38 Studios – Page 3

November 21, 2012November 21, 2012

Progress Report: 38 Studios Scoop; Localvore Recipes; Banksters vs. Liz Warren; Thanks, ALEC and Earned Media

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

greenwich cove fall light — Greenwich Cove (Photo by Bob Plain)

It’s amazing some of the things we’re willing to believe … Jesus was born to a virgin, Thomas Jefferson thought all men were created equal, Reaganomics works and, the perhaps the biggest doozie of them all, that Rhode Island did its due diligence in assessing the 38 Studios deal.

For anyone still hanging onto that most recent bit of malarchy, Tim White and Ted Nesi have some news for you.

One of the most interesting aspects of their scoop is Linc Chafee’s letter to Keith Stokes about the impending deal, and Stokes’ reply – which was essentially that smarter business minds than Chafee’s had already vetted the deal … which goes to show, I think, that being successful in the free market doesn’t always – or even all that often – translate into having a flair for what works with regard to public policy.

Progressive Charlestown has been blogging about localvore recipes this week … a great idea, you guys!!

The banksters don’t want Elizabeth Warren on the Senate committee that oversees their industry. No surprise there … I wonder what the people want? And which constituency will get its way?

Dee DeQuattro lists her 12 biggest turkeys for 2012. Noticeably missing from her list is the guy she’s suing.

How small is Rhode Island? We would fit into Alaska more than 547 times! I once lived in a county in Oregon that was about four times the size of our state. And before that in an unincorporated hamlet in Northern California that only had about 200 full-time residents, but was at least twice the size of the Ocean State.

Bob Kerr reminds us of some of the Rhode Islanders we should be thankful for. And Elizabeth McNamara of EG Patch has a great piece on all the things a community journalist should be thankful for … including fast-talking editors!

Thanks to John Marion, executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island, local public officials will have to disclose more of the travel expenses comped to them because of their public positions. The new rule, Marion said, is a result of some shoe leather reporting by the local media.

Here’s how the ProJo reports it:

Marion said the rule request was prompted by Providence Journal reports concerning two legislators’ controversial trips. One trip was taken by Senate Majority Leader Dominic J. Ruggerio, to a Buenos Aires, Argentina, luxury hotel last year, paid for by a New Jersey organization, the Senate President’s Forum. The other, Marion said, “was by soon-to-be former Senator Jon Brien’s travel to these conferences held by the American Legislative Exchange Council, otherwise known as ALEC.” Marion said, “In both instances, that travel wouldn’t have come to public light except for the reporting that had occurred about them.

One clarification: that was my shoe leather on the ALEC story. In an email to me this morning, Marion confirmed, “It was the Projo reporting on Ruggerio that first led us to this idea, and RI Future’s reporting on ALEC that pushed us to make a request of the Commission.”

November 8, 2012November 8, 2012

Speaking to the Speaker

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

Winners in political races have it easy. They thank everyone and move forward. The Silver Medalists analyze what went wrong and fade into the shadows. Is it possible to write a post-election column as the loser and not sound self-serving, shrill or sour? I’m going to do my best.

From the beginning, this race was about the way that the legislature hasn’t been working effectively for the citizens, voters and taxpayers.

My analysis of the way the system functions is this:

On Election Day, 75 men and women are voted into the Rhode Island House of Representatives.
Shortly after that a number of them meet. They horse trade over issues and bills and power. Then they determine who will be the Speaker. You’re either on the team or you’re off.
In January, the 75 Reps vote on the Speaker and the Rules of the House. Currently, these rules give the Speaker the authority to set the agenda and move legislation on and off the floor at his or her discretion
And for the next two years, all of the Reps who are not part of the “Leadership” beg for scraps and line items. The true outsiders get nothing.

The system, as a voter in Mt. Hope said, isn’t broken. It works great for those in charge. But it doesn’t work so well for Rhode Island. We, the people, elected you to be our Representatives, not to give away your power.

The deals that representatives make are supposed to be in the best interest of the state as a whole, not the special interests and campaign donors. Payday lending rates of 260% annual interest are usurious and unjustifiable. Votes on social issues, like Marriage Equality, ought to be held early every session rather than suppressed.

Our State’s business climate is not just dependent on tax rates, tax breaks and loan guarantees. Your business should not depend on the whim of a Speaker and the uninformed consent of the Legislature.

Our children should not be educated in a system that is overhauled in the middle of the night on a budget vote with no public debate, discussion or even planning. Children need more than institutions and buildings, they need books and materials. Students need more than testing, they need teachers who have the time and permission to teach them on their own terms.

I hope that my challenge to Gordon Fox reminds him, and every other Speaker who follows, that the power that they wield derives from the people.

You are not in charge. We are.

November 2, 2012November 1, 2012

Reforming the Legislature

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

Ask 100 people about Rhode Island’s government and 105 will say it’s broken, and probably not fixable.

