RI schools over-suspend students with disabilities


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

Percentage of Student Body SuspendedStudents with disabilities across Rhode Island are suspended from school at rates more than twice as high, on average, as their representation in the student body, an ACLU of Rhode Island report has found. These disproportionate suspension rates, like those that impact racial minorities, begin in the earliest grades, and are often for low-risk behavioral issues that could be addressed in other ways. During the 2013-2014 school year, every school district in Rhode Island and all but two charter schools over-suspended students with disabilities.

The ACLU report, “Suspended Education: The Over-Suspension of Students With Disabilities in Rhode Island,” found that students with disabilities comprised 32.90% of all suspensions between 2005 and 2014. This is more than twice what is expected, given that they made up just 16.11% of the student body population on average during that time. The report further noted that students with disabilities are over-suspended at the highest rates when they are in elementary school—a particularly vulnerable time when they should be receiving much-needed individualized support, not punishment.

Among our other findings:

  • Despite nationwide recommendations that suspensions carry significant risks and should be used only for the most serious infractions, suspensions of students, and students with disabilities, are often issued for low-risk, behavioral infractions. Further, nearly 36% of suspensions for such offenses over the years studied were given to children with disabilities, 2.23 times the rate expected given their representation in the population.
  • Twenty school districts and eight charter schools suspended students with disabilities at rates twice, or more than twice, as high as would be expected during the 2013-2014 school year alone.
  • Suspension disparities against students with disabilities begin, and are at their highest, in elementary school. Thirty-eight percent of suspensions for elementary school students were issued to students with disabilities, 2.58 times higher than expected given their representation in the population. High school students with disabilities were suspended nearly twice as often as expected.
  • The labels assigned to the behavior of even the youngest students call into question the overreliance on suspensions for normal childhood roughhousing. During the 2013-2014 school year, 266 suspensions for fighting or assault were issued to students between kindergarten and the second grade; 21.05% of these suspensions were issued to students with disabilities.
  • Altogether, 14.45% of students with disabilities were suspended at least once between 2005 and 2014, compared to just 6.65% of students without disabilities.

From the report: “The figures suggest that, while students with disabilities are supposed to be given myriad services, they are being removed from school not because of their behavior, but because of the failure of schools to meet their needs. Worse, they are being disproportionately suspended for relatively minor, and often subjective, infractions.”

In the report, we offer a series of recommendations to keep students in the classroom, including passage of legislation currently before the General Assembly that would limit the use of out-of-school suspensions for only the most serious offenses. We further recommended that the Rhode Island Department of Education and local school districts examine their data to identify disparities in the suspension rates of students with disabilities, develop plans to reduce those disparities, and investigate alternative evidence-based disciplinary methods.

Suspensions have for too long been a first response to children’s behavior instead of a last resort. That Rhode Island’s children with disabilities are suspended even when federal law requires they be given particular behavioral supports only underscores the overreliance on suspensions to address the behavior that comes with being a child. Children with disabilities deserve better than a ‘troublemaker’ label and a trip down the school-to-prison pipeline, and Rhode Island must work to do better by them.

Tolls, trucks and transportation: the contours of this debate


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

Speaker Nicolas Mattiello has indicated that he may not include tolls for trucks on Rhode Island highways. I’d like to summarize the debate and highlight some ways that Rhode Island can move forward with reasonable compromises on this issue.

Singling out one industry

The trucking industry has been remarkably successful with a talking point: they say that tolling trucks is “singling out one industry” for a special charge. This raises the hackles of business-oriented members of the Assembly.

Expect more. Pay less. Strong Towns blog says this is more than just a slogan for the trucking industry.

The truth of the matter is that truckers are being singled out: for an unusually large subsidy. Director Peter Alviti of RIDOT spoke Monday night for several hours at the Finance Committee meeting, and one of the most important points he made is that trucks cause around 3/4 of the damage on roads, but only pay 19% of the costs of upkeeping them. With new tolls, that number would double, but essentially trucks will still be paying fifty cents to the dollar for the damage they leave behind them.

Some members of the Finance Committee were concerned at what it would mean if trucks decided to circumvent Rhode Island for through-trips. While it’s always smart to think about how a particular tax or fee might be evaded, in this case the worry doesn’t make sense. The truckers are like customers who show up to your lemonade stand: each cup is costing you a dollar to make, but you charge them $0.50 each time. This is a financial loss. You can’t make up that loss on volume, as any fifth grader could tell you. And so the only trucks we should really want in our state (at least at the present toll rates) are those that directly serve our households or businesses. And try as they might, truckers who are coming to directly serve us can’t avoid the tolls.

Fiscally-conservative urbanist blog Strong Towns talks very clearly in this article about why “the real welfare Cadillacs have 18 wheels.”

Why are we bonding for infrastructure?

A serious concern which may be holding up tolls are questions about whether we should be bonding (taking on public debt) to fund infrastructure projects. The tolls raise $700 million plus $200 million for debt service to repay the bonds. Concerns about bonding were raised by left (Rep. Tanzi) and right (Rep. Patricia Morgan), but were generally raised more intensely by conservative members of the Finance Committee.

Portland, Oregon’s Harbor Drive was once a highway. No longer.

Director Alviti pointed out that the long-term cost of our bridges falling into disrepair and needing to be completely replaced is much higher than the $200 million in debt service. Of course, said the director, there is a cost to financing these projects. But the overall net effect is a savings for taxpayers. Alviti used a metaphor over and over: fixing a road or bridge now is akin to replacing the broken hinge on a door. Waiting for perfect financing is like letting the door fall off the hinges and break entirely.

The ugliness of Harbor Drive when it was a highway belies the fact that highway infrastructure is also more expensive, and worse for development and the environment.

I agree with Director Alviti’s metaphor, but would like to expand on it. Debt service to help us fix our projects now is somewhat akin to fixing a hinge, instead of replacing the door. The difference is that in Rhode Island, we have a house that has too many doors.

With 4:7 dollars from the tolls going to capital expenses for the 6/10 Connector, the state should be giving serious consideration to whether we’re overbuilt in our highway system. Already, I’ve been very encouraged (and, frankly, surprised) at the outpouring of bipartisan support for exploring a boulevard on 6/10 to save money. A boulevard would be better for Providence and Cranston neighborhoods, would be better for our environment, but would also greatly reduce costs. This morning, Rep. Patricia Morgan tweeted me to signal her support, joining a consensus that includes West Side Councilman Bryan Principe, UNITE-HERE local 217, Environmental Committee Chair Art B. Handy, Minority Leader Brian C. Newberry, and Rep. Daniel Reilly. You really could not find a more politically diverse group of people who agree on this issue. As Speaker Mattiello explores whether to continue to subsidize the trucking industry, he should address the concerns of fiscal conservatives by including language in the toll bill requiring RIDOT to explore reduction of highway capacity as a cost-saving option.

