June 27, 2016 – RI Future

June 27, 2016June 27, 2016

SCOTUS abortion ruling has RI impact

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

Local reactions to the Supreme Court decision Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which is being hailed as the most important reproductive rights decision in decades, have started to come in. Arguing that “…it is beyond rational belief that H.B. 2 could genuinely protect the health of women, and certain that the law ‘would simply make it more difficult for them to obtain abortions,” Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Steven Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Anthony Kennedy and Elena Kagan in the 5-3 decision that struck down a controversial law that closed 75 percent of abortion clinics in Texas.

Breyer wrote the opinion, saying, “Both the admitting-privileges and the surgical-center requirements place a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, constitute an undue burden on abortion access, and thus violate the Constitution.”

The full statement from Planned Parenthood Votes! Rhode Island:

Today, June 27, 2016, the United States Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional right to abortion. In its 5-3 ruling on Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the Court struck dangerous restrictions on abortion providers in Texas.

While the Court’s decision ultimately does not affect Rhode Island women and families today, Planned Parenthood Votes! Rhode Island warns that existing Rhode Island laws and an anti-abortion rights majority in the General Assembly threaten reproductive freedom for Rhode Island residents.

“The Supreme Court made it clear that politicians cannot pass laws to block access to safe, legal abortion. Yet today’s victory does not undo the past five years of damage and restrictions already written into law across the country and what is at stake this fall in Rhode Island,” said Craig O’Connor, Director of Public Policy and Government Relations, Rhode Island with Planned Parenthood Votes! Rhode Island. “We will continue to fight restrictions on safe, legal abortion on behalf of all people in Rhode Island. This year, Rhode Islanders will make it known at the polls that anti-abortion politicians have no place in the Rhode Island State House.”

The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling protected access to safe, legal abortion by blocking two unconstitutional Texas restrictions. As the Court recognized, “neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes.”

In Rhode Island, several anti-abortion laws exist that have real world effects on abortion access, for example, the prohibition on state employee’s health insurance from covering abortion. In fact, language in Article 1, Section 2 of the Rhode Island Constitution explicitly states, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to grant or secure any right relating to abortion or the funding thereof.” Therefore, if ultimately the Supreme Court reverses its position on Roe v. Wade, there could be very real and very devastating repercussions throughout Rhode Island.

“Physicians and patients must be free to make informed and medically-appropriate decisions without interference from ill-informed legislation,” said Jennifer Villavicencio, MD, with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). “Abortion is a fundamental aspect of women’s health care and must be protected. Rhodes Islanders need to ask their State Senators and State Representatives where they stand on abortion rights and reproductive freedom.”

Steven Brown, Executive Director with the ACLU of Rhode Island, said that the ACLU of Rhode Island has sued the state more than six times over restrictive abortion laws since Roe v. Wade. Brown said that although each suit has been successful, “much work remains to be done to make our state a place that respects reproductive freedom.”

NARAL Pro-Choice America – in its annual “Who Decides” scorecard – labeled the RI House and Senate anti-abortion. NARAL also downgraded Rhode Island to an F rating on reproductive rights – from a previous D+ rating. NARAL awarded the same score to Texas.

According to The Guttmacher Institute, politicians have passed 316 restrictions on safe, legal abortion at the state level since 2011.

Rev. David A. Ames, Priest-in-Charge at All Saints’ Memorial Church in Providence and Member of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund Clergy Advocacy Board said that all people have “an inherent right to reproductive health care.” Ames explained, “We must continue working to expand reproductive freedom in Rhode Island.”

The RI ACLU’s Steve Brown offered an additional statement, saying, “We are extremely pleased that the Supreme Court has struck down these cruel and insincere efforts to interfere with a woman’s basic constitutional right. But this is hardly the end of the matter. Since Roe v. Wade was handed down, the ACLU of Rhode Island has been forced to sue the state at least half a dozen times over restrictive abortion laws. Although every one of those suits has been successful, Rhode Island continues to impose significant barriers to a woman’s right to choose, allowable under other U.S. Supreme Court rulings. As a result, much work remains to be done to make our state a place that respects reproductive freedom.”

June 27, 2016

Cicilline, Langevin hold gun safety ‘sit-in’ Wed in PVD

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

Following on their successful sit-in action last week on the House floor to call attention to gun violence in America, Rhode Island congressmen David Cicilline and Jim Langevin are hosting a local action called “No More Silence: A Public Sit-In to Reduce Gun Violence.”

The event will be on Wednesday, 3pm at the Providence Public Safety Complex.