Phase 1: Attack the Assumptions

From day one, my campaign for House District 4 has been about challenging that truism. It was clear to me at the start that the Speaker of the House used his power to push through the 38 Studios Video Game disaster, and then denied any responsibility for the outcome.

The most powerful man in the state of Rhode Island beaten by an unknown independent? That would create an opportunity for a breath of fresh air. At the start of the campaign, many people questioned whether my attempt was even credible. Today, few doubt that it is. We’ve had our fair share of media publicity. The smiles on the faces of neighbors and strangers throughout the district when I knock on their doors and give my pitch are reassuring too.

Currently, it’s looking like a close race, so we’re pushing ahead our next plan…

Phase 2: Change the Rules

Politics abhors a power vacuum, and many have expressed fears that whoever comes post-Fox will be “worse.” Better the devil you know? That’s so old school. How about a new way of running the State government that actually works for the State?

The old system works like this. Thirty-eight representatives agree to elect one of their members a Speaker. Then they give all their power to the Speaker, do whatever he (or she) says, and beg for scraps.

Why? I realize that the existence of a Speaker is specified in the State’s Constitution, but the system seems to work well only for the leadership. And the special interests who contribute to campaigns and lobbyists.

It doesn’t seem to work very well for the citizens, voters and taxpayers of this state. It doesn’t seem to work very well for the individual legislators outside the circle of power. Arrangements are made in back rooms, deals are cut, and votes are delayed until the last minute so that no one really knows what is going on.

Today I am inviting and challenging the current and future reps to adopt a government reform proposal in caucus before electing the next Speaker of the House.

Members of the House can and must make it a priority to fix the structural problems that led to such controversial decisions as the 38 Studios deal and this year’s last minute mash-up of the Board of Regents and the Office of Higher Education. We must adopt a drastic reform plan and secure a commitment from any candidate for Speaker to support the plan before committing our votes.

The starter elements for this plan include:

The proposal put forth by State Representative Spencer Dickinson to prohibit campaign fundraising during the legislative session. This will prevent the corrosive contributions before, during and after working on legislation that benefit the special interests.
Amending the House rules to prevent the House Finance Chair from introducing amendments to the budget without prior notice. This will prevent late night amendments, like the one that smashed together the Board of Regents and office of Higher Ed.
Requiring the General Assembly to comply with the 48-hour notice provision of the Open Meetings Law for both committee and floor actions, thus making our government truly open and public.

There are other ideas floating around: a deadline for bringing bills out of committee before the end of the session to prevent the onslaught of last-minute votes and give legislators time to actually read the bills; allotting time in the calendar for legislators to call for votes from the floor for bills, thus short-circuiting the dead-in-committee morass.

Putting the power of the legislator into the hands of one person doesn’t work for the State. It doesn’t work for the voters, and it costs taxpayers money. Meaningful steps have to be taken to prevent the kind of scandals and abuses of power we have seen under Gordon Fox and his predecessors. It’s time to move ahead.

We know that every candidate is getting the message that people are fed up with the kinds of deals and abuses that produced 38 Studios. So let’s do something about it and make fixing state government a priority.

Legislators need to come together in caucus and say that there will be no vote for Speaker until a roadmap for government reform is in place and has the support of the woman or man elected speaker.

Every legislator who supports this roadmap to reform will be able to tell his or her constituents that ‘I stood up and fought to change the way business is done in the State House.’

Most important, these kinds of changes are wins for the people, the voters and the taxpayers.

The rules that we have haven’t been working. It’s time to change the rules.

November 1, 2012November 2, 2012

38 Studios Shoe Drops

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

This afternoon, Governor Chafee announced the state would be pursuing legal action against not only the officers of 38 Studios, but also the financial advisors and the EDC staff who put the deal together. I highly recommend reading the actual complaint, but here is the part that stands out for me:

The undisclosed risks included the express admission, made by 38 Studios’ directors and chief executives directly to these Advisors, and by 38 Studios’ own financial projections that were disclosed to the Advisors, that, even with the loan from the EDC, 38 Studios was undercapitalized by many millions of dollars and would not have nearly enough money to relocate to Rhode Island and complete Copernicus, and that, as a result of this cash shortfall, 38 Studios was likely to run out of money in 2012. The EDC Board understood that 38 Studios’ capital requirements to complete Copernicus were approximately $75 million, and that the net proceeds to be lent to 38 Studios would be less than $75 million. Nevertheless, the EDC Board was also told that the net proceeds 38 Studios would receive, along with other sources of funds set forth in 38 Studios’ financial projections, “would provide necessary financing to relocate 38 Studios to Rhode Island, complete production of Copernicus, and capitalize the company’s growth and expansion in Rhode Island.” In fact, the Advisors knew or should have known that this was untrue, and that even if all of 38 Studios’ financial projections proved true, the net proceeds would not be sufficient to fund 38 Studios’ relocation to Rhode Island and completion of Copernicus.

