Posted on

What Happened to Hollywood East?


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

It seemed that just a few years ago the film and television industry was on the rise here in the Ocean State. Underdog, 27Dresses, and Showtime’s Brotherhood series were some of the more notable productions based here in Rhode Island.

The studios liked Rhode Island for a number of reasons. Locations ranged from rural settings, ocean settings, beautiful urban locations and a variety of socio-economic backgrounds from Olneyville to the gilded age mansions of Newport. All of these natural assets could be reached within no more than a forty minute drive in any direction.

Furthermore, the tax credits offered by the state to the motion picture industry were attractive and competitive. They were simple and straightforward: 25% credit on all money spent on a motion picture process in the state. RISD students could put design skills to use. Brown/Trinity Consortium actors could find gigs that paid the rent and tuition and Rhode Island’s economy benefited greatly from the economic stimulus brought by the blossoming industry. The motion picture industry brought well paying jobs and well paid individuals spread that money in many directions: the domino effect of economic prosperity. Restaurants, hotels, real estate, catering, transportation all saw a boost in revenue and volume. Sound studios and cycloramas were built.

There was talk of Rhode Island being “Hollywood East.”

Anne Mulhall of LDI Casting, Rhode Island’s premier casting office for film and television, said that once the film credit was initially instituted, business was booming.

“LDI Casting had to hire staff and we moved to an office on Federal Hill,” she said. “Two and three and four projects at a time! Big Budget Films, TV Series, Indie Films and TV Specials.”

However, in 2009 when the tax credits were capped at $15 million, studios were more than willing to take their business elsewhere; to neighboring states that offered lower minimum spending requirements and no tax credit caps. Prior to the cap, there were multiple major productions occurring at any given time. After the cap the number of film and TV projects dwindled to one or two per year, if that.

Mulhall said

… Although we had never reached that cap, never giving away more than up to maybe $12 million in a banner year (not the norm), it is my belief that the image of a cap was daunting enough for out of state productions and unless they were guaranteed that that would be receiving credit on money spent, they would rather go to another location that LOOKED like Rhode Island, so Massachusetts was the next best thing. … Plus the fact that by this point 42 other states instituted film tax credits. Competition was heavy while at the same time we started to pull out of the race.

So, Rhode Island, a state that had for once been on the forefront of an economic wave, pulled back. Workers who had moved here – union, non-union, homeowners, taxpayers – with families and well paying jobs were out of those jobs and forced to leave the industry or the state. The state that is notorious for being economically reactionary, had been proactive and found a way to foil its own initiative.

Mark Fogarty, President of the Rhode Island Film Collaborative (RIFC: a registered 501(c) 3 organization), stated that an independently commissioned, non-biased study showed that the benefits of an uncapped system far outweighed the risks.

As Fogarty put it:

…the results overwhelmingly showed that film results in money being spent and taxes being collected. The biggest problem is people do not understand the way it works and assume the government is losing out on 25 percent of taxes. The reality is all it means is the person who purchases the tax credit will pay about five percent less taxes. That is five percent in exchange for millions of dollars being spent in the state. It is really a no lose situation.

Fogarty is a native Rhode Islander and founder of EXILE Movies. He wrote and directed the upcoming independent feature film smalltown. With a budget of under $100,000, he shot the majority of the film in nearby MA due to the fact that Massachusetts requires a minimum budget of only $50,000 to qualify for the credit instead of $100,000 that RI now requires. At the time Fogarty was filming, the minimum budget for tax credit qualification in Rhode Island was $300,000. That meant that all the purchases and rentals of materials as well as 80% of on location filming was done in Massachusetts despite his preference to have shot in RI.

Some of the confusion stems from the notion that a tax credit percentage means a reduction in that amount in direct revenue to the state. For example, a 25 percent tax credit on a $1 million budget would result in a loss of t$250,000 worth of tax revenue. That may be closer to the actual case in refunded tax credits. However, Rhode Island uses transferable tax credits. This means a wealthy investor or group can purchase the credit at a reduced rate, thereby dropping their taxes about five percent. This is preferred as a benefit to the state in that the loss of tax revenue due to the the tax credit incentive is well under the total revenue brought to businesses, individuals and, subsequently, tax revenue to the state.

Of course the weight of the ongoing 38 Studios fiasco looms heavily over any decision for lawmakers to take legislative measures to encourage businesses to come to Rhode Island. However, the tax credit laws for motion pictures, while they do encompass video games as part of the “motion picture” definition, guaranteed state loans are exempt from tax credit eligibility. Therefore, 38 Studios and scenarios similar to it would not fall into the same risk category that led to the state’s current legal nightmare and potential taxpayer black hole.

The question Rhode Island must ask itself is “is it too late?” Has Rhode Island just moved on to the next economic band-aid? Casino table games, perhaps? That may be a short term boost. But we can look at other states with strong casino based economies to find out how well that has worked. New Jersey and Nevada both have some of the highest levels of unemployment in the nation. Nevada is actually number one, with over 12 percent unemployment.

Or can the state resurrect a discussion of how to revive a once budding industry, clipped off by a frightened legislature and competitively forward thinking surrounding states? The vast majority of manufacturing is gone in Rhode Island. Barring a few companies still valiantly holding on to making things for sale in this state, manufacturing jobs have left and are not coming back. The motion picture industry was an interesting and promising replacement for the loss of the manufacturing industry and the economic ramifications were similar in statewide benefits.