Cicilline and Langevin both participated in the historic sit-in on the House floor last week that was organized to call attention to the GOP’s inaction on gun safety following the horrific Pulse massacre in Orlando that left 49 innocent people dead.

The follow-up event is being billed, by Cicilline spokesman Rich Luchette, as an opportunity to “discuss ways for Rhode Islanders to continue to push Republicans in Congress on ‘no fly, no buy’ and universal background checks,” he said.

Cicilline was an organizer of the 26-hour House floor sit-in, along with Georgia Congressman John Lewis, which for 12 hours prevented Republicans from conducting congressional business.

“Republicans can no longer ignore the voices of millions of Americans who are demanding commonsense legislation to address this epidemic,” Cicilline said in a statement following the protest action. “It is shameful that Speaker Ryan, using a procedural maneuver, adjourned the House in the dark of night, shortly after his party voted for another Wall Street giveaway, so that Republicans would not have to address the very real impact of gun violence. This isn’t Wall Street’s House – it’s the People’s House – and it’s time Republicans start acting like it by addressing the important issues facing American families. When the Speaker calls the House back into session we will continue to stand up once again for our constituents who are demanding we take action to reduce gun violence in our country.”

In a letter to congressional colleagues, the six organizers of the sit in wrote:

Dear Colleagues:

This week, Democrats in Congress made history while the world watched. Our sit-in showed that the Republican Leadership can no longer ignore the epidemic of gun violence. A movement was born and will only continue to grow.

We ask you to join us in a National Day of Action on June 29, 2016. While you are back home in your District, you can continue to build the momentum and engage your community. Whether it a press conference, roundtable, or telephone town hall, we encourage you host an event showing that Democrats in Congress will keep up the fight against gun violence. Local partners including survivors, law enforcement and faith leaders can be excellent partners and can help carry our message even further.

We look forward to working with you as we continue our fight to bring commonsense, bipartisan, gun violence prevention legislation up for a vote. Together, we can give voice to the overwhelming majority of the American people who want to see their Congress take action to help keep our communities safe.

Sincerely,

John Lewis

John B. Larson

Katherine M. Clark

David N. Cicilline

Robin Kelly

Mike Thompson

June 27, 2016

Clean Water Action ‘deeply disappointed’ with Raimondo, Archambault

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

The RI Sierra Club made a bold move when they revoked their endorsements of Senators Steven Archambault and William Conley over their Senate Judiciary Committee votes against the people of Burrillville in their fight against a proposed power plant in their town. Clean Water Action has also endorsed Archambault and in addition, they have backed Governor Gina Raimondo, the strongest supporter of the power plant among the state’s elected officials.

I asked Clean Water Action’s Rhode Island State Director Johnathan Berard if his group was willing to revoke their endorsements.

Berard commented that his group is “deeply disappointed” but stopped short of revoking the endorsements Clean Water Action gave out during the last election.

Clean Water Action ardently opposes the construction of any fossil-fuel burning power plants in Rhode Island and we are deeply disappointed that these general assembly members and the governor, who we supported in 2014 based on their promise of environmental leadership, have chosen to ignore the will of the majority of Rhode Islanders, as well as the environmental and public health communities, by forging ahead with the development of new natural gas infrastructure projects across the state.”

Compared to the position taken by the Sierra Club, this is a soft response. Clean Water Action seems to have a process to endorse candidates, but their endorsements lack any teeth when it comes to holding elected officials accountable.

June 27, 2016

Marcia Ranglin-Vassell to challenge DeSimone in House District 5

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

Marcia Ranglin-Vassell announced her candidacy for State Representative in House District 5 – Charles, Wanskuck and Elmhurst neighborhoods of Providence.

“Our community needs someone who will fight for us,” Ranglin-Vassell said upon filing her declaration of candidacy at the Board of Canvassers. “For too long, we’ve had politicians who are only helping themselves and their well-connected friends. I have spent my entire life working, teaching, and fighting for families like mine. Families who’ve worked hard for everything they’ve got and just want a fair shot. Our neighborhood needs an advocate who won’t give up. As a mother, a Providence public school teacher, and a community activist, I have done everything I can to give my children, my students, and my neighbors a chance at success. I’m running to bring that same passion and determination to the State House, for all of us.”