According to the complaint, the deal was put together against the advice of lower-level EDC staff, according to projections that guaranteed failure by last summer, pretty much exactly what happened. The complaint also points out all the ways in which the EDC top brass and the deal-makers prevented the EDC board from hearing data to contradict them. The complaint says the EDC analyst who threw cold water on the proposal was un-asked to prepare his economic analysis, the agendas were manipulated to keep damaging information out of board discussions (most famously by preventing then-candidate Lincoln Chafee from speaking to it, but there are other incidents in the complaint).

So we learn that Governor Chafee was not the cause that sent 38 down the drain. The cause was wishful thinking by powerful people, who thought that ignoring the lowly analysts was the right thing to do. By 38 Studios own projections, $75 million wasn’t going to be enough to do the job, and when they found out they weren’t even going to get that much, due to deductions for debt reserve funds, they forged ahead anyway.

The complaint is, of course, just that: a complaint, a set of allegations. The facts in it remain to be proven, but it seems possible there will be a trial to come out of it. If so, it will be a spectacular look at how deals are made around here and how illusions of good times ahead can drive sensible people to do silly things. Having looked at the complaint, I have no doubt that the misfeasance alleged in it was motivated by a desire to see something cool happen for Rhode Island. (Well, most of it, anyway.) But purity of motive is no excuse for sloppiness of analysis, a message that is as applicable to debates about polls, climate change, economics, or business projections for a video game company. It’s a real world out there, and real numbers have a way of biting you in tender parts when you ignore them.

October 18, 2012October 21, 2012

RI Future, Gordon Fox Serve Those in Charge

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

In two of his recent Progress Reports, Bob Plain, the editor of RI Future, posted comments that trouble me on several levels.

It’s unlikely Binder will knock Fox out of office, but he could help move him back toward the left side of the political spectrum. Or he could do just enough political damage to make it hard for him to retain the Speaker’s gavel, which might not be a good thing for progressives…
—Bob Plain, RI Progress Report

Fox is more conservative than we’d like in a Speaker and Binder is less experienced than we’d like in a state Representative. Practically speaking, wheen factoring in both of these circumstances, the House of Representatives probably moves to the right if Binder were to upset Fox.
—Bob Plain, RI Progress Report

This logic remind me of what a Mt. Hope voter said to me recently:

“I don’t think the government is broken. I think it’s working just fine for those who are in charge.”

Unlikely?

As I’ve been knocking on doors throughout my district, the reception I have been getting is warm and congratulatory. People smile and thank me for running, especially against Gordon Fox. Then they say, “Do you think you have a chance?” I answer quite honestly, “If you and all the people you know vote for me, then I will win.”

Fox moves left?

38 Studios: A deal brokered by Michael Corso, a Fox business associate who profited at the expense of the taxpayers. Shoved through in a typical late night session with little debate. Representatives on the floor of the house deny that they knew that the $75 million was slated for a baseball players dream team. Even now, Gordon Fox flip flops on whether he knew/didn’t know before ramming the bill through.
Payday Lending Reform: 50 State Reps co-sponsored a bill to reduce payday lending from 260% to about 36%. Bill Murphy, a former Speaker, was paid $50,000 by an out-of-state payday lending company. The bill died in committee. Fox said that the bill had been watered down. Why didn’t he just put the straight bill on the table?
Marriage Equality: Civil unions are not enough. Maybe when Fox made his great compromise he thought that they were. If so, why have only 52 couples opted for the watered-down civil union option in the past two years? Since then Fox has promised to pass marriage equality but continued to duck his responsibility and avoid wielding his power to bring this black and white issue to a vote. Why? Because it protects Conservative Democrats, and it might fail. Boo hoo.
The Midnight Education Merger: At the beginning of 2012, Fox promised no last minute votes. He broke that promise, and one of the results was the mashup of the Board of Regents and the Office of Higher Education. Asked in a debate why, he shrugged and said, “We have to try something.” No public discussion, no debate. From the folk I’ve talked with one in the elementary schools or universities want to be under the thumb of the same organization. George D. Caruolo, another former Speaker, will have a good job.

Where is the Progressive in these issues?

Political Damage?

Our legislature is dominated by fear. The Reps and Senators give away their power at the beginning of the session to the “leaders” and then beg for crumbs.

They cower in fear in the halls of the legislature and then crow when the leaders give them a line item in the budget or let one of their proposals rise from the black hole of committee. They whisper and confer and suspend the rules and vote on bills that most of them haven’t read. This is called “hardball politics.”

How’s that working for our state? The other day at the gym, a guy on a treadmill joked that every year the legislature passes lots of election bills because they always seems to benefit the legislators.