The interest is still there. The Rhode Island Film Collaborative has a large membership and still hosts a number of strong programs ranging from classes to networking and sponsors productions for filmmakers determined to make films, documentaries, shorts, features, animated films and other motion picture related projects. For anyone interested in meeting and discussing this or any other film based topic (here comes the shameless plug) the annual Rhode Island Film Collaborative’s Black and White Gala is on Saturday, December 8th at 6:30PM at Mixed Magic Theatre in Pawtucket’s Hope Artiste Village. It goes until very late and features food, dancing, libations and many other prizes and surprises. The gala is the collaborative’s biggest fundraiser of the year and, for a nominal twelve dollar admission fee, all are welcome.

No one can argue that Rhode Island needs an economic renaissance. No one can say that a single idea or initiative is the solution. The problems are deep and multifaceted and so must be the solutions. However, the motion picture industry was an excellent boost while it lasted and, with some discussion, could be again.

As Anne Mulhall said:

Personally, I feel that if there are concerns about how the credit negatively affects Rhode Island economy…first, look at how it has BENEFITTED Rhode Island’s economy and small businesses before making any decision and second, change the criteria by which the is credit is offered, not the credit itself. I consider film making a manufacturing industry. If this is true, we are General Motors.

I hope we get to work in our home state again.

Posted on

When Progressives Fight, Progressives Win


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

In 2008 progressives across America were basking in the warm glow of the nation’s first black president. A breeze of Democratic victories had blown through Congress and the long, dark night of the Bush era had given way to the rising sun of the Democratic super-majority. A Democratic executive branch and a bicameral legislative branch teaming with enough blue fruit to overwhelm any red agendas devised by the defeated and deflated Republican party. The progressive tree was blooming in the new era sun and progressives across America were able to relax.

Were the conservative, right wing Republicans relaxing? Were their minds changed and their hearts quiet? Was their spirit broken and did they skulk away quietly, tail between their legs in acceptance of America’s new direction of a liberal and populist agenda? Does the phrase 2010, mid-term elections answer that question?

Shortly after the 2008 election, the general public was struck with the reality of the total economic collapse of the American banking system, the bottom dropping out of the stock market and the the real estate bubble bursting. Frightening and confusing terms like “derivatives,” “toxic assets” and “ARM loans” were brandished by the talking heads on the cable news networks and the true inheritance of the new electorate was made apparent and they reacted accordingly. President Barack Obama consulted with his cabinet, with economists and stepped up, proposing a Keynesian stimulus package that stalled an economy in free-fall. No need to further recount the history of so recent a period in history; one in which wounds are still in various stages of recuperation and rehabilitation.

Suffice it to say, the Republicans were quickly seeding the sky with storm-clouds. The population, just moths before filled with warm, sunny hope was scared. And rightly so. Jobs were lost in record numbers. Income was falling while prices were rising and the conservative, Republican agenda was ready and mobile with a new and radical group of flashy and simple politicians called the Tea-Party. They catered to the three Gs of right wing, fear-mongering: God, guns and gays. They tied these social-issue weapons of mass distraction to the real, pressing issues of the day and (quite neatly and effectively) laid blame for the Nation’s rapid decline, both socially and fiscally, on the President and his socialist administration.

It worked like a charm. The 2010 mid-term elections were a cyclonic victory for conservatives. The super-majority was blown away and the House of Representatives was owned by the Tea-Party influenced Republicans. Surely the less than honest messaging of voices like Eric Cantor and the less than heartfelt tears of men like John Boehner are worthy of blame for the GOP sweep. Not to mention an entire cable news network dedicated to promoting untruth, injustice and the Glen Beckian way. But just as important to consider is the lack of preparedness and distracted complacency of the Democrats.

Obama promised to reach across the aisle and compromised in spite of having the power to push through any progressive agenda the Democrats and their constituencies wanted. The Democratic message was convoluted and tried too hard to explain why and how and, in a stagnant economy, it is nearly impossible to use economists to prove a negative and certainly impossible to win an off year election on that message. There was no “Go! Fight! Win!” There was no message of solidarity and spirit.

The 2012 elections were a very positive message for progressives. The light shone through the clouds and, once again, the Democratic agenda allows for a deep breath and an enjoyment of the light of populist understanding. But only for a few moments. In this administration, there can be no room for error. There can be no time for compromise. There can be no sacrifice of agenda in exchange for good faith because the anti-progressive movement, given an inch, will take a mile.

In a lesser known speech, Franklin D. Roosevelt wrote:

“… Until the Democratic Party [through this convention] makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory.”

The progressive movement, if it wants to survive and burn off the cloud-cover of the remaining storm, it must not rest on this victory. The election may be over but the great work just begins. The middle class must stand together. Unions must double their efforts. Progressive politicians must dissent, speak up and speak well. They must not merely make their voices louder, but also their arguments better. The 2014 mid-term elections are just around the corner and, if the issues embraced by the the majority this year are truly issues of importance to those who voted, the progressive campaign must begin immediately. The preservation of Medicare and Medicaid as we know them and the expansion of affordable healthcare to everyone and the taxation of the wealthiest while regulating the disenfranchisement of the working class by those same wealthiest – these and many more progressive agendas need to be reinforced and protected a little more every day.

The work is not easy. Nor should it be. Frederick Douglass, a true American champion of freedom, once said, “Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the the awful roar of its many waters. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” Progressive Democrats want social justice, but they also want to be nice and expect that if they are nice, so will be the other side.

Although often mistaken for one and the same, there is a difference between what is safe and what is comfortable. And, if progressive Democrats believe that there is safety in American solidarity over the opposition’s beliefs in safety being individual financial insulation at the expense of those less fortunate, then progressive Democrats need to be willing to fight, to throw comfort to the wind and to keep on keepin’ on.