Currently a special education teacher at Providence Career and Technical Academy, Ranglin-Vassell cited her passion for education as one reason for jumping in the race. “I grew up very poor in Jamaica, in a neighborhood similar to some of our struggling neighborhoods here in Providence. I remember having only one pair of shoes and no backpack – when it rained, I would put my school books under my clothes to keep them dry. My father never learned to read or write, but he started a church and a preschool right in our front yard and taught me the power of education. That is why I became a teacher, and why I have dedicated my life to empowering young people and community members to be the best they can be. My children all went through Providence public schools, so I know public education can be successful. But I also know our schools continue to struggle, and our state continues to underfund our young people. As state representative, I will not rest until we have a fair school funding formula that ensures our youth have the resources they need to succeed,”

Saying she has always felt the need to serve her community, Ranglin-Vassell said she did not feel at all intimidated taking on the high-ranking House Majority Leader. “I know that entering this race is a challenge to the status quo, but sometimes the establishment needs a challenge. I always try to do what I think is right, whether it is easy or not,” she continued. “And titles aside, the truth is our current representative is not fighting for his constituents. I have lived here in our district, on Waite Street, for over 20 years, and I have never met our representative. I do not have a single friend or neighbor who can say he has ever returned their phone calls or emails. I’m sure he is great for the well-connected, for the people who know-a-guy. But he has never been there for families like mine that are working hard and just trying to get by. We need a legislator who is committed to representing all of our community, and that’s why I am in this race.”

Marcia Ranglin-Vassell has a Bachelor of Science degree in Community Health Education from Rhode Island College and a Master’s in Special Education from Providence College. She is a “Woman of Achievement” award-winner from the YWCA for her work in education, a congregant at Ebenezer Baptist Church, and a member of the Rhode Island Black Business Association.

[From a press release]

June 27, 2016June 27, 2016

Why should Burrillville care about Invenergy’s bad financial decisions?

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

At the most recent Burrillville Town Council meeting, Town Councillor Kimberly Briquette Brown made some curious remarks about Invenergy’s obligations to ISO-NE, the organization responsible for managing the supply of electricity to Rhode Island and neighboring states. Invenergy is planning to build a $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in the town and residents of Burrillville strongly oppose the plant.

“It’s my understanding,” said Brissette Brown, “from speaking to Mike McElroy and learning about this just as much as everybody else has been over the last few months, that once the ISO had granted the power capacity in February to Invenergy, that regardless of whether not they enter into a tax agreement with the town, if they do not go forward with building the power plant they’re going to be fined, substantially, it’s my understanding, and I could be wrong, millions of dollars. At the time… there was a concern about the financial ramifications of leaving the bill to people that thought that by voting no to a tax agreement that they’d be basically sending the power company packing.”

The gist of her remarks seems to be that Burrillville town attorney Michael McElroy convinced her that the town might be on the hook financially for the fines that Invenergy might suffer for not delivering on its obligations to ISO-NE. I couldn’t see how this was possible, so I asked Jerry Elmer, senior attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), for his insight. The added emphasis is all mine:

By way of background, I explain in general that the results of FCA-10 show that the Invenergy plant is not needed, here.

And I am well aware of the fact that the mechanics of these FCAs can be complicated and difficult to understand; I provide some general background, here.

“In FCA-10, Invenergy bid both of its turbines, or 997 MW, into the ISO’s auction. However, in the actual auction, Invenergy cleared only one turbine, or 485 MW. Thus, Invenergy acquired a CSO of 485 MW. Invenergy agreed to provide electricity to the regional grid operator, ISO-NE, for a one-year period of time running from June 1, 2019 through May 31, 2020. This period of time is called Capacity Commitment Period 10 (CCP-10), and it corresponds to FCA-10. In return for agreeing to be available to the regional grid operator during that specified, future period, Invenergy will receive a stream of payments called capacity payments.

“In effect, Invenergy is selling a commodity, capacity, in return for a stream of money, called capacity payments. (And those links above provide some needed background that may help readers understand this.)

“In order to be allowed to participate in the ISO’s Forward Capacity Auction (FCA), Invenergy (or any other entity) had to first “qualify.” In order to qualify to participate in an auction, Invenergy (or any other entity) had to show that it had a realistic chance to actually build its proposed plant. (The ISO requires this, because the ISO is responsible for keeping our electricity grid reliable. ISO cannot keep the grid reliable if entities that acquire CSOs cannot actually build and operate power plants.) Invenergy (or any other entity) also has to put up a huge amount of “Financial Assurance” to even be allowed to participate in an FCA. FA is a kind of bond, a way of securing (guaranteeing) that Invenergy will be able to perform its obligation. FA would be forfeited if Invenergy (or any other entity) acquired a CSO (in an auction) but then did not actually have a plant built by the beginning of the CCP.

“So, now that Invenergy did acquire a CSO in FCA-10, is Invenergy irrevocably committed to building the proposed plant in Burrilville? The answer is unequivocally not.

“Could Invenergy abandon its proposed plant in Burrillville completely, and not lose the FA (bond) posted with ISO? The answer is unequivocally yes.