What else benefits the legislators? They get campaign contributions from special interests, and then submit bills, vote on bills and push bills through that benefit those special interests.

And it’s all out there in the public record.

Gordon Fox collected $7,200 in contributions from auto repair shops, just 90 days before he pushed through a controversial auto insurance bill that benefitted those shops at the expense of consumers. Thankfully, the Governor vetoed the bill.
The law firm Adler Pollack and Sheehan raised $7,300 for the Speaker. Shortly after that, they got the contract from the Joint Committee on Legislative Services to defend the gerrymandering in the legislative redistricting plan in court.
And as recently as September 5th, the Speaker hauled in $5,900 from the lobbyist for the car wash industry and a number of car washes. That came just months after the Speaker rammed through a last minute budget proposal to exempt car washes—an only car washes—from the Governor’s expanded sales tax.

Are these really all coincidences? Who benefits from contributions to Gordon Fox’s $200,000+ campaign slush fund? Voters? Taxpayers?

Was this a move to the right or the right move?

Meanwhile, Fox has bought into the Conservative dogma that raising taxes is bad for business and good for government. And he’s given the Casinos a sweetheart deal that means taxpayers will have to loose three times as much at table games as they do at the slots just for the State to break even on what it gets now.

How’s that all going for us?

Is Speaker Fox retaining the gavel really doing the Progressives any benefit? Is having Gordon Fox in the House benefitting the people in District Four?

I think it’s clear that our “representatives” haven’t been working for us. They have been working for each other and for their special interests.

In Gordon Fox’s case, he’s been working hard for his business associates, former Speakers, and for the campaign contributors. For the people in his district? Not so much.

I will be honored if you vote for me, and help knock them out.

October 2, 2012October 2, 2012

Progress Report: Plastic Bags in Barrington; Offshore Wind Farm off Block Island, Cub Scouts in Cranston; Patch, SRIN

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

Congratulations to Barrington for becoming the first town in Rhode Island to ban plastic grocery bags, and here’s hoping many more municipalities follow suit; such restrictions serve as a great aid in cleaning up Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island’s greatest natural asset.

Speaking of firsts, the first offshore wind farm in the United States, which should generate enough electricity to power almost 20,000 homes, could be built off Block Island by 2014, says the Providence Journal. If you’re worried about the five, 600-foot-tall turbines effect on the environment, this is what the ProJo says the project will do to keep things cozy for wildlife:

“During construction, Deepwater would use a spotter boat and would suspend work if [endangered North American right] whales get too close. The company would do above-water pile driving to reduce underwater noise when the turbines’ foundations are being anchored to the ocean bottom.”

There could be another civil liberties controversy brewing in Cranston, as Senate candidate Sean Gately is now making an issue out of the school department’s decision not to let the Cub Scouts recruit new members on school property.

Better late than never, the ProJo editorial team runs a post mortem on the 38 Studios debacle, laying the most blame on Don Carcieri and the least on Linc Chafee … meanwhile Curt Schilling will get the worst of it tonight on ESPN as he’ll be featured in a documentary about athlete’s who go broke.

The biggest chain of weekly newspapers in Rhode Island has a new publisher and she is doing something a journalist should never do, namely saying things that are patently untrue: “Our position in our markets is definitely positive as we continue to be the dominant news source for our communities,” Jody Boucher told Ted Nesi in an email. No they aren’t. In fact in almost every community Southern Rhode Island Newspapers has weekly papers in, their properties are a distant second to Patch sites.

Speaking of which, Patch is taking on the Valley Breeze now, too.

Today in 1800, Nat Turner, one of America’s greatest revolutionaries, is born.

September 17, 2012September 17, 2012

Progress Report: Anti-Choice Agenda Fares Well in Primary; Happy Birthday Occupy Movement; Chicago Still on Strike

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

Anti-choice crusaders Rhode Island Right to Life was one of the most successful PACs on primary night, reports the ProJo. How DINO is that! On the other hand, Political Scene also gives some love to Planned Parenthood and the public sector unions for having a successful primary.

38 Studios will be the issue local candidates don’t want associated with their name, says Dan McGowan. Don’t forget, Don Carcieri said the only way legislators didn’t know he was considering the new loan guarantee money on Curt Schilling is if they weren’t paying attention to the news.

One year ago today, activists in New York City began the unrewarding but effective process of changing the political debate in America when they set up a protest camp in Zuccotti Park. Say what you will about the Occupy movement but we are talking about income inequality and corporate greed today because of them, issues that are defining the 2012 election.

Here in Rhode Island, Occupy Providence planned to spend the night at the State House to stand in solidarity with the anniversary. In New York, about 250 people marched and an unspecified number of arrests occurred.

But Occupy isn’t the biggest direct action in the nation this September … that honor goes to the Chicago Teachers’ Strike. Last night, the teachers’ rejected a proposal causing Mayor Rahm Emanuel to go to court today to try to force them back to work. Please remember, the two sides aren’t arguing over money – they’ve agreed on compensation – the breakdown is over how much reform Emanuel can embed into their contracts.