Contact the Speaker

It needs to be clear to Speaker Mattiello that Rhode Islanders expect him to charge a fair(er) price for truck use of our highways. To not do so is to put the cost on the backs of other road users, and possibly leave our roads in a condition that is embarrassing and unsafe. But Mattiello should address the concerns of fiscal conservatives as well, mandating a reduction of costs by an over-stretched RIDOT.

Fiscal conservatives and environmental/social justice liberals have a budding consensus that part of the problem with our road system is that we’re spending too much money for bad outcomes. Addressing this is a way forward: The Speaker can reduce the overall amount of money needed to be raised, thus lowering tolls. Conservatives will feel that they’ve had a victory. Liberals, too, will be happy. And our state’s infrastructure needs will be addressed in a way that gives all sides part of what they want.

Contact Speaker Mattiello’s office, and email me at transportprovidence@gmail.com or tweet me @transportpvd to let me know that you have.

~~~~

Community organizations file petition to delay high stakes testing


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

standardized-testingThe ACLU of Rhode Island and a coalition of 11 other organizations representing youth, parents, the disability community, and civil rights activists Tuesday filed a formal petition with the state Council on Elementary and Secondary Education to initiate a public rule-making process to bar school districts from using high-stakes testing as a graduation requirement or grading tool before 2020.

After the Rhode Island General Assembly approved a moratorium last year on the use of high-stakes testing until at least 2017, the Council, with support from the Commissioner of Education, proposed to continue the moratorium until 2020 in order to ensure students, parents, and teachers had adequate time to prepare for the new PARCC test. However, in adopting final regulations, the Council reversed itself and instead gave school districts the authority, if they chose, to institute high-stakes testing with the class of 2017. Shortly thereafter, the Commissioner unilaterally advised districts that they could also begin using PARCC scores as a component of students’ grades as early as this coming year. These developments prompted our petition.

Under the Administrative Procedures Act, the Council has 30 days to respond, either by denying the petition or by initiating a rule-making process where the public can testify and the Council can consider whether to accept, modify, or reject the proposal. Accepting the petition would provide the public with its first real opportunity to discuss the Council’s expedited schedule for use of the PARCC.

In the letter accompanying the petition, we pointed out that across the country school districts are encountering problems with the implementation of statewide standardized testing; more parents, teachers, and students are opposing such testing; and the number of states using PARCC had declined from 25 to 13 in just a few years. Waiting until 2020 to use PARCC scores against students was necessary in order to give RIDE and school districts “adequate time to put the instructional and other supports in place to give every student a fair chance to pass the PARCC.”

In addition to the ACLU of RI, the Coalition to Defend Public Education, George Wiley Center, NAACP Providence Branch, National Association of Social Workers/RI Chapter, Parent Support Network of Rhode Island, Parents Across Rhode Island, Providence Student Union, Rhode Island Disability Law Center, Rhode Island Teachers of English Language Learners, Tides Family Services, and Young Voices signed on to the petition.

We emphasized to the Council that it did not need to take a definitive stand on the merits of the petition in order to initiate rule-change proceedings. “Although we hope to ultimately convince you of the merits of this rule change, we trust you agree it is at least worthy of a full public discussion, and of one sooner rather than later,” our letter stated.

Jean Ann Guliano, from Parents Across Rhode Island, said: “Once again, the state has implemented a top down mandate without providing parents a meaningful mechanism to hold districts accountable. Districts are simply not providing students – particularly those living in poverty, or with special needs or limited English proficiency — the supports that RIDE requires districts to provide and that students need to do well on the PARCC. Students should not be the ones held accountable for poor testing preparation.  This policy needs to change.”

For more on the ACLU’s efforts to halt high-stakes testing in Rhode Island, visit our issues page here.

Q&A on the 6/10 Connector


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

The 6/10 Connector rips Olneyville and Valley apart from Federal Hill and the West End. Replacing it with a boulevard would be less expensive and reconnect these neighboring parts of the city.

With Governor Raimondo’s recent push for transportation funding, people are talking about patching up the 6/10 Connector vs. replacing it with a boulevard. Best practice in urban design recommends replacing urban highways with boulevards. But that would be something we haven’t done before in Rhode Island, so it’s understandable that some people have concerns. Here are a few questions I thought you might have about updating the 6/10 Connector for the 21st century.

  1. That’s a big change. Wouldn’t it be expensive to remove the highway?Governor Raimondo is proposing a tractor-trailer toll that would allow the state to bond for $700 million. $400 million of that (plus another $400 million RIDOT wants to get from the Feds) is earmarked for the 6/10 Connector repairs. That is expensive.

    Prices vary a lot for building highways, but urban highways with as many overpasses as the 6/10 Connector tend to be on the high end of the scale (and $800 million is quite high). Boulevards (think Memorial Boulevard in Providence, but more multimodal) tend to have a cost roughly ten times lower than an urban highway. Imagine how many structurally-deficient bridges we could make safe with an extra $360-720 million? That’s a very rough cost comparison, but what we can be sure of is that replacing the 6/10 Connector with a boulevard (even tripped out with the best complete streets features you can think of) would cost dramatically less than rebuilding it as a highway.

  2. So many cars use the connector! Wouldn’t removing it create massive traffic jams?Actually many cities have removed excessive urban highways and seen no marked increase in traffic. There are a couple reasons for this. Traffic is created through a process called “induced demand” where if you build more highways, drivers will use them. Conversely, if you eliminate an urban highway, fewer people will use it as a short-cut.

    “But wait!” you say. “I use 6/10 as a shortcut! You want to reduce my transportation options!” Actually, in other cities that remove urban highways, they see the traffic that previously used the highway spread out over the city’s other streets. And there’s less potential for traffic jams when drivers have lots of options. It’s like how bugs congregate around lights on hot summer nights, but out in the dark it’s less buggy. 6/10 is the bug-clogged light, city streets are the cool night air.

    And one more thing: our current transportation network overwhelmingly favors driving; it has big highways that cut swaths through neighborhoods that are uninviting to other ways of getting around. Leveling the playing field by making our street system more comfortable for more ways of getting around (RIPTA, walking, and biking as well as driving) gives you more choices and more freedom. Plus, it means more other people are choosing to walk or bike and they’re not clogging up the road in front of you.

  3. It’ll never happen. We can’t do innovative things in Rhode Island.I mean, this isn’t that innovative. And hey, we started the Industrial Revolution and moved rivers to revitalize downtown Providence. I think we have it in us to make a prudent economic decision to give Rhode Islanders more transportation options and safer bridges.

    Plus, you cynics, politicians like ribbon-cuttings and ground-breakings. It’s not as sexy to photo-shoot the replacement of an archaic 1950s-era project as it is to pose for the first complete multi-modal corridor in the State.

We can assume that because the 6/10 Connector is in Raimondo’s investment plan, now is the time that something will happen with it. The state should choose the approach that is best for the neighborhoods adjacent to the corridor, which coincidentally is the option with the best return on investment. Replace the 6/10 Connector with an urban boulevard.