“To be sure, Invenergy could not just walk away from the plant. However, between today and June 1, 2019 (the beginning of CCP-10, when Invenergy’s CSO kicks in) the ISO will hold three separate Reconfiguration Auctions. One will occur about 2 years before June 1, 2019; one will occur about a year before June 1, 2019; and the last one will occur just before the start of CCP-10. At each of these Reconfiguration Auctions, buyers and sellers buy and sell CSOs to each other.

“Invenergy could – if it wanted to – sell out of its CSO in any one of those Reconfiguration Auctions. Of course, because the ISO is still responsible for keeping the New England electricity grid reliable, any entity that wanted to buy Invenergy’s 485-MW CSO would have to be qualified by the ISO to participate in the Reconfiguration Auction. The qualification process would be very similar to the qualification process for participating in an FCA – show that you either have a power plant already or could realistically build one in the remaining time allowed, and post FA.

“Invenergy could elect to sell out of its CSO in any of the next 3 ISO-run Reconfiguration Auctions for any one of a variety of reasons. For example, Invenergy could decide that the political climate in Rhode Island has turned against it, and that the plant might not be permitted by the Energy Facility Siting Board. (This could happen, say, if Governor Raimondo were persuaded to oppose the proposed plant as a result of overwhelming constituent pressure.) Or Invenergy could decide that the New England energy market is less lucrative than it thought it would be, and it is not worth building the plant. (In fact, the auction clearing price crashed from over $17 per kilowatt-month in FCA-9 to $7.03 per kilowatt month in FCA-10.) Or, Invenergy could sell out of its CSO for no other reason than that it thought it was profitable to do so. (Remember that whatever entity buys the CSO from Invenergy would be buying the right to a future stream of income. This is a valuable commodity, and it is entirely possible that Invenergy simply flips the CSO for a quick profit. Note that in that last sentence I mean “possible” as being completely within the ISO Market Rules; I am not suggesting that this is a likely course for Invenergy – only that it can be done.)

“In fact, Invenergy could sell out of its CSO in any one of the next three Reconfiguration Auctions for any reason it wanted to do so. The fact is that, having acquired a CSO on February 8 does not mean that the plant must inevitably be built, and does not mean that Invenergy is powerless to walk away without forfeiting the huge bond it posted with the ISO.

“In this scenario, the Town of Burrillville would not be on the hook for any of Invenergy’s CSO. In fact, the Town of Burrillville could almost certainly not be qualified by the ISO to buy Invenergy’s CSO. But, in any event, if Invenergy sold out of its CSO, the Town of Burrillville would have no liability for the CSO.”

So, in summary, the Town of Burrillville is in no way responsible for Invenergy’s bad decision to buy into a forward capacity energy market before being sure that they would be able to supply the energy required.

Invenergy made the promise, not Burrillville.

So I ask again, “Why should anyone in Burrillville care about bad decisions made by a Chicago based energy company? How is it possible that Burrillville should be liable for Invenergy’s bad business decisions?”

June 27, 2016

RI Democratic Party more aligned with national GOP than Hillary Clinton

Why is the NRA more pleased with the predominantly Democratic legislature in Rhode Island than gun safety groups? Why do anti-abortion groups have more access to lawmakers than their pro-choice counterparts? Why did our elected officials cut taxes to the rich, payments to struggling cities and towns and the pensions of public sector workers? Why is Rhode Island the only blue state with a voter ID law?

Sam Bell, director of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats, told NBC10 News Conference this weekend that it’s because the Governor Gina Raimondo and the Rhode Island General Assembly are significantly more conservative than Hillary Clinton and national Democratic Party and are more ideologically aligned with traditional Republicans.

“I think one thing people don’t realize about how politics works in our state is that the people who dominate the Democratic caucuses in the General Assembly – both the House and the Senate, to a lesser degree – really seem to stand with the national Republican Party on the core issues that divide the two parties at the national level,” Bell to Bill Rappleye.

Bell said the recent top tier tax cuts were the among the largest ever and that car taxes, which hit lower income people harder, were increased to finance this tax break to Rhode Island’s richest residents.

“There’s just no evidence that Rhode Islanders stand with any of these extreme conservative policies that the leaders of the General Assembly are pushing,” he said. While local elected officials like to use the term “business friendly,” Bell said, the policies they push tend to hurt small businesses.

Afterwards, Jon Brien and I debated Bell’s assertion. Brien said the problem is “economic Robin Hoods” who want to take other people’s money while I countered that “economic sheriffs of Nottingham” who want to take other people’s money are the problem.