Here is Rhode Island, where it’s popular to pretend that people are leaving the state to find a better tax rate, researchers have actually proven a much larger theory: there’s less life on earth than initially thought.

Yesterday I was chided on Twitter for quoting Taegen Goddard as saying Elizabeth Warren is “pulling away” in polls from Scott Brown as they battle for the hotly contested Mass. Senate race. Today, Goddard writes that she is “surging” after going from 5 percentage points behind to 2 ahead. All political analysis aside, Liz Warren is simply more in line with Bay State voters and at the end of the day this will matter most. Just ask Bill Weld.

September 15, 2012September 15, 2012

I Learned It By Watching You, Jon!

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

State Rep. Jon Brien blames his recent defeat on “outside influences” – my union among them – who were “spending a lot of money” against him. Here’s why he is partly right, partly wrong, and partly to blame.

Last week, I filed several independent expenditure reports with the RI Board of Elections on behalf of my organization, SEIU District 1199NE — the union representing nearly 4,000 private-sector health care workers throughout Rhode Island. The reports detailed our spending in support of four candidates in this past Tuesday’s primary elections.

Among them was an expenditure of $834.57 for a mailing sent to frequent primary voters in Woonsocket’s House District 50, critical of State Rep. Jon Brien’s sponsorship of legislation paving the way for the disastrous 38 Studios deal. This expense was so small that it wasn’t even required to be reported under the state’s new disclosure law. According to some reports, however, it may have had a big impact on the race — where Brien lost by 50 votes to first-time candidate and city firefighter Stephen Casey.

In my opinion, there were many reasons to vote against Rep. Brien. I don’t know the man personally, but most of his views are the exact opposite of mine (except perhaps for our mutual admiration for the roast beef sandwiches at the Beef Barn). He often seemed more focused on building his profile with business interests, ALEC and the right-leaning Washington think-tank crowd than with actually helping the people of Woonsocket.

For example, Brien did little to help during my union’s recent fight to restore $24 million in funding that had been cut from programs serving the developmentally disabled — despite the importance of agencies like Seven Hills of Rhode Island to many families in Northern RI. Meanwhile, he adamantly supported costly tax breaks that only benefit the wealthy – embracing the failed & disproven “trickle-down” theory of economic growth, depriving our state of revenue that could have more than restored the cuts to these vital services, and condemning direct care support staff to a life of poverty.

But the 38 Studios debacle (and the mindset that brought it into being) stood out as an event that deeply angered everyone across the state, regardless of their political leanings. Rep. Brien was one of three sponsors whose names appeared on the law that enabled the EDC to loan $75 million to Curt Schilling’s risky video game company, but left Rhode Islanders on the hook when it failed.¹

Brien claimed that the wool had been pulled over his eyes, that he was sold a bill of goods, and that he didn’t know that all of the funds would be poured into one company – but it appears these excuses simply weren’t good enough for most voters, who decided it was time for a little Reckoning of their own.

There were other factors, of course – and you won’t find me claiming that one postcard could magically beat a 3-term State Representative from a political family with deep roots in the city. From what I’ve read, it appears that Stephen Casey related well to many voters. On election night, he told the Valley Breeze that he had knocked on over 900 doors. That’s the kind of hard work that wins elections – but it didn’t stop Rep. Brien from crying foul:

“I worked really hard and I think I represented the district well,” said Brien. “I think that the outside influences from out-of-town, spending a lot of money on these races, worked really hard to target certain people. That’s the nature of the beast. I was targeted by many of the labor unions from around the state.”

What Brien fails to mention (because his venom sac runneth over when it comes to workers’ organizations) is that my union was vastly outspent by a corporate-backed alliance that dropped just over $11,225 in a failed attempt to protect him. That’s more money than even Rep. Brien’s own campaign could raise and spend.

As Ted Nesi noted, this group — the 50CAN Action Fund² — received $160,500 from Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire Mayor of New York City, and $50,000 from Jonathan Sackler, an heir & executive at Purdue Pharma (the maker of OxyContin) in addition to $2,500 from one Rhode Islander, Angus Davis. So we have a situation where three wealthy individuals (but let’s be honest, it was mostly the non-Rhode Islanders³) spent more money on the outcome of one Woonsocket general assembly primary election than the nurses, CNAs, and other health care workers who belong to our union.

Unlike these donors, our members live and work in the Ocean State, and have a real stake in Rhode Island’s future. In House District 50, this group outspent us by nearly a 14-to-1 margin⁴ — so it seems to me that Rep. Brien’s real complaint should be that his rich independent benefactors weren’t particularly smart at directing their investments — an ultimate irony, of course, for these illustrious captains of finance.