Want to help make this happen? Transport Providence is organizing a walk around the area in question today at 5:15 with Providence City Councilman Bryan Principe. The best thing you can do is to talk to people about this. Which people? Especially your representatives (state, federal, and city if you live in Providence), the Governor’s office, and RIDOT.

Linc Chafee wages a peace campaign for president


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

chafee for potusCalling on the United States to “wage peace,” Lincoln Chafee made official his campaign for president Wednesday night at George Mason University in Washington D.C.

Chafee said domestic issues – “What’s happening in our inner cities, and with our middle class and the disparity of wealth,” he said – would be his first priority as president, when asked this question after his prepared speech. He said tax policy and public education are the best ways to address income inequality.

But his speech focused heavily on international affairs. He spoke strongly against George Bush and the neoconservatives who sold the country on a false premise for going to war in Iraq. Chafee railed against drone strikes and called to bring Edward Snowden home. He spoke favorably about the Trans Pacific Partnership, an issue that progressives vociferously oppose, as does the Rhode Island congressional delegation.

“For me waging peace includes negotiating fair trade agreements that set standards for labor practices, environmental protections, preventing currency manipulation and protection of intellectual property among others,” Chafee said. “The Trans Pacific Partnership has the potential to set fair guidelines for the robust commerce taking place in the Pacific Rim.”

Asked if he is a progressive, the former Rhode Island governor didn’t answer.

WPRI has video of the entire speech, including the Q&A after his prepared remarks (which is the most interesting part). Below that, is the full text of his speech.

Thank you for inviting me.  Mixing foreign policy and politics is an invitation I couldn’t pass up! It’s a pleasure to be here at George Mason University – which is named for one of the many great contributors to the best form of government on earth.

As prescribed by our Constitution, which George Mason helped write, we will be electing a new President in 2016. I enjoy challenges and certainly we have many facing America.

Today I am formally entering the race for the Democratic nomination for President.

If we as leaders show good judgment and make good decisions, we can fix much of what is ailing us.

We must deliberately and carefully extricate ourselves from expensive wars.  Just think about how better this money could be spent.

For instance, our transportation network is deteriorating and becoming dangerous. We should be increasing our investment and priority in public schools and colleges. This is especially important in some of our cities where there is a gnawing sense of hopelessness, racial injustice and economic disparity.

We can and should do better for Native Americans, new Americans and disadvantaged Americans.

Let’s keep pushing to get health care coverage to more of the uninsured.  We can address climate change and extreme weather while protecting American jobs.

I believe that these priorities: education, infrastructure, health care, environmental stewardship, and a strong middle class are Americans’ priorities.

I am also running for President because we need to be very smart in these volatile times overseas.

I’d like to talk about how we found ourselves in the destructive and expensive chaos in the Middle East and North Africa and then offer my views on seeking a peaceful resolution.

There were twenty-three Senators who voted against the Iraq war in October 2002.  Eighteen of us are still alive and I’m sure everyone of us had their own reasons for voting “NO”.   I’d like to share my primary three.

The first reason is that the long painful chapter of the Viet Nam era was finally ending.  This is my generation and the very last thing I wanted was any return to the horrific bungling of events into which we put our brave fighting men and women.

In fact we had a precious moment in time where a lasting peace was in our grasp. Too many senators forgot too quickly about the tragedy of Viet Nam.

A second reason was that I had learned in the nine months of the Bush/Cheney administration prior to September 11th, not to trust them at their word.  As a candidate, Governor Bush had said many things that were for the campaign only- governing would be a lot different.  For example a campaign staple was, “I am a uniter, not a divider”.  He said very clearly that his foreign policy would be humble, not arrogant.  And he promised to regulate carbon dioxide, a climate change pollutant.  These promises were all broken in the very first days of his presidency.

Sadly, the lies never stopped.  This was an administration not to be trusted.

My third reason for voting against the war was based on a similar revulsion to mendacity.  Many of the cheerleaders for the Iraq war in the Bush administration had been writing about regime change in Iraq and American unilateralism for years. They wrote about it in the 1992 Defense Planning Guide, in the 1996 Report to Prime Minister Netanyahu, in the 1997 Project for a New American Century and in the 1998 letter to President Clinton.

A little over a month before the vote on the war I read an article in the Guardian by Brian Whitaker.  Listen to this:

“In a televised speech last week, President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt predicted devastating consequences for the Middle East if Iraq is attacked.

“We fear a state of disorder and chaos may prevail in the region”, he said.  Mr. Mubarak is an old-fashioned kind of Arab leader and, in the brave new post-September-11 world, he doesn’t quite get the point.

What on earth did he expect the Pentagon’s hawks to do when they heard his words of warning?  Throw up their hands in dismay? – “Gee, thanks, Hosni.  We never thought of that.  Better call the whole thing off right away.”

They are probably still splitting their sides with laughter in the Pentagon.  But Mr. Mubarak and the hawks do agree on one thing: War with Iraq could spell disaster for several regimes in the Middle East.

Mr. Mubarak believes that would be bad.  The hawks, though, believe it would be good. For the hawks, disorder and chaos sweeping through the region would not be an unfortunate side-effect of war with Iraq, but a sign that everything is going according to plan.”

It’s bad enough that the so-called neocons, most of whom had never experienced the horror of war, were so gung ho.  But worse yet, was that they didn’t have the guts to argue their points straight up to the American people.  They knew there were no weapons of mass destruction but wanted their war badly enough to purposely deceive us.

After reading the Guardian article, I asked for a briefing from the CIA. I said, “I have to vote on this war resolution in a few weeks, show me everything you have on Weapons of Mass Destruction”.  The answer, after an hour-long presentation out at CIA headquarters in Langley was: not much.  “Flawed intelligence” is completely inaccurate. There was NO intelligence.  Believe me I saw “everything they had”.

It’s heartbreaking that more of my colleagues failed to do their homework.  And incredibly, the neocon proponents of the war who sold us on the false premise of weapons of mass destruction are still key advisors to a number of presidential candidates today.

Without a doubt we now have prodigious repair work in the Middle East and North Africa.  We have to change our thinking.  We have to find a way to wage peace.  Let’s have a re-write of the neocon’s Project for a New American Century.  It is essentially the opposite of everything proposed in the original.  We will be honest and tell the truth. We will be a good international partner and respect international agreements.

The 70th anniversary of the United Nations is June 26th.  The preamble to the UN charter says, “to unite our strength to maintain peace and security”.  We can do that. “Unite our strength to maintain peace and security.  Let’s reinvigorate the United Nations and make the next 70 years even better.

As part of our efforts to wage peace in this New American Century let’s be bold. Some of our bravest and most patriotic Americans are our professional diplomats stationed all over the world.