At a rally in Boston’s Dudley Square last week, a congregation of labor and activists reminded one another of what the power of unity can do: hello Elizabeth Warren, goodbye Scott Brown. Hello Barack Obama, goodbye Mitt Romney. “E pluribus unum” has been proven by the American voters to be a preferable national ideal to “sic semper tyrannus.” But, like any dream, ideal or hope for a nation , it requires foresight, strength, perseverance, blood and sweat. It takes a will to fight. Progressive Democrats remember, “When we fight, we win.”

Posted on

Leave Gordon Fox in Hen House of Representatives


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

This endorsement is one of the most difficult to make because, based on this author’s personal, professional and procedural experiences with Speaker Fox, he is unlikeable on all counts. In the spirit of full disclosure, when a written appeal for help on a personal level as well as a statewide plea for any continuing aid, or consideration thereof, was sent to Speaker Fox, the result was a rather snide and condescending letter. To his credit, Fox did take the time to personally sign the letter. Woot.

On the other side of the spectrum, independent Mark Binder is very likeable. Binder is soft-spoken, thoughtful and seemingly diplomatic. Both are very intelligent and exceptional communicators in spite of their opposing methods of expressing their respective messages. The white-hot, spotlit issues staged in this particular political drama are 38 Studios, pension reform, education reform, pay-day lending and gay marriage. Binder has the advantage on all of these.

However, the reason he holds the upper hand is because he has never had to deal directly with the decision making that comes from the Democratic-Republic system of being an elected lawmaker. His campaign has been run primarily on pointing out the failures of his opponent. To his credit, there are many to point out.

38 Studios was/is a massive cocktail of economic woe and, in spite of many others dipping a straw in that scorpion bowl, Fox was left holding the empty glass and the state will be feeling the fiscal hangover for a long time. To maintain the metaphor of blame, the EDC was definitely behind the bar along with then Governor Carcieri and possibly more nefarious influences like Jon Brien and ALEC.

Pension reform can be looked at as a mathematical necessity over the long term in spite of Fox and Raimondo’s bullying methodology. This reform is now headed to the courts who may or may not decide its legality and validity. Fox could have avoided this by using his position of authority to encourage more diplomacy and negotiation with those who suffer the economic repercussions of broken statutes, rather than ignoring the requests for more time, talk and less speculation of Fox’s caving to the “last place aversion” psychological influence of the private sector and the bond market.

There is no question that Rhode Island’s public education system requires a massive overhaul. Pages have been filled with discussion on what is wrong and how to fix it. Suffice it to say, Fox is affiliated with RI-CAN. This organization has questionable means of achieving admirable motives. Better public schools? Yes please. Systematic elimination of teachers unions in order to publicly fund corporate charter schools? No, thanks.

Gay marriage? Of course it should be legal. And an openly gay man in the most powerful position in Rhode Island’s General assembly who does not, when given the opportunity to promote a progressive agenda and make a stand for his own, unfortunately, disenfranchised minority … well? I suppose there is only one thing to call that: a politician.

Gordon Fox is a politician. He is an effective politician. He is an opportunist. He is a pragmatist. He knows how to attract power and to attach himself to power. Gordon Fox gets things done. He seems to embody the adage of more is lost by indecision than by wrong decision. He says the right things and, maybe, most of the time, he means it. In Tony Kushner’s Pulitzer Prize winning play Angels in America the fictionalized, historical character of Roy Cohn (a gay, lawyer working in high-level politics) talks about politics in a way that is brutally honest. Roy says, “This is… this is gastric juices churning, this is enzymes and acids, this is intestinal is what this is, bowel movement and blood-red meat – this stinks, this is politics, [Joe] the game of being alive.” Perhaps this is too harsh a statement. Probably so. However Gordon Fox understands that to be successful at politics, it helps to be a politician and, often, that means making enemies and unpopular decisions. Sometimes Gordon Fox is not nice. But, again to quote Kushner’s character of Cohn, “Do you want to be nice, or do you want to be effective?”

Mark Binder is very smart. He is very creative. He is very contemplative and diplomatic. Gordon Fox is effective. My endorsement for Representative in House District 4 goes to Gordon Fox.

Posted on

Stephen Casey for Woonsocket State Rep


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 fact that Stephen Casey requires endorsement is a bit ludicrous, considering he defeated his Democratic primary opponent by a safe margin and has no other party opponent on the ballot come November 6. But a “Do over, ‘cuz I wasn’t ready!” write-in campaign by his primary opponent has Casey continuing his election efforts in order to ensure the Woonsocket, District 50 House seat is his.

And it damn well should be.

Stephen Casey deserves this seat on merit alone. The twelve-year Woonsocket resident is a firefighter and the son of a current town politician. He and his wife, Debra, own a home on Park Ave. where he mows his own lawn and pays taxes on his house and two older cars. In Woonsocket, his taxes are higher than he would like, but necessary to avoid desperate measures for Woonsocket, such as the city being handed to a receiver to be taken into bankruptcy. Casey is willing to accept this current sacrifice as a necessary reality, but hopes that, as a representative, he can provide a strong voice to bring Woonsocket back to economic, middle class stability.

Casey holds a degree in communications from Boston College and, before becoming a firefighter, he worked in the financial industry in both customer service and supervisory roles. He supports serious reconsideration of the state tax codes, instituted in 2006 and re-instituted in 2010. The regressive tax policies were initially designed to attract job creators by “simplifying” the tax codes. In reality, the policies gave tax breaks to the wealthiest Rhode Islanders and left working families to make up the difference. Apparently, seeing as the state boasts the second highest levels of unemployment in the nation, (and, according to the RI DLT’s LMI, Woonsocket’s are higher than state average) the current tax system has not served its purpose. Casey supports tax equity, where millionaires and working families all pay their fair share of taxes. Furthermore, Casey believes in a long term approach to attracting business to Woonsocket, starting with straightening out the city’s school system, thereby making it a desirable place to raise a family. He emphasizes Woonsocket as being a well located community, but businesses are moving out rather than moving in. Casey aims to change that.