But if it’s any solace to those who truly object to the interventions that my organization and others made in the recent election, let me say this: so do I.

Unfortunately for us all, the Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” decision has opened the floodgates for unlimited spending by corporations, wealthy individuals, and unions – though most observers acknowledge that workers’ organizations don’t have pockets nearly as deep as the CEOs. Independent expenditures didn’t begin with “Citizens’ United,” but the decision has paved the way for untold sums of money to be dumped into our local, state, and federal elections.

If we abandon one of our most important founding principles as a country — a government of, by, and for the people — the very future of our democracy is at stake. For our part, SEIU believes that the Supreme Court decision should be immediately overturned, and that laws must be passed to ensure that the voices of ordinary Americans are not drowned out by the wealthy and corporations in our political process.

In the meantime, however, our members will not unilaterally disarm. We’ll be in the trenches, working to stop politicians who believe that corporations are people, and who are eager to do the bidding of the wealthiest 1% — those who are growing ever-richer while the standard of living for the vast majority of Americans continues to decline, and who seek to further dominate the political process, distort our democratic institutions, and turn our government into an auction house.

Our union believes that we need to build a movement of all Americans across political and party lines to make sure that the voices of ordinary people will be heard in our democracy, today and always. With that, I’ll offer two parting thoughts for Rep. Brien, if he is genuinely concerned about the influence of money in politics, and not just at the times when it doesn’t work out for him personally:

First, if ALEC still keeps you on their board after voters have shown you the door, maybe you can parlay your current misfortune into convincing the Koch Brothers, ExxonMobil, and the other CEOs and corporations to change ALEC’s position on unlimited corporate spending on elections.⁵ As John Nichols described it last year in the Nation:

[ALEC] has no problem with policies that increase the likelihood that the candidate with the most money and corporate support will prevail. Its 2009 Resolution Supporting Citizen Involvement in Elections bluntly “opposes all efforst to limit [citizen] involvement by limiting campaign contributions.” A resolution approved [in 2010] expresses support for the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling.

Second, if that doesn’t work out (my prediction: it won’t), I’m willing to bet that Common Cause would let you join as a member and stand with them to work for fair elections and stronger rules governing the influence of money in politics.

Heck, if you are able to kiss and make up with their director, I’ll even pay the $40 for your membership! The only issue would be that Rhode Island’s ethics code prohibits gifts of more than $25 to a member of the general assembly.

So can you remind me: when is your last official day in office?

Footnotes:

(1) Now-retired State Rep. Bob Watson was the lone ‘NO’ vote on the deal – which you can either credit to his powers of legislative discerment, or to the fact that he was a constant contrarian on just about everything at the General Assembly, so eventually he was bound to really get one right!

(2) The group, which purports to stand for educational opportunities for poor children in urban schools, boggled many minds when it gave Brien an “A+” grade, given his intense opposition to our state’s DREAMers who simply wanted to be able to afford to go to college after they graduate high school, and whose only “offense” was being undocumented because they were brought here at a young age.

(3) Given their out-of-state base, it’s no wonder 50CAN got geographically confused with a couple of their mailers. If they had heard about Casey’s beer and dynamite fundraiser, we may have even seen an attack mailer accusing him of mixing alcohol with explosives.

(4) There were other unions that reported conducting Independent Expenditures in HD-50 – their reports showed $18,000 and $5,000 spread over 25 races (an averge of $920 per race). Even if twice the average had been spent going after Rep. Brien (I highly doubt it – voting history shows that this is a fairly low-turnout district), all of the union money combined against Rep. Brien still would have been four times less than the corporate money supporting him.

(5) You can read ALEC’s resolutions from both before and after the Citizens United decision, though you’ll have to filter through the cluttered layout of the critique (apologies, but those were the only versions I could find on-line – strangely enough, ALEC appears to have removed the originals from its own website).

September 15, 2012September 15, 2012

Mark Binder Takes Campaign to TV

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

“Are you a credible candidate?”

I’ve heard that question again and again and again. What it’s code for is, “How much money have you raised?” (And “Do you own a car?”)

I learned during my first campaign that the press and media have a Woodward and Bernstein relationship to money. (Remember the scene from All the President’s Men where Jason Robards growls, “Follow the money!”) Money is something you can measure and count. The Board of Electors requires regular mandatory filing of campaign contributions and expenses. So it’s easy to find out how much money someone has raised, who contributed it to their campaign, and where they spent it. This gives “the media” the illusion that they have the measure of a candidate.

It’s the reason that you hear so much about presidential fundraising. If they have more money, they must be getting more votes, right?

Bought and Paid For?

Why do people donate money to campaigns? Sometimes it’s because they believe in the candidate and her/his mission. Sometimes they want to oppose the opposition.