This isn’t an easy career and they deserve the very best in support and respect.  As President I would institute a ban on ambassadorships for sale. That means no more of these posts going to big political donors.  I want the best-trained people doing this important work.  And it is critical that the integrity of the office of Secretary of State never be questioned.

I want America to be a leader and inspiration for civilized behavior in this new century.  We will abide by the Geneva Conventions, which means we will not torture prisoners.  Our sacred Constitution requires a warrant before unreasonable searches, which includes our phone records.  Let ‘s enforce that and while we’re at it allow Edward Snowden to come home.

Extra judicial assassinations by drone strikes are not working.  Many blame them for the upheaval in Yemen.  And Pakistan is far too important a player for us to antagonize with these nefarious activities.  They are not worth the collateral damage and toxic hatred they spread – let’s stop them.

For me waging peace includes negotiating fair trade agreements that set standards for labor practices, environmental protections, preventing currency manipulation and protection of intellectual property among others.  The Trans Pacific Partnership has the potential to set fair guidelines for the robust commerce taking place in the Pacific Rim.

Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, many of the former Soviet Republics – especially Ukraine – have been caught in a tug of war between Europe and Russia. I believe stronger efforts should be made to encourage Russian integration into the family of advanced industrial nations with the objective of reducing tensions between Russia and its neighbors.

To wage peace in our own hemisphere, I would repair relations with Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia.  As part of that rapprochement, let’s unite with all our experience to rethink the war on drugs.  Obviously eradication, substitution and interdiction aren’t working.  Let’s have an active, open minded approach to the drug trafficking that can corrupt everything from the courts to the banks, to law enforcement in our hemisphere.  Appropriately the United Nations is planning a special General Assembly meeting next year on this subject.

In this New American Century, let’s join the many countries who have banned capital punishment.  Congratulations Nebraska for your leadership here! Earlier I said,  “Let’s be bold”.    Here’s a bold embrace of internationalism: let’s join the rest of the world and go metric.  I happened to live in Canada as they completed the process.  Believe me it is easy.  It doesn’t take long before 34 degrees is hot. Only Myanmar, Liberia and the United States aren’t metric and it will help our economy!

In this New American Century it is very important to continue to have a ready and strong military.  The eagle in our Great Seal holds both arrows and an olive branch.  Let’s lead responsibly with a commitment to our unwavering defense and our peaceful purposes.

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said it best: “I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction.”  He asked, “where do we go from here – chaos or community?”

Our challenges are many and formidable.  Let’s wage peace in this New American Century.

Thank you!

A higher minimum wage means better economy for all


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

The minimum wage in Rhode Island has risen every year since January 2013 and 2016 will be no different, moving up from $9 to $9.60 per hour. The measure passed on the floor of the state Senate in a 34-3 vote, and will soon be enacted into law. But as each year passes, the income gap in Rhode Island only grows larger, even with the minimum wage increases.

Voting against the increase were Republicans Nick Kettle, of Coventry, Mark Gee, of East Greenwich, and Elaine Morgan, of Ashaway.

Graphic courtesy of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Graphic courtesy of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

A study from 2012 conducted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) showed that from the 1970’s to the mid-2000s, the income gap has grown 70 percent. The poorest 20 percent of Rhode Islanders have only received a 11.8 percent raise in their household incomes, while the richest 20 percent have seen their income grow 99 percent.

In Connecticut and Massachusetts, the percentages are even more disconcerting. The poorest 20 percent of MA residents have seen no change in their income since the 1970s, but the richest 20 percent have had a 151.9 percent increase. Connecticut’s poorest residents have even seen a drop in their income by 4 percent since the 1970s, and a 9.8 percent drop in the past decade, more than both Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

How did this even happen? Kate Brewster, the executive director of the Economic Progress Institute, believes that trends have lead to the widening income gap.

“Our economy has shifted so dramatically,” she said. Brewster stated that over the years, Rhode Island has seen a move from the manufacturing to the service industry, as well as a decline in unionization among employees. These factors have lead to a decline in the minimum wage’s value.

Senator Erin Lynch (D-District 31), the sponsor of the legislation, said the move to $9.60 is a step in the right direction, even though she originally wanted $10.10.

“I would have loved for it to be $10.10,” she said. “I think any step forward is a good step forward.”

Lynch also added that even though raising the minimum wage is definitely a part of eliminating income inequality, it’s not the only piece of the puzzle.

“We want to continue moving in the direction we’re moving. There’s no one magic bullet. We’re working on all kinds of different things.”

RI State Senate floor
RI State Senate floor

Other pieces of the economic puzzle include workforce development, access to capital, and education. Lynch believes that those together can help to level out incomes in the state, especially because they will be able to help those who are providing for their families. Outside of the state house, Lynch works as a divorce lawyer, and sees the hardships that low wages can take on the family unit.

“I see a lot of parents. I see a lot of people getting second and third jobs. People are doing what they need to do to support their families,” she said.

Currently, Rhode Island has one of the highest minimum wages in the country, but will soon fall behind states like Massachusetts, California, and Washington, DC, as they move their wages upwards of $10 an hour going into 2016.

“An adult needs close to $12 to meet their basic needs,” Brewster said. “$10.10 would have been great, but $9.60 is better than $9.”

Lynch stated that she will continue working to move the state economy forward. Hopefully that means a brighter, more equal future for everyone in Rhode Island.

“This is home,” Lynch said. “We want to make it the best place it can be.”

Senate Judiciary considers legislation to legalize cannabis


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
From Left: Jared Moffat, Rebecca McGoldrick, and Diego Arene-Morley testify in support of S510.
From Left: Jared Moffat, Rebecca McGoldrick, and Diego Arene-Morley testify in support of S510.

A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday showed overwhelming support for legislation that would legalize marijuana in Rhode Island after its economic successes in both Colorado and Washington.

Jordan Wellington, a lawyer with Vicente Sederberg LLC in Colorado, came to speak in support of the legislation, S 510. Wellington has worked closely with Colorado’s state government to implement the retail and regulation of marijuana, and now works in their Department of Revenue’s Marijuana Enforcement Division as the single policy analyst.

“Instead of should or shouldn’t we, we discussed how to move forward with this responsibly,” he said.

Wellington said Colorado gained more than 20,000 jobs and saw $900 million in sales that brought in $125 million in tax revenue. The cost of enforcement, he said, was less than $10 million.

Money from the extra revenue was invested in educational programs about cannabis to teach youth about its effects and consequences.

“We have found that some of the messaging to youth has been very effective,” Wellington said. “A very cautious message has been given to Colorado’s youth.”

According to Wellington, Colorado has not been without its challenges by taking this step forward. Regulation and education has been key in making the policy work. “One of the biggest things we did was we put a lot of different restrictions on potency in edibles,” he said.

