Progressive News, Opinion, and Analysis
This week on NBC 10 Wingmen, Justin Katz, Bill Rappleye and I talked about the primary elections. And, yes, we managed to squeeze in some anti-union rhetoric, as well.
News, Weather and Classifieds for Southern New England
You can also watch the lt. governor’s debate here:
News, Weather and Classifieds for Southern New England
Secretary of State Ralph Mollis said he’s “personally pro-life” but “governmentally pro-choice.”
Mollis is running for lt governor and his stance on a women’s right to choose came up when Democratic primary rival Rep. Frank Ferri, as well as Planned Parenthood of Southern New England, publicly questioned his endorsement from Rhode Island Right to Life.
“My personal and governmental beliefs conflict,” Mollis told me. “Personally, I’m pro-life but the government should not prohibit a women’s right to choose. I don’t think they should inhibit or prohibit a women’s right to choose.”
He stood by the answer he gave during a WPRI debate. “I think I actually answered [the question] more accurately than anyone. For it to be safe it has to be legal and being that I’m pro-life I’d love for it to be rare.”
Mollis said he had a change-of-heart on his public policy view of abortion six years ago, when someone close with him was considering an abortion.
“Six years ago someone very close to me was faced with that decision,” he said. “I encouraged that person to have the baby. I told that person why they should, all the different reasons. And when hat discussion was done i told that person that no matter what she chose i would support it, I would respect it because it’s her choice and at that moment I realized I was governmentally pro-choice.”
When asked about late-term abortions, Mollis said there should be “some restrictions” on abortions. He said he wasn’t familiar enough with mandatory ultrasound legislation to give an opinion.
Mollis said his views on abortion have nothing to do with how he will handle the lt. governor’s office. “I don’t think that’s the litmus test for lt. governor.”
Calling it “a new low” in the state’s enforcement of the Access to Public Records Act (APRA), five open government groups blasted an opinion issued by the Attorney General’s office which held that public bodies can charge members of the public for the time it takes to compose a letter denying an open records request.
That interpretation of the law was embodied in an AG advisory opinion, Clark v. Department of Public Safety, issued yesterday. It arose in the context of a Rhode Islander who had sought BCI and personnel records for an individual in the State Fire Marshal’s office. When the requester was denied access to the records on the grounds that they were confidential by law, he was charged a $15 fee. He then filed an appeal with the AG, leading to yesterday’s opinion. (The complaint raised a number of other APRA objections, which were also rejected in the opinion.)
APRA allows public bodies to charge for the “search and retrieval” of public records. The opinion appears to argue that because the time spent redacting records has been held to constitute “search and retrieval” time, then the time spent composing a letter to deny access can be charged as well. The portion of the opinion addressing this issue is on Pages 6 and 7.
Below are quotes denouncing the decision from representatives of Common Cause RI, ACCESS/RI, the ACLU of Rhode Island, the League of Women Voters of Rhode Island, and the New England First Amendment Coalition.
Rosanna Cavanagh, executive director of the New England First Amendment Coalition:
“The legislative intent of the statute is thwarted by the Attorney General’s new interpretation which in effect replaces the clear meaning of ‘search and retrieval’ with the opposite meaning of ‘search and denial.’ If this interpretation takes hold it would make Rhode Island the least access friendly state in New England in this regard.”
John Marion, executive director, Common Cause Rhode Island:
“By upholding the DPS’s decision to charge a citizen the costs associated with composing a letter denying their request, the Attorney General’s office has provided a blueprint for government officials to discourage public records requests.”
League of Women Voters of Rhode Island President Jane Koster:
“Too many public bodies already treat the open records statute like a series of recommended guidelines instead of a law that must be followed. This opinion only exacerbates the many problems the public already has gaining access to information.”
Linda Levin, chair of the open government group ACCESS/RI:
“We call on the Attorney General to reverse this position in future decisions. If the office does not, ACCESS/RI stands ready to seek legislation that would establish into law that the public cannot be charged in any way when records are denied.”
Here’s my statement, as the executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island:
“Allowing agencies to charge people for the privilege of having their request for records denied makes no sense, has no basis in the statute, and represents a new low in interpreting the open records law. It adds insult to injury, and is like sending a ‘Dear John’ letter postage due.”
“I want to speak on respectability politics,” said one of the speakers at the #HowManyMore rally held in Burnside Park last night.
“Which,” he continued, “is basically telling a black or brown poor kid to pull our pants up, turn our hats the right way, wear a suit and we’ll get ahead, Alright? Fuck that, alright? Martin Luther King had a suit and tie on when he was shot. Malcolm X had a suit and tie on when he was shot. Medgar Evers had a suit and tie on when he was shot. This is my suit and tie. This is the uniform of the hip-hop generation, my sagged pants and my cocked hat.”
The event was billed as an event to “Demand justice for all victims of anti-black violence, state terror and police impunity.” Many of the over 120 people present, especially people of color, had stories to tell of being stopped by the police and being treated as criminals because they “fit the description. The event was held under the watchful eye of the Providence Police, who hovered at the edge of the park. Ironically, just as Alex, one of the event organizers, took the microphone to address the crowd, the police swooped in on the other side of the fountain to arrest a homeless man for reasons unknown.
“I think it’s really important to understand that police violence, anti-blackness and white supremacy all plays out in our society in a variety of ways,” said Andrea, one of the organizers, “Some of this violence is actually physical violence that leads to death, that leads to imprisonment, etc., but some violence is not so physical. We can have emotional violence, we can have spiritual violence, and that’s constantly happening to us…”
The killing of Mike Brown, an unarmed black man in Ferguson MS, has sent reverberations throughout our country, and young people, like those who held this rally, are beginning to explore ways in which to stand up against racial profiling, police militarization and the corporatization of law enforcement, including the prison-industrial complex.
The conversation is shifting.
Watching citizens and activists peacefully organize around the ideas of inclusivity and respect for human rights fills me with hope for the future.