Stephen Casey believes in a hands on approach to everything he does. He has personally marched the streets of the city, knocking on doors and offering a winning smile and an open mind. He listens and offers main street solutions to problems created by wall street and its supporters. He attends School Committee and Council meetings to find out what the people say about Woonsocket’s strengths and weaknesses.

At a fundraiser event held at a local Woonsocket tavern, one found, not only suits and ties but jeans and Patriots jerseys as well. This reflects Casey’s attitude toward making change his highest priority. “I never fancied myself a politician.” he said in an interview. Rather, he saw a problem and decided to take a level headed approach to helping to solve that problem. He discussed it with his wife and the two agreed to tackle the problem from the middle class out and the bottom up.

Stephen Casey is a newcomer to politics and he believes in taking the high road. When asked about his message he says, “I’ve never been into name calling … people are tired of hearing it.” He wants people to get out and vote. That is their right as Americans and he emphasizes the sacrifices Americans have made throughout history for that right. And if they are tired of politics as usual and desire change, vote for Stephen Casey.

In this author’s opinion, they already have and that is why Casey took the primary. The people of district 50 made their decision once and now, in spite of the obstacles that have been placed before him in what should be a clear road to the House of Representatives seat for Woonsocket, the people will vote again. If they want an honest, hard working, hands-on candidate determined to do whatever is in his power to change Woonsocket and Rhode Island for the better, they will vote Stephen Casey.

For these reasons, my endorsement for House of Representatives: District 50 – Woonsocket goes to Stephen Casey.

Posted on

Pearson Shines Light on Moura’s Stone-Age Politics


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

In spite of his youth, Ryan Pearson has already served a tenure with the Cumberland School Committee and has built bridges there, rather than simply padding his resume for future office.

He also ran for the state Senate once before and lost by a narrow margin to current Senator Beth Moura. Pearson has a background in finance, currently holding position with RBS Citizens. That combination of an ever increasing financial savvy and a youthful enthusiasm for fixing Rhode Island’s broken political structure implies a refreshing, if a bit naive, desire for change in his district and Rhode Island as a whole.

Perhaps an even more immediate and pressing reason for electing Pearson is to banish Beth Moura from any public policy making position. Moura is a dangerous and mean-spirited social conservative who has made public statements that show her to be a radical, right wing obstructionist of progress.

Her stances on voter ID laws suggest a possible desire to repeal the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Furthermore, her speech to RIILE, when referencing a March 2012 ProJo article suggesting a possible relationship between a controversial bill concerning “reasonable suspicion” needed for more than standard identification requests during routine police stops and possible racial profiling led to viral video footage of  her saying: “If Rhode Island is so full of racists and bigots why do they keep coming here?” (insert groan of dismay here).

She also incited controversy, via incendiary tweets in reference to Cranston West student, Jessica Ahlquist’s, constitutional rights to objecting to having to be subjected to Christian doctrine in public school. Twitter responses to Moura’s unkind tweets involved the common idiom of Moura having “put her foot in her mouth.” Her response was to contact the State Police and charge “communication of threats.”

Ryan Pearson is likeable. He’s bright. He’s enthusiastic and energetic. He’s kind and personable and makes youthful naivete appear filled with the possibility of progressive policy education throughout his political career. His incumbent opponent, on the other hand, I would like to keep at least one hundred yards away from schools and playgrounds. Therefore I endorse Ryan Pearson for state senate in district 19: Lincoln/Cumberland.

Posted on

Send Congressman David Cicilline Back to Beltway


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

Congressman David Cicilline made some mistakes as Mayor of Providence. He made some enemies and he also made some friends. Many will say that a vote for David will be only to prevent the loss of a Democratic seat in the House of Representatives to a Republican. Fair enough. However, to Congressman Cicilline’s credit, he has voted in favor of jobs and the preservation of Medicare and Medicaid as we know it. He has legal experience, mayoral experience and US Congressional experience.

Brendan Doherty, on the other hand, has experience in political ads that bear almost no resemblance to the truth, contradicting his campaign slogan of “uncommon integrity.” He has also allied himself with Mitt Romney and the GOP platform. This includes an infrastructure bill that has been described by Transportation Secretary, Ray La Hood (a former republican) as the worst he’s seen in thirty years of public service. Doherty’s description of Romney as “fantastic” within a week or so of the viral disclosure of Mitt’s infamous 47% diatribe burned his bridges with many of the Democrats for Doherty.

My endorsement goes to David Cicilline.

Posted on

Scott Brown TV Ads Are Theater of the Absurd


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 battle between Senator Scott Brown and progressive challenger Elizabeth Warren has spilled over the Massachusetts border into Rhode Island, and those who have missed the volley of advertisements are either altogether abstaining from TV or hopelessly engrossed in what happens next to Honey Boo Boo.

Those in the latter group have probably stumbled upon this article by mistake and may wish to return to searching for video footage of pocket sized canines dressed as famous seventies sit-com characters. For the rest, however, the pro and anti candidate propaganda has become as familiar as it is nuclear in nature.

But in the spirit of fairness, Elizabeth Warren’s media blast to her political universe is purely self-defense. Senator Scott Brown, along with his super PAC America 360, has launched a campaign of misinformation, misdirection, racism and lies. And the sad part is, to an unfortunate extent, it is working. They are not dubbed “low information voters” for nothing.