The question of youth cannabis use was touched upon several times throughout the hearing. Andrew Horwitz, an assistant dean at Roger Williams Law School, who also testified in support of 510, said the prohibition approach aken towards marijuana is completely ineffective, and disingenuous to children.

“We are fundamentally dishonest in the way we talk to our children about marijuana,” Horwitz said. “We talk to them like it’s crack, like its heroin. They know now to believe us, that marijuana does what we claim.”

Horwitz also stated that reforming juvenile use starts from the top, with how the state looks at marijuana as a whole. “We are doing terrible damage by the use of our criminal justice system to deal with a public health issue,” he said.

One of these damages includes a racial disparity in the number of African Americans who are arrested for marijuana related crimes, due to police saturation in communities of color, as well as racial profiling.

“We’re doing a number of things wrong,” he said. “We’re arresting people for distributing marijuana. If you legalize the distribution of marijuana, you eliminate the whole line item of law enforcement.”

Jared Moffat, director of Regulate Rhode Island, also came in support of 510, with an entire binder of studies regarding the legalization in Colorado. The most accurate study of youth use, called Healthy Kids Colorado, looked at 40,000 middle and high school children, and is re-done every two years.

“The best available data on youth marijuana in Colorado shows that the use has remained flat,” he said, especially when in comparison to alcohol and tobacco, which has continually fallen in recent years. Moffat, like Horwitz and Wellington, pointed to education as the key to reducing youth cannabis use. Looking at the context of use is important as well.

“If we are acknowledging that marijuana is available in our schools, we need to acknowledge that is readily available from drug dealers,” Moffat said.

Moffat said many of the studies that opponents brought up against the legalization of marijuana have cherry picked their data in order to make it look like youth use has risen. One such study compared the city of Denver to the United States as a whole.

“If you take any metropolitan area, you’re going to find higher use,” he said.

Youth use was definitely the biggest worry of both legislators and the few opponents who did come out to speak against the bill, such as Debbie Paragini, who came as a Rhode Island parent.

“I feel really upset living in a state that is thinking about legalizing yet another recreational drug. For an economic basis? I don’t understand that,” she said. “As a parent, I think this is a really bad idea.”

Can Chafee top Sanders, or should they form a ticket together?


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

chafee vidWhen Warwick resident Linc Chafee formally declares his candidacy for president of the Unites States today he will be the first Rhode Islander since local progressive icon Richard Walton (for whom the Red Bandana Award is named) ran in 1984 as a member of the Citizens Party.

Chafee, who would launch his political career two years after Walton’s failed bid to become the president, hopes to capture the Democratic nomination in 2016. He’ll presumably outperform Walton, who won 240 votes in Rhode Island that year. But the progressive Chafee needs to best isn’t Richard Walton. It’s Bernie Sanders.

“The first obstacle Chafee faces is not Hillary Clinton, it’s Bernie Sanders,” Larry Sabato told Rhode Island Public Radio.

A fiercely unapologetic leftist, Sanders is tough competition for anyone seeking the progressive vote. He has a track record of implementing progressive reform – and winning free market converts and economic improvement in the process – as the mayor of Burlington, Vermont.

Sanders is as tough as they come in addressing America’s wealth gap, which remains an unaddressed issue that most voters are united against. Chafee, for his part, isn’t well-situated to steal any income inequality thunder from Sanders. As governor of Rhode Island, he resisted raising taxes on the rich and instead focused on broadening and lowering the sales tax.

But perhaps Chafee has an edge on national security and international diplomacy. They both oppose the war in Iraq, but Chafee did so as a Republican and won oodles of respect for doing so. NPR this morning called him, “the last liberal Republican to serve in the U.S. Senate.”

Yesterday Chafee tweeted in regards to the USA Freedom Act, “Congratulations to Congress for standing tall for civil liberties! Now let’s bring Snowden home. He has done his time.” Sanders, for his part, hasn’t gone quite that far on Snowden.

Maybe there’s a way for Sanders, the fiery populist, and Chafee, the principled moderate, to form a ticket together?

School voucher bill wording lifted from ALEC model legislation


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

SPN_exposed_redBefore the ink was dry on the highlights of the conference Transforming and Democratizing Public Education: An Activist Summit, Rhode Islanders concerned about the survival of public education were confronted with a threat from the General Assembly.

Senate bill 607, benignly titled THE BRIGHT TODAY SCHOLARSHIP AND OPEN ENROLLMENT EDUCATION ACT, was heard in the Senate Education Committee on May 20, and the companion bill (H 5790) was heard in the House Finance Committee on May 27. This egregious bill would provide state education tax dollars to any family in Rhode Island that believes their child would benefit from any other school than the one designated by their residence—any other public school in or out of their district, a private school, religious school, online virtual school, or home school. The scholarship that the family could obtain would have a cap of $6,000 (except for special needs students), but would be awarded according to a sliding scale of family income.

All families deserve fully funded and resourced neighborhood public schools with well-prepared and experienced teachers who make teaching their career. Families who choose to do so certainly have the option to send their children to private schools, religious schools, or to home school their children. But the overwhelming number of children attend public schools. Public schooling, though beset with many problems, is the foundation of a just and civil society. Public schools are overseen by local school boards, whose actions and decisions are accountable to the public. It is antithetical to our shared values to have public money siphoned off to private schools, particularly if the schools are religious in nature. Providing “scholarships” for students to attend non-public schools will wreak havoc on the public system, particularly at a time when public schools are already under assault from the neoliberal, free-market approach to schooling, with the expansion of charter schools, incessant standardized testing, and evaluating and sanctioning students, teachers, and schools by test scores on invalid standardized tests such as the PARCC.

The bill includes “scholarships” for students to participate in virtual, online schools, which have had an abysmal record in other states. This bill also includes “scholarships” for students with special needs. These students are entitled to a free and appropriate PUBLIC education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Unfortunately, under-resourced public schools have not always provided the full range of supports that these students need and deserve. Sending them to private schools that likely do not have the resources to meet the plethora of diverse needs of students with learning challenges will make this situation worse.

This bill is being heavily supported and promoted by the RI Center for Freedom and Prosperity. This group has made a number of rosy claims about the bill’s benefits not only to families but also to taxpayers and to public schools. I have read some of their reports and did not see any evidence that they have been peer-reviewed or critiqued by qualified authorities. The impetus stems from the Milton Friedman ideology of free-market/privatization reforms that have been devastating to education in other countries. Further, a few minutes of Googling turns up the undeniable fact that parts of this bill have been lifted almost word for word from “model bills” from the playbook of the American Legislative Exchange Council, also known as ALEC.

For those who are unaware of ALEC, this insidious group promotes the collusion of legislators and corporate moguls to write model legislation to be stealthily introduced into state houses across the country. This goes against the most fundamental rights of Americans to live in a country of the people, by the people, and for the people. Please see this great clip from an Atlanta, GA TV station that exposes how ALEC operates:

