirit Strategies Ltd, shills for some of the very worst corporate polluters. The Providence Journal, under the editorial leadership of Ed Achorn, would never stoop so low.

Right?