He has drawn attention to her Native American heritage. This is something Mrs. Warren was informed of by family members as a child and grew up believing to be true. It may have been a family tie of which she held some pride. Or, it may have been a legend that was misconstrued among the oral history passed between generations, as is the case in many families. Who knows? Who cares? This much, however, is guaranteed: to be Native American has certainly not been advantageous for Native Americans since the first Europeans decided to claim this land as their own. So, for Brown to allege that Warren has achieved her success due to her claiming a small percentage Native American heritage is merely fueling distrust and racism. It has even led to such bigoted name calling as “Little Liarwatha,” and “Granny Pocahontas.”

If that is not enough to make one’s blood boil, Brown has accused Warren of cheating victims of asbestosis and their families out of settlement money during her time as an attorney with Travelers Insurance and profiting from their misfortune. The slanderous statements are a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. In fact, Mrs. Warren fought for the victims and their families and set aside a half-billion dollar trust to compensate the workers affected by the asbestos, both present and future. True, she earned wages for her legal services rendered as most working people do. But it was only after she was no longer employed by the insurance company responsible for the case that Travelers weaseled out of payment of the trust. Mrs. Warren no longer had any say in the matter. Furthermore, it is suspected that, upon separation with her former employer, she signed a confidentiality agreement forbidding her from commenting on this or any other legal matters.

Are Brown’s ads only slamming Mrs. Warren? Is he taking any measures to promote himself? One might think that, in a political climate where likeability is often more important that facts, how is Senator Brown attempting to win the hearts of his constituents? Keep in mind, the Massachusetts political universe is deeply and sincerely Democratic and the seat currently held by Senator Brown was previously occupied by the beloved and quintessentially Democratic, Ted Kennedy.

In fact, Brown has been distancing himself from certain political personality traits associated with the Republican party. His television ads show him as being just a regular working guy as a means by which to paint his opponent, Elizabeth Warren, as elitist and out of touch with working class people. He is seen driving a truck and wearing plaid and eating a hot dog at a farmers market. Personal experience has confirmed that, in fact, many voters actually think he is running as an independent.

One of Brown’s television spot shows his support of women, a voting demographic that encompasses a large percentage of the registered independent voters in Massachusetts. The advertisement is composed of a montage of women extolling Brown’s virtues as a strong supporter of women’s rights.

 

Scott Brown is pro-choice, and he supports a woman’s right to choose. I like that Scott Brown is independent, he really thinks for himself. His record shows that he supports women, he supports families. When my daughters grow up, I want to make sure that they have good jobs with equal pay, and I know Scott Brown will fight for that. I support Scott Brown because I know he wants to get our economy moving forward again. I’m a mom, I have a family, and I know that Scott Brown will fight hard for families.

This is a different Scott Brown from the Senator we have seen before. In fact, his record shows that many of these statements are either misleading, coded or just plain false. The Senator voted against the Paycheck Fairness Act, in spite of the ad’s promise to “fight for” equal pay. He was a co-sponsor of several bills related to ant-choice positions, including the Woman’s Right To Know Act, which would force a woman to wait 24 hours before getting an abortion and view pictures and literature about the fetus. Senator Brown was in favor of the Blunt Amendment, designed to allow employers and insurers to deny women any health coverage they might find morally distasteful. Furthermore, Brown has also voted to de-fund Planned Parenthood. And, while it might not be in direct relation to women’s issues, the repeated use of phrasing pertaining to “families” suggests both strong anti-choice and anti-marriage  equality sentiments.

Elizabeth Warren makes no secret of her support of Unions and growing the middle class, not from the top-down as proposed by supply-side economics, formerly known as “trickle-down” economics. She believes in a level playing field and government providing a strong safety-net role in economic regulation to promote fairness and job-development. Warren sees affordable education as a real and necessary foundation to growing a stable workforce. She was the architect of the Consumer Protection Act that has led to punishment for predatory banking and credit card practices.

Scott Brown, on the other hand, was called “Wall Street’s favorite congressman” by Forbes Magazine. Perhaps it was because during the December, 2010 debate on terms for extending the Bush tax cuts, Brown voted against an amendment to keep the Bush tax cuts for the middle class, but end them for people making over $1 million a year. Or maybe it had something to do with the May, 2011, vote to block a bill that would reduce the federal deficit by closing special tax loopholes that benefit oil and gas companies. This specific measure was designed to target only the world’s five biggest oil companies, not small producers, and could have reduced the deficit by nearly $21 billion over ten years.

What has he done for his home state of Massachusetts? Brown voted against a bill to keep 2,400 Massachusetts seniors from losing in-home care and assistance with basic living activities, and protect vulnerable children.He voted for a bill cutting Pell Grants for approximately135,000 Massachusetts students and for budget cuts that would have cost Massachusetts 17,000 jobs and job training for 27,000 residents.

Perhaps Brown is moderate by Tea Party or radical Republican standards. One probably will not catch him saying that pregnancy occurring as a result of rape are is God’s will or referring to Mrs. Warren as acting unladylike. But make no mistake, Scott Brown is a GOP man through and through and when it comes to the decisions that will define the plot of this nation’s drama, Brown will have no qualms about playing the protagonist that leads the rising action to the right, to the one percent and to a tragic outcome for the dwindling working class whom he sees fit to do nothing but fill the cheap seats.

Posted on

Elizabeth Warren Reaches Rhode Island Family


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
Photo courtesy of Elizabeth Warren for Mass.

It is all too often that I encounter the jaded political soul. Every day I hear a variation on the theme of distrust of all politicians.

“They’re all liars,” “I hate all politicians” and “None of them care about anyone but themselves.”

It is easy to think that way and, I must admit, I have become callous about many candidates and elected officials through my work with and for them in varying capacities. So when I was granted the privilege of meeting US Senate candidate from Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren, I was awestruck.

This woman is the truth.

Fall River is where I met her. This past Friday night, she was in town at the Kuss Middle School with Joe Kennedy III and Representative Bill Keating. Both men gave their own brand of well crafted rhetoric and warmed the crowd of locals before Elizabeth Warren took the stage.