As evidence of ALEC’s influence on the wording of this bill, please check this link.  If you scroll down the list of “Bills Affecting Americans’ Rights to a Public Education,” you will see two bills that are represented in the language of the RI bills. The first is 2D16 The Parental Choice Scholarship Program Act Part 1 Exposed. The second is 2D21 The Special Needs Scholarship Program Act Exposed. The yellow highlights that you will see are in the original from ALEC Exposed, provided by the Center for Media and Democracy.

During the Senate Hearing, Senator Sheehan clearly stated the reason that I believe proves that this bill needs to die in committee: This bill is for the purpose of the privatization of public schools, he said.

Restaurant workers, faith leaders march for tipped minimum wage increase


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

DSC_8425Restaurant workers, joined by faith leaders and and other supporters, marched in the drizzling rain from the Gloria Dei Lutheran Church to the State House to demand an increase in the tipped minimum wage, the first such increase in 20 years. The tipped minimum wage in Rhode Island is $2.89, as opposed to the regular minimum wage of $9. It is expected that the General Assembly will raise the regular minimum wage to $9.60 in this session, though even $9.60 is a far cry from a living wage, estimated to be about $12 per hour.

The effort to raise the tipped minimum wage has been led by Restaurant Opportunities Center RI. A bill introduced by Representative Aaron Regunberg in the House and Senator Gayle Goldin in the Senate seeks to raise the tipped minimum wage every year until it reaches parity with the regular minimum wage. That bill is not expected to pass this year, though Regunberg is hopeful that a $1.00 increase in the tipped minimum wage can be negotiated.

DSC_8466

DSC_8427

DSC_8390

DSC_8345

Patreon

Post prison services would stem system’s revolving door


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
The ACI

The ACIThe Rhode Island Department of Corrections is obligated under law to protect the public by providing ex-inmates with treatment in the community to help rehabilitate them as productive members of society. Too often it doesn’t meet this obligation. Inmates who return to difficult and stressful circumstances and lack supportive structures and services are at greater risk for post-prison adjustment problems. More needs to be done to help them.

Right off the bat, the ex-inmate is socially and economically disadvantaged. Secondly, without the direction provided by prison, life outside can quickly become chaotic. Hard tasks of finding and maintaining work, affordable housing, dealing with pre-existing problems, such as drug addiction, mental health, and disgrace of past incarceration lead most to return to drugs to self-medicate themselves right back to prison.

The problem is so bad that the RIDOC and many prison systems are better known for their revolving doors than their rehabilitative services. The inmate goes out and comes right back – over and over again – because they lacked the structure to adjust to the reality of post-prison life. It’s very expensive to keep an inmate locked up in prison. Helping one stay out of prison would surely be cheaper and keep the public safer from crime.

I propose that the RIDOC should offer to provide inmates with post-prison “aftercare.” They should work toward supplying the inmate with a stable environment and structured lifestyle upon release. But don’t stop there. Assist the ex-inmate with initiating a plan and providing support throughout the process.

Providence school busing routes require rethinking


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

School Bus

Last week, more than 60 local students marched in circles around City Hall holding signs that read, “Keep Your Promise,” and “My Feet Hurt.”

The Providence Student Union (PSU) organized the action in protest of Mayor Elorza’s failure to follow through on his campaign promise regarding school transportation to “bring the walking limit to 2 miles, and to grant bus passes to anyone who lives beyond that.” Currently, Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) passes only extend to students living farther than 2.5 miles from school. This 2.5 mile radius came after a reduction from a 3 mile radius by former Mayor Angel Taveras via the inclusion of additional funding in the 2014-15 budget, with plans for further reduction of the radius in the 2015-2016 school year. As WPRI reports, as “Elorza and school officials scrambled to close a projected $34.7-million shortfall in the budget year that begins July 1, the $680,000 needed to reduce the distance to two miles was deemed too steep.”

PSU organizer Roselin Trinidad, in an interview with NBC 10’s Bill Rappleye, stated, “Kids have actually told me I’d rather stay at home than walk in the snow because I’m safe. I know I’m not going to slip on the sidewalk. I know I’m not going to get frostbite because I’m home.” And she continued, “the sidewalks are not well plowed, so it forces me to walk on the street. I’ve been lucky so far.” Indeed, the need for a solution to this massive lack of transportation for students who live substantial distances from their schools is incredibly palpable after this past winter, when the unplowed and unsalted sidewalks became dangerous.

It’s a predicament that I myself can relate to: while I don’t attend public school in town, I live exactly 2.5 miles from Brown’s campus where I go to teach and attend classes, and I often walk the distance. Here is the crucial difference: if I get a blister, or my feet hurt, or I’m just exhausted, or there has been a blizzard, I have the option of either taking the bus (which is paid for), getting a ride from my partner, taking a Brown-provided safeRIDE, or driving in my sometimes-functional car. When the streets were at their worst this winter, I walked to campus as little as possible, because I didn’t feel safe walking down the slippery sidewalks, or, worse, down the middle of the street because the sidewalks were too icy or completely unshoveled. Again, I live 2.5 miles from campus, which is relatively far, regardless of whether the city thinks this is a reasonable distance for high school students to walk. I fell one of the few times I did walk this winter, and I heard many stories of fellow students, a number of whom lived much closer to campus, who fell multiple times, often getting injured or bruised in the the process. If Brown students with access to multiple forms of transportation are having trouble getting to school, it is absurd that high school students being asked to make such long treks without access to public transit.

Indeed, the 2 mile mark is not enough, and this seems especially true when the weather turns sour. I say this not solely as a Brown student, but as someone who has attended 8 different public institutions across the grade spectrum, including several public colleges, all of which provided better access to transportation than Providence currently provides its students.

As Elorza himself said while campaigning, “denying students who live between 2-3 miles away from school bus passes impacts learning, impacts health, and impacts safety, and our low-income communities are disproportionately affected.”

Roselin Trinidad’s response as quoted in Bob Plain’s recent RIFuture article seems apt:  “Mayor Elorza pledged that the City would put money in next year’s budget to lower the walking distance for Providence high school students down to 2 miles. Yet his proposed budget does not direct a single dollar toward keeping this promise. It is unacceptable for Mayor Elorza to value our ability to access education before an election, but not after, and we will not quiet down until this wrong has been righted.”

Is there a way to make bussing more sustainable? Can bus passes have some form of nominal fee attached to them that is tiered much like many free or reduced price student meal programs in order to make the program budget-friendly in a way that opens it to students up to the 1.5 or 1 mile mark (according to an RIFuture article from 2014, over half of Rhode Island school districts provide transportation for students living within 1.5 miles, and almost a third of districts provide transportation to students living beyond the 1 mile mark)? Is there a way to expand this program to more students when the weather turns sour for months on end? Can schools do anything in the interim to help students get to their classes like school organized car-pooling?