And sometimes they just want a favor down the road…

For example, let’s say that an important piece of legislation is coming before the House on say, Auto Body Repair. And you know that nothing gets on the floor without the Speaker’s approval.

Do you think that more than $3,000 worth of campaign contributions from people who work at Auto Body shops makes a candidate more “credible” or have they been “bought and paid for”? (See Gordon Fox’s filing for January-March, 2012)

10 News Conference

I was all excited. Last week I’d received an email from Stephanie Cunha inviting me to participate in the 10 News Conference program with my opponent, (soon-to-be-former) House Speaker Gordon Fox.

Then I got nervous. Here I was, the “challenger” going up against a 20-year politician. I did a lot of preparation and homework, and when I got to the TV station, I learned that he wasn’t coming. Instead it would be Jim Taricani and Bill Rappleye and me. For a time, I got even more nervous. Me and two journalists. I was worried that they might tag team me…

Maybe I could talk to an empty chair, I joked.

Instead it was a wonderful gift. I had a full half hour news broadcast to explain why I got into the race (38 Studios and Mr. Fox’s continued silence and refusal to take any responsibility), what else bothered me about my opponent (wimping out on Gay Marriage… not letting the Payday Lending reform come to a vote, even though 50 representatives had signed onto it… 38 Studios and Michael Corso… creating an atmosphere of fear in the State Capitol… 38 Studios), and even time for some thoughts on public education (reduce testing, decouple testing from teacher evaluations, halt the end of session midnight merger of the Board of Higher Ed and the Board of Regents…).

Finally, they asked me the question I’d been waiting for, “Are you a credible candidate? You’re going up against the Speaker of the House.”

Believe it or not, it was an upbeat and positive and jovial time.

The air date: NBC 10 on Sunday, September 16 at 11:30 a.m. to watch, and then ask yourself the question, “Is this a credible candidate?”

Or you can watch it here:

September 14, 2012September 14, 2012

Don Carcieri: Short on Apology, Long on Advice

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

carcieri tim white — Former Governor Don Carcieri being interviewed by WPRI’s Tim White in an exclusive interview. (Screen shot courtesy of WPRI)

Give Don Carcieri, the unequivocal architect of the 38 Studios deal, credit for at least two things.

One is that the former governor finally came forward and faced the public. He should have done so four months ago, but we panned him when he didn’t so we’ll recognize that he did. The other is that he did so with Tim White, the go-to guy when a politician needs to publicly apologize.

But that’s as much credit as he should get, if not more.

He hardly took ownership of the fiasco for which he is largely responsible. He parsed himself as being one of 12 members of the EDC board who decided to back Curt Schilling’s video game company with taxpayer dollars. In reality, it was his idea to court Curt here with a giant loan guarantee. He didn’t just vote for it, he dreamed up the idea.

But that wasn’t even Carcieri’s slimiest statement of the night. That moment would be when he suggested the state default on the loan rather than repay it. After all, he argued, it’s only a moral obligation bond.

“All I’m saying is this is not an absolute slam dunk obligation for the state,” Carcieri told WPRI.

Bonds or otherwise, moral obligations matter when doing the people’s business. And Carcieri’s ambivalence to this may well be one of the reasons he failed so mightily as a public official and made such a bad gamble with regards to 38 Studios.

Besides, the people just wanted an apology … I didn’t hear anyone ask Don Carcieri for any advice on how to get ourselves out of the mess he created for the state.

August 31, 2012August 31, 2012

Don Carcieri’s 38 Studios Silence: Selfish and Foolish

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

It turns out even Republicans are miffed at Don Carcieri for hiding from the media when one of his signature decisions as governor blew up in the face of Rhode Island.

“Former Gov. Donald L. Carcieri’s long silence on the 38 Studios bankruptcy wound up putting fellow Rhode Island Republicans on the spot this week at Mitt Romney’s nominating convention,” wrote correspondent John Mulligan in today’s ProJo. “Carcieri, the delegation’s most prominent exponent of running a government according to sound business principles, declined to be interviewed Wednesday about his role in a state-backed loan guarantee for former Boston Red Sox star Curt Schilling’s company. The failed deal may leave Rhode Island voters on the hook for up to $102 million.”

That Carcieri broke his long silence on the 38 Studios debacle once it “wound up putting fellow Rhode Island Republicans on the spot” speaks to our post on Carcieri from Thursday in which we wrote: “Carcieri always represented conservatives first and then Rhode Islanders somewhere after that.”

Carcieri broke his silence on 38 Studios not when Rhode Island was most desperate for answers about it, but when Republicans were most desperate for cover.

Apparently that cover didn’t come quick enough.

Because Carcieri thought he could dodge the issue indefinitely, it ended up becoming a story when other Republicans had to answer for him. So not only was Carcieri’s tack on 38 Studios selfish, it was foolish too.