She stuck to her message of growing the American economy from the middle class out and ensuring that women had a defender in Washington. She gave a summary of facts about the shortcomings of her opponent’s voting record on the same issues. I’m sure the readership of this site is well versed in Mrs. Warren’s platform vs. that of her opponent, Scott Brown’s, so I won’t rehash the details. Suffice it to say, her words hit home with the audience and the enthusiasm was electric.

However, It was after she spoke that I was most impressed with Mrs. Warren. Anyone who has followed her campaign for Senate knows the white hot spotlight that has been shined upon her by the media and by her opponent. This, of course, is part of the price one pays for running for such an important and strongly contested office. Of this Mrs. Warren is aware and spoke about it at the end of her speech, saying that in spite of the physical and emotional drain, each day she will work and fight from before the sun comes up until long after it sets.

I assumed following the raucous applause that she would spend a few minutes for photo ops with a select group of people chosen strategically to demonstrate her commitment to the young, the old, the working class, the students, etc. Then she would be whisked away through a back exit to rest or prepare or possibly meet in a quieter setting with other politicians or important benefactors. But she didn’t. Instead, she stayed and posed for every snapshot requested by her fans. She shook every hand in the room. She met everyone’s eye and listened – truly listened – to every single bit of praise or concern brought to her attention.

And after that, she stayed even longer.

I was there with my wife and eight-month-old daughter and an enthusiastic group of labor organization members. As soon as Mrs. Warren finished speaking, we pushed our way to the center of the flood of people and managed to get a group photo. Then the tide rose, tossing us to the outskirts where I was grabbed for an interview with a local newspaper and various sales pitches from other local pols.

Then I collected my family and we began to make our way to the exits. But as we said some final goodbyes, a nearby friend saw an opening and handed me a smart phone to try and snap a last minute photo with Mrs Warren. I agreed and took the snapshot. It was then that she walked over to us and hunched down to eye level with my daughter, Audrey, held by my wife, Michele. She hunched because she is taller than one would expect. She took Audrey’s feet in her hands and talked to her, then to Michele. She said mothers and daughters were why she was fighting so hard and why she would never stop fighting.

I saw tears in her eyes and in my wife’s eyes as well.

This was a moment I will never forget. This woman took the time to speak with strangers after the cameras stopped flashing. She put in the voluntary overtime to speak with a working family, rather than rest or fundraise or strategize against the onslaught of personal attacks launched by her opponent. Furthermore, she spoke with a family of Rhode Islanders who can’t even vote for her.

My job, as of late, has placed me in Fall River for most of my working hours. I travel the streets and speak with residents and I can say with confidence that the city has fallen on some extremely difficult economic times. In fact, Fall River fell into recession long before the rest of the country and sunk even deeper when the nation’s economy tanked. And, while I see a few Scott Brown signs tied to fences and tacked to businesses, the overwhelming sentiment is positive for Warren. But the commonwealth as a whole is a very different story.

Elizabeth Warren has a fight ahead of her. She is on a tear through Massachusetts in a final stretch attempt to rally as many supporters as possible for her November 6th showdown with Republican incumbent, Scott Brown. Mrs. Warren is using a grassroots approach to counter Senator Brown’s negative mailed literature, sponsored by super PAC America 360. The super political action committee funded the attack ad flier to the tune of $200,000 and I suspect many dark and stormy television ads with the same grim, grainy, anti-Warren message are to follow. Like many in his party, Brown seems to relish in truth avoidance when it comes to his own record, his party’s platform and his opponent in general.

But to see and hear Elizabeth Warren is to understand that she is more than just words. She is warm. She is honest. She is committed to her message in a way that instills hope in those like myself who understand too well the loud and greasy engine that powers the sleek and shining sports car of politics. In spite of her opponent’s portrayal of her as the elite, distant, wealthy professor, she came to Fall River and took the time to touch everyone who showed up.

Posted on

Good Start: DLT Recalls 7 Call Center Employees


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

In a recent statement from the Rhode Island Department of Labor & Training, seven of the fifty-one employees laid off last July are being recalled. DLT Director Fogarty praised both the Governor and the United States Department of Labor for their concern for customer service. Since the recent staff reduction, contact with the DLT’s Unemployment Insurance sector has gone from difficult to nearly impossible. While it is valid for DLT administration to celebrate the return of the seven staff members to help bail out the drowning department, it may be more appropriate to call this recall what it truly is: a good start.

Negotiations between the state and federal departments have resulted in the U.S. Department of Labor agreeing to allow allocation of approximately $500,000 for human resources from the UI Modernization Fund. This pool of money was initially intended for technological and automated system upgrades. However, given the drastic nature of the staff cuts – about two-thirds of the call center representatives’ jobs eliminated – the sheer volume of calls was too much to handle. Rhode Island is still holding strong with the second highest levels of unemployment in the country. The workload did not diminish and the technology did not improve on the scale to allow for the decimated staff to keep up.

SEIU Local 401 President Lynn Tipton commented on the recall stating, “Long waits and delayed processing of services have continued for Rhode Island’s unemployed.  The recall of 7 Senior Employment &Training Interviewers at DLT is a start in helping relieve some of the repercussions as a result of the original layoff of 57 workers in July. RIESA Local 401 SEIU continues to urge administration in locating more funds and continue the recall until they have an adequate workforce to serve its customers.”