I think this issue needs to be looked at seriously, and just reducing the limit to 2 miles, while a necessary first step, also leaves many other students still in precarious positions, especially if the city experiences another winter like this last one. Providence’s utter neglect evokes one of those “back in my day” stories where a grandparent describes walking uphill, through the snow both ways, to school. Except the city’s current students experience such ridiculous slogs on a daily basis. Except now, when the the students do get to school, the buildings are often crumbling. Seriously, Providence can do better.

Mattiello’s payday loan position opposed by Catholic ideology


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
Mattiello 1
Nicholas Mattiello

Correction: After this piece was published I received the following communication from Carolyn Cronin, Director of Communications for the Diocese of Providence:

“The article you are referencing in your piece was an editorial in the RI Catholic newspaper.  Bishop Tobin is the publisher, but he does not write or review the editorials. It is a separate opinion of the paper. So to attribute those quotes to him are not accurate. I would appreciate the clarification.”

When I asked Cronin what Bishop Tobin’s views on payday lending are, I received this reply:

“The Bishop supports the traditional teaching of the Church, but has not made any specific statements about pending legislation. Father Healey represents the diocese on this and other issues at the Statehouse.”

The piece below has been modified to reflect the fact that the statements made in Rhode Island Catholic should not be attributed to Bishop Tobin.

I regret the error.

The Rhode Island Catholic newspaper came out against payday loans in an editorial.

After referring to such loans as “heresy” Rhode Island Catholic said, “Usury, the charging of extreme interest, is condemned by Catholic doctrine. Recently Pope Benedict XVI explicitly condemned usury in his encyclical letter Caritas in Veritate. St. John Paul II called usury ‘a scourge that is also a reality in our time and that has a stranglehold on many people’s lives.’”

“Rhode Islanders,” continued Rhode Island Catholic, “especially R.I. Catholics, should stand up against payday lending, the usury of our time. The extremely poor need protections from what appears their only option in a challenging economy. Extreme rates of interests, with little chance of payment in a timely fashion, are not the way to grow a healthy economy. Instead, the poor need regulations against financial charlatans who seek the economic ruin of those on the margins.”

That usurious lending is ideologically opposed in Catholic theology should come as no surprise to Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello, a lifelong Catholic, who continues to oppose reform.

“The case has not been made to me to terminate an industry in our state,” said Mattiello last month, “The arguments against payday lending tend to be ideological in nature.”

This would not be the first time that Mattiello has found himself politically at odds with his putative faith. A Providence Journal report, published shortly after his accession to speaker, says, “A Roman Catholic who for half his life had been a lector at Immaculate Conception Church, in Cranston, Mattiello opposed gay marriage. His view changed, he says, as society became more accepting and the issue became one of equality. Today, Mattiello says his vote to legalize gay marriage is one ‘that I am proud of,’ even though it cost him his lector position.”

Mattiello’s recent statement on payday loans is no different than the view he expressed back in March 2014, when he said, “Payday lending is a hot button issue, but the consumer likes the product. It’s an ideological approach. I will make my decisions based on evidence and how it actually impacts people and our economy. I’ve asked for evidence on that issue in the past in my position as House majority leader and I’ve been promised a dozen times over, and I’ve never gotten evidence on that.”

What evidence Mattiello is looking for is hard to imagine, given that year after year the House Finance Committee hears testimony from the AARP, the Economic Progress Institute, Rhode Island Coalition for the Homeless, Rhode Island AFL-CIO and the Rhode Island Payday Lending Coalition. These groups present reams of evidence detailing the harmful effects of payday loans to both individuals the state’s economy.

To some, Mattiello’s willful ignorance about the plain evils of payday loans seems predicated on the special relationship he has with the payday loan industry’s paid lobbyist. According to RI Monthly, former Speaker of the House William Murphy, who is the paid lobbyist for the payday loan company Advance America Cash Advance Centers, is “like a brother” to Mattiello. “In 1994, Mattiello ushered at Murphy’s wedding.” In 2006 Murphy encouraged Mattiello to go into politics, starting him on his path to speaker of the house.

One of Speaker Mattiello’s favorite words is “outlier” in that he claims he doesn’t want Rhode Island to be one. “Rhode Island is one of only 13 states with an income tax on Social Security,” said Mattiello, “and I am tired of our state being an outlier.”

Sam Wroblewski, at WPRO, writes, “Mattiello said not assessing fees to out-of-state trucking operations makes Rhode Island an outlier in the northeast.”

One way that Rhode Island is an outlier that doesn’t seem to bother Mattiello is payday loans.

“Rhode Island payday loans are authorized to carry charges as high as 260% APR,” says the Economic Policy Institute, “Payday lenders can charge this rate in Rhode Island because in 2001, payday lenders received a special exemption from the state’s usury laws, making RI the only state in the Northeast to do so. The exemption enables licensed check cashers to make payday loans as at 260% rather than complying with the state’s small loan laws.”

Apparently, being an outlier is okay if one of your best friends is making $50,000 a year.

It seems clear that the day Nicholas Mattiello will allow a vote on the abolition or restructuring of payday lending laws here in Rhode Island is the day that Advance America decides to stop employing Mattiello’s friend Bill Murphy as a lobbyist. Until that day, the poor will continue to be exploited and money will continue to be sucked out of Rhode Island communities.

Catholic ideology be damned.

Rhode Island Factsheet w Supporters

Patreon

Burrillville compressor station buildout for fracked gas exports


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

A grassroots coalition, No Pipeline Expansion (NOPE), stated in a press release issued last Friday that the Department of Energy’s (DOE) approval of Pieridae’s Goldboro liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal in Nova Scotia, Canada confirms their position that natural gas from Spectra Energy’s northeast pipeline expansions will be shipped overseas.

StopGasExports

 

According to the Goldboro LNG website, the Pieridae “facility is located adjacent to the Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, a 1,400-kilometre transmission pipeline system built to transport natural gas between developments in Nova Scotia, Atlantic Canada and the northeastern United States.”  The Spectra Maritimes & Northeast pipeline connects directly to the Spectra Algonquin pipeline in Beverly, MA. Exports by Spectra, assisted by the proposed Kinder Morgan greenfield pipeline and Peabody lateral, could feed most of Pieridae’s needs for gas.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved the Spectra Algonquin Incremental Market (AIM) Project, the first of three proposed Spectra expansions on the same line, on March 3, 2015. FERC’s Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the project insists that the gas will not be exported, but the approval of the Pieridae project and the statements by the Canadian company reveal the true reason for the huge expansion. “FERC, a Commission funded by fees from the gas and oil industry, has obviously rubber stamped a project that will negatively impact Americans to benefit foreign nations and private corporations,” said Susan Van Dolsen of NOPE. “Many of us raised the issue of export to FERC during the public comment period, but we were told that the expansion was strictly for domestic use. We knew otherwise and this proves we were right.”