As a laid off DLT employee I, myself, can attest to the customer service nightmare caused by the sudden elimination of fifty-one call center representatives out of a total of just over eighty. Unemployment Insurance Senior Employment & Training Interviewers – the actual job classification title of those laid off – consists of far more than answering the phones and processing internet claims for Unemployment Insurance. The details of the back office functions are intricate and fairly uninteresting to the layperson. Suffice it to say, taking a claimant from initial contact through to full understanding and timely and consistent payment of benefits requires time, care and follow-up. Answering the phones is merely the first of many steps toward giving quality customer service.

Is this infusion of seven trained and ready staff members a needed boost to the DLT’s UI sector in crisis? Yes. Does it merit appreciation of those who negotiated for the funds to be allocated where they are best spent right now: human resources? Absolutely. Is this a small victory for union labor/management relations at a time when they feel strained? Definitely. The union made a case that proved valid and it is the top seven in union seniority that are being called back.

On a related note, a non-union position was posted for an administrator of workforce development programs at a salary approximately twice that of a single one of the recalled employees. Dare I ask from where came the funding for that job?

Will these seven returning employees be able to ride in and save the customer service battle being valiantly fought in vain by the small troupe of remaining reps? Probably not. Even the Greeks at Thermopylae had three hundred Spartans. The DLT has far fewer, even with the seven returning. There are still over 60,000 unemployed Rhode Islanders seeking help in the areas of labor and training.

But seven is a good start and will hopefully lead to more being recalled in the future. In the spirit of full disclosure, I am not one of the seven being recalled at this time. But as one who is currently collecting Unemployment Insurance benefits while seeking full-time employment I can say that anything that will enhance my customer service experience when having to make contact with the department gets my full support.

On behalf of Rhode Island’s Unemployed citizens I would like to thank Director Fogarty, Governor Chafee and the others who helped in securing the funding to make our DLT experience a little easier. And we implore you to continue in this direction of fighting for funding to help those most in need.

 

Posted on

Many Unemployed, Fewer DLT Equals Big Problems


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
Governor Chafee (Photo by Bob Plain)

So Governor Chafee has justified the reduction in key staff of the Unemployment Insurance and Workforce Development sectors of the Department of Labor & Training by saying that our economy is improving sufficiently enough to justify the layoffs.

In a June 7th interview with WPRO, the Governor stated:

“Well, the DLT is the opposite of the economy. When the economy is bad they are hiring to deal with the unemployment insurance issues and as the economy stabilized, unfortunately, it goes the other way. They start to layoff those employees that they had to hire during the glut of unemployment insurance requests.”

Realistically speaking, this means a reduction in service center employees from around 90 to around 35. So Rhode Islands’s economy, by gubernatorial logic, has improved over 65%. When did that happen? Where were we? Didn’t 38 Studios just take a flaming nose dive into bankruptcy, crashing into Narragansett Bay in spectacular fashion? Didn’t Blue Cross just let over 40 employees go? Is there a secret, hidden construction boom going on? Is manufacturing on the rise? Does Mr. Chaffee realize that having the second highest levels of unemployment in the country is not worthy of a silver medal? Or is he simply not satisfied until Rhode Island wins first place at something?

Or is it something else?

Changes in Rhode Island laws are a matter of public record, but not often a matter of public knowledge. As of July 1st 2012, Rhode Island Labor Law 28-44-6 has undergone a fairly drastic change that will significantly reduce the means by which unemployment insurance weekly benefit rates are calculated. Without going into the formulaic details of the change, it is enough to say that it will reduce the weekly benefit rate in almost all cases. Come this time next year, the weekly benefit rate reduces again and as of July 1st, 2014, it reduces once more. In a state where over ten percent of claims include out of state wages (primarily due to the small geographic size of RI and it’s proximity to CT and MA), this reduces the incentive for claimants to choose Rhode Island as the state where they would receive a benefit rate most comparable to the income they were receiving prior to layoff.

Maybe. But not necessarily. Previously, Rhode Island was often the obvious choice when given the option to request the combination of out of state and Rhode Island taxed wages because of the generous means by which our weekly benefit rate was calculated. Now it will be comparable in many cases. But not significantly reduced. The more likely incentive will be for businesses who will be able to lay workers off with less of a payroll tax rating percentage increase. Good for “job creators” when they choose to be “job eliminators.”

Another change in the Labor Laws is the means by which a disqualification can be overcome. Previously, if a claimant was determined to be separated from an employer for disqualifying reasons – getting fired for wilfull misconduct or quitting without good cause – one needed only to return to work after the date of disqualifying separation for eight weeks and earn twenty times Rhode Island’s minimum wage for each of those weeks (8X$148) to overcome the prior disqualification and be allowed to collect on subsequent separation from employment. Now one must return to work for at least eight weeks and earn at least his or her weekly benefit rate for the disqualification to be overcome. This will prevent many from being able to collect after a single disqualification, even after redeeming themselves by returning to work and being separated again through no fault of their own.

Rhode Island has the right to know about changes that will affect the safety net of over eleven percent of it’s people. These same citizens also have the right to know that, while these changes – the reduction of key workforce at the DLT, the reduction of benefits, the increase in difficulty of overcoming disqualification of receipt of said benefits – may benefit the few (the job creators who create no jobs), they disenfranchise the many.

These decisions are not math, they are politics and, in spite of the deliberate confusion on the part of many politicians, there is a difference. The workload at the DLT has not reduced. The wait times for incoming calls to the call center have routineley exceeded one hundred minutes over the past few weeks. The back office functions and specialized  are falling far behind and work is piling up. After the two thirds reduction in front-line employees and the eliminations of entire sub-sections of specialization, things will not get more efficient. I will reiterate, this is math. Politics can not change math no matter how hard it tries.

Eleven percent unemployment. Insufficient training for a struggling workforce. Second highest unemployment rate in the country. 65% reduction in front line workforce on the front lines at the Department of Labor & Training. That is the math problem. Solve for X using politics.