Last week, citizens from many states across the country gathered to protest FERC’s rubber stamping and undemocratic processes. #FERCus protestors, as they call themselves, include residents of communities along the AIM route who demand that their health and well-being should not be sacrificed for corporate profit and foreign customers. The protestors also oppose FERC’s approval of the Cove Point LNG export facility in Maryland. Beyond Extreme Energy, qualmless organizer Jimmy Betts said: “The bullying and deceptive tactics of how fracked gas infrastructure projects, like LNG export terminals, are permitted for private profits at the expense of our planet’s water, soil, air, climate, and human and natural rights, should be reason enough to question and ultimately block these devastating fossil fuel follies.”

Support for the Five who were arrested for blocking the FERC crime scene
Support for the five—front row left—who were arrested for blocking the FERC crime scene

The NOPE coalition is made up of grassroots organizations in the four states along the AIM route: New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. After issuance of the FERC Certificate, the coalition filed a Request for Rehearing with FERC on April 2, 2015, raising many serious issues including impermissible segmentation, overbuilding and significant risks to health and safety of communities along the route. FERC issued a tolling order on May 1, 2015, which means the rehearing requests are in limbo. Meanwhile, Spectra Energy began moving forward with preparations to begin construction on the project, despite massive resistance from residents and opposition from many elected officials.

Of particular concern is the new 42 inch diameter high pressure segment of pipeline that is proposed to cross the Hudson River, making landfall in Cortlandt, NY adjacent to the aging Indian Point nuclear power plant and two seismic zones. Pipeline expert Rick Kuprewicz and nuclear expert Paul Blanch have called for an independent risk assessment of the siting of the pipeline next to a nuclear power facility in a densely populated area that includes the largest city in the country. They maintain that the evaluation done by the plant’s operator, Entergy, and confirmed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, was inadequate and seriously underestimated the risks.

FERCus banner
FERCus banner: natural gas and atomic energy, a match rubber-stamped by FERC

Furthermore, a new lateral proposed in West Roxbury, MA, would run dangerously near to an active quarry; the City of Boston, Congressman Stephen Lynch, and other elected officials have called for a health and safety review.

The Spectra proposals, called AIM, Atlantic Bridge, and Access Northeast, would significantly increase the volume of fracked gas being transported from the Marcellus Shale through New England, and ultimately send it through the Maritimes & Northeast pipeline to the Goldboro export facility. The NOPE coalition objects to the projects for many reasons, including the risks mentioned above, as well as upstream effects on communities where fracking is occurring and the increase in fugitive methane emissions that contribute to climate change. In addition, ratepayers may bear the costs. “It is a fact that more than half of all the fracked gas moved across Connecticut will be destined for export, according to the US DOE. Yet, our State Senate just voted to force the cost of constructing and operating fracked gas pipelines onto ratepayers. In other words, the customer will pay so that energy companies can export fracked gas and make four times the profit available to them domestically,” says Martha Klein, Sierra Club Connecticut Chapter Communications Chair. NOPE is outraged that FERC is placing local communities and the global climate at risk for the benefit of foreign nations and corporate profit.

Protest at National Propaganda Radio, aka Gas Commercial Central
FERCus Protest at National Propaganda Radio for Fracked Gas

It has been known for a long time that natural gas was meant for export. The American Gas Reporter had a cover story in May of 2013 that by 2017 “U.S. gas imports from eastern Canada will have completely flipped to exports.”  Members of our political class have been rather slow in understanding how they are being used by energy industry insiders.  It took 16 U.S. Senators until February of this year to express concern about the pace at which the U.S. Department of Energy is approving natural gas exports “at the expense of households and industries that will suffer from higher natural gas and electricity prices.”

Governor Gina Raimondo, who enjoys the support of donors from Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs, Bain Capital and JPMorgan Chase, supports the AIM pipeline expansion project.  Blanking on exports, she said in a press release of April of this year:

I am committed to moving ahead with cost-effective, regional energy infrastructure projects – including expansion of natural gas capacity – that will improve our business climate and create new opportunities for Ocean State workers.

Of course all these politicians agree that it is necessary to destroy the global climate to save the local economy.

NBC10 Wingmen: Debating Deborah Gist


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

gist rappDuring her six years in Rhode Island, Deborah Gist said she never once went digging for quahogs. This is just one of the ways the embattled commissioner of education, who is leaving at the end of June to become superintendent of her hometown school district in Tulsa, Oklahoma, never really warmed up to the Ocean State.

I’ve already graded Gist’s tenure in Rhode Island, but Jon Brien and I debated her legacy on NBC10 News Conference this weekend. Brien says organized labor was too powerful for her to fully implement her anti-teacher agenda, while I say overall public education improved even though Gist’s focus on more tests for students and teachers weren’t the areas the state needed the most help.

News, Weather and Classifieds for Southern New England

Video and pictures from the 2015 Red Bandana Awards


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
DSC_8304
Bill Harley presents award to Eric Hirsch

The nearly 100 people who crammed into Nick-a-Nees on a rainy Sunday afternoon in celebration and remembrance of activist Richard Walton were given quite a show. This was the third annual Red Bandana Awards show.

The awards are granted to those who embody the spirit and work of Richard Walton. This year’s winners were Providence College Professor Eric Hirsch, a “tireless advocate for the poor and homeless” and the Providence Renaissance Hotel workers, who are fighting for “their right to decent working conditions and a living wage.”

The Gnomes, a global folk-fusion band, opened the event with about a half hour of live music before being joined on stage by emcee Bill Harley. Harley gave a short talk about Richard Walton, and read one of Walton’s emails to give a flavor  of the man, quoting him as saying, “I’d like life to be a hot hodge-podge of people of all sorts. All ages, all cultures, all colors, all everything.”

Harley then segued into a remembrance of Sister Ann, the amazing “social justice activist” and founder of the Institute for the Study & Practice of Nonviolence who died earlier this year. Harley held a touching moment of silence that lasted about a minute before joking, “I think that’s the longest it’s been quiet at Nick-a-Nees.” Sister Ann was considered for an award, said Harley, but the committee making the decision decided to keep it as an award for the living.

After a song, Harley gave the first award to the Providence Renaissance Hotel workers. Receiving the award were organizer Heather Nichols-Haining and Mirjaam Parada. For many years now the workers at the Renaissance and more recently the Providence Hilton have been battling The Procaccianti Group over wages, workload and the right to organize. Workers at these hotels are getting hurt on the job, and management treats them as disposable. The award recognizes the importance of organized labor and union rights.

Professor Eric Hirsch was then called to the stage to be presented his award. Hirsch, ever the activist, reminded the audience that he’s involved in the Zero: 2016 effort to wipe out veteran homelessness by the end of this year and to wipe out chronic homelessness by the end of 2016. Hirsch asked everyone interested in this effort to go to rihomeless.org to find out what they can do to help.

Hirsch also reminded the audience that the school he teaches at, Providence College, recently had an event to deal with racial profiling and Renaissance Hotel boycott. After Hirsch received his award, the crowd was entertained by the Extraordinary Rendition Band, an appropriate choice, given their appearance in the viral “Joey Quits” video.

DSC_8017
The Gnomes

DSC_8219

DSC_8214
Mirjaam Parada
DSC_8201
Heather Nichols-Haining

Patreon


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