Posted on

Drowning DLT to Replace People with Robots


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

As we all are by now aware, Rhode Island’s unemployed and under-employed population are preparing themselves to receive fewer and less effective services from the State of Rhode Island. The unprecedented reduction in workforce does not correspond with the extremely high workload created by the second highest levels of unemployment in the nation, and stagnant level of jobless citizens seeking help.

But wait! Never fear because technology is here!

Currently a system has been implemented called “The Call Back Manager.” This system gives those who require assistance from a call center representative the option to either wait on hold for the next available representative or to wait for a call back by the next available representative. This means that less call center representatives are needed. Right?

But who calls the people back?

I suppose that minor detail was overlooked when calculating the number of staff to cut. The automated system still connects a customer with a human representative, trained to assist them in any number of widely varying claims issues and providing information. Okay, so that’s just one minor miscalculation. There is other technology being encouraged by the wise elders administrating the efficiency-enhancing devices being implemented to ease the transition from human to robot. In fact, recent press has encouraged claimants to file their claims for unemployment insurance via the internet. This makes sense. The claim can smoothly pass through the system without a single set of human eyes ever having to scan the claim. Right?

But how about the hundreds of variables that stimulate the need for contact between claimant and specialist to clarify details left out or mistakenly interpreted? Or how about the fact that wages from other states play an enormous legal factor in accurately determining benefit calculations or entitlement in this state? Furthermore, when details like this are overlooked (as they quite often are by the already implemented “internet clean claim system”) this leads to many dollars lost in non-recoverable overpayments.

Well of course there are a few bugs to be worked out and that’s why we hired the experts from private industry to come and evaluate the specific needs of our department and tailor their products to best serve Rhode Island’s jobless needs. These corporations have Rhode Islander’s best interests at heart and the prices paid for their services are well worth the taxpayers dollars.

We have the front desk, where a person can walk in and speak with a representative who is explicitly instructed to have the customer complete a call-back form to be dispersed among the representatives and contact will be made within five business days to aid the individual. In fact, they can do this from an automated, touch-screen kiosk and never have to speak with a live person at all. Despite the fact that this is technically listed as the Unemployment Service Center, it is actually a call center and we do not provide services directly in-person.

But who calls them back?  Or, for that matter, the people who request information about payment via the UIHelp email system?

Well questions like this are simply wrinkles guaranteed to be ironed out after the majority of the representatives are laid off. The fact remains, when a person loses his or her job, he or she wants a human being to explain the rights of legal entitlement. People want to be helped by other people. Automation is excellent at facilitating what human resources can do. But we have all had the frustrating experience of having a complication with an organization, the solution to which is not offered as a numbered choice by the robot voice on the end of the line. When these complications are on the scale of losing one’s home and feeding one’s family, one wants to talk to another human being; a human being trained to explain in detail the when, where and how of the financial lifeline when it is needed most.

You will hear me repeat this many times before my writing days are over: Rhode Island is a reactive state. Not a proactive state. A little foresight goes a long way. Keep the staffing levels as they are and those drowning may stay afloat. Continue on the path of decimating a vital state agency and watch the water levels rise. The choice is up to the legislators and, lest we forget, the legislators answer to the citizens.

But only if the citizens speak up.

Posted on

Layoffs Could Cause Crisis for Unemployed Rhode Islanders


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

Recently, the DLT has been informed of an unprecedented reduction in workforce. Up to sixty-nine employees are scheduled to lose their jobs on July 28th, 70 percent of these are to come from the Unemployment Insurance sector. The irony of going from working to serve unemployed citizens in their time of need, to being one of those in need of such assistance is not lost on us. This layoff is guaranteed to significantly decrease the department’s ability to provide the necessary level of customer service.

The bottom line is this: Rhode Island’s employment situation is not improving quickly and this mass layoff of frontline workers is going make more acute the pain unemployed Rhode Islanders are already feeling.
At 11% unemployment Rhode Island already has the second highest jobless rate in the country. The Rhode Island Department of Labor & Training provides that assistance with its divisions of Income Support and Workforce Development for the approximately 62,000 Rhode Islanders out of work.

At its current staffing levels, DLT is already it struggling to keep up with the demand for services. I know this because I work as a Senior Employment & Training Interviewer with Unemployment Insurance. I am one of the many representatives that work hard to ensure fair and timely processing of payments within the increasingly complex system of jobless benefits.

The cutback in staff will exponentially delay benefits payments to those facing extreme hardship. It will hold back dollars from flowing into economically starved local economies. Entire specialized sectors of benefits specialists could be eliminated, including but not limited to the already challenged office dedicated to processing military claims. This will lead to extremely long delays in benefits to those men and women in uniform, returning from service. Our veterans have honorably served our country and are owed the highest quality of service the state can provide.

Finally, the State of Rhode Island is a direct reimbursable employer. This means that they are responsible to pay the employees that they lay off dollar for dollar when these employees file for Unemployment Insurance. This burden falls ultimately to the taxpayer. Therefore, Rhode Island’s taxpayers will be on the hook for upwards of one million dollars in benefits paid out to laid off DLT staff to perform no services to Rhode Island citizens. This estimation does not include subsidizing health insurance for the out of work employees and their families. I know, personally, my wife and infant daughter will be forced to seek public assistance to help pay the high costs of staying insured.

Is there a solution? I think so. The state of Rhode Island needs to create a plan to find and allocate funds to maintain appropriate staff levels at the DLT. When a house is on fire one does not take the firefighter’s hose and replace it with a watering can. Rhode Island is our house and it is burning. Rather than reducing the economic stream that can help contain this fire and eventually extinguish the blaze, the state needs to locate the funds and allow them to flow to where the fire burns brightest: the people who need it most.


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