Here’s what some prominent Republicans told Mulligan about how Carcieri handled the situation:

“I would probably have spoken about my role” in such a loss of taxpayer dollars and Rhode Island jobs, said John Robitaille, Carcieri’s former communications chief.

“A lot of people are wondering” what went into Carcieri’s “business judgment” that the 38 Studios venture was a good investment of Rhode Island tax dollars, [Cranston Mayor Allan Fung] said.

Rhode Island’s incoming GOP national committeeman, Steven Frias, said Carcieri’s support of Schilling’s video venture will dog the state’s Republicans for a long time…

August 30, 2012

Carcieri Always Represented Conservatives, Not RI

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

It should come as no surprise to see former Governor Don Carcieri, the architect of the 38 Studios fiasco, yucking it up at the Republican Convention even though he has yet to answer questions about his role in state’s biggest economic blunder in a generation.

After all, Carcieri always represented conservatives first and then Rhode Islanders somewhere after that. We’re talking about a governor who gave more interviews to WPRO shock jocks than the rest of the local media combined!

But, like Scott MacKay of RIPR, we were surprised that Carcieri had the gall to be offering an economics lecture to President Obama. Here’s how MacKay put it:

Well, governor, what say you about a purported conservative Republican Rhode Island governor who gambled with the taxpayers money, made the most reckless crony capitalism economic development loan in the state’s history (38Studios, which is now bankrupt) and left the taxpayers hanging for $100 million in loan guarantees. Then this very same governor leaves office, goes into virtual hiding, refuses to answer to anybody to justify his actions and finally turns up in Tampa at the Republican National Convention to lecture the president on business.

The reality is many of Rhode Island’s economic sore spots are Carcieri’s fault. 38 Studios is only the most obvious example. Another is the state’s epidemic of failing cities. When Carcieri cut off state aid to the state’s poorest communities he virtually guaranteed at least some of them would have no other option than to go through an expensive reorganization.

As governor, he also focused his energies on cutting the state payroll instead of growing the state economy. And he fought really hard against obvious economic development winners like a casino and a port at Quonset.

One missed opportunity that few people recall is when Carcieri had the old Jamestown Bridge demolished instead of turning it into what would have been one of the most beautiful – and probably well-visited – bike paths in the world. Environmentalists and transportation advocates fought hard for the idea at the time, though the local media largely ignored the idea. Imagine how many additional people who visit and vacation in the Ocean State if they could ride their bikes from the South County beaches, through scenic Saunderstown over Narragansett Bay and right out to Beavertail and Fort Wetherill.

It’s well worth noting that Carcieri had a beach house in Saunderstown – it’s his legal address these days, though we get the feeling he spends more time at his place in Florida than in Rhode Island – and many of the uber-affluent residents on both sides of the bridge deplored the idea of sharing their slice of Rhode Island with the masses.

The best thing Carcieri probably did for Rhode Island is give us proof positive that business acumen doesn’t translate to political acumen.

And now here is campaigning for a businessman for president.

That should be all the evidence Rhode Island and the nation needs to know that Mitt Romney is the wrong guy to be president. After all, Carcieri has proven no more effective at picking winners in politics than he has in the video game business.

August 23, 2012August 23, 2012

Progress Report: Congrats to Shaw’s Market; DePetro, Gemma; 38 Studios and the State; Improving Rail Service

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

Three cheers for Shaw’s Market in Barrington. The grocery store told the Town Council last night that it would voluntarily stop using plastic bags, according to Linda Borg of the Providence Journal. I can only assume they decided doing right by the town and the environment wasn’t as much of a hardship on their business as some said not using plastic bags would be…

While the local media did a great job of seeing through Anthony Gemma’s over-sized claims of voter fraud, it’s important to remember that most Rhode Islanders won’t read much of our work. So yes, the Associated Press did a fantastic story refuting much of what Gemma put forth. But many more people will hear John DePetro on the radio today falsely claim that the the volunteers and staff are leaving the Cicilline campaign as a result of Gemmapalooza.

Both Gemma and DePetro are bad for Rhode Island because they put themselves ahead of the residents and the truth. Together, they are a toxic combination that should not be tolerated, either by the people or by WPRO.

And speaking of people who should shut up, and the AP, for that matter, the local bureau digs deep into how the state and 38 Studios both did their part to ensure the company wouldn’t succeed. It’s interesting to note that the old job creator logic failed miserably for former Governor Don Carcieri … but will RI remember this next time a smooth talking CEO from the private sector says they know how to make government work better???

Speaking of Schilling, Ed Fitzpatrick writes a nice column about how lawyer (and former North East Independent reporter) John Pincince managed to do what few other in the local media have managed to do: get Schilling on record.

And speaking of making stuff work better … there were many good ideas kicked around about how to make rail service work better in the Ocean State and along the northeast corridor at a meeting yesterday afternoon. One great idea: have Amtrak stop at Green Airport.

In important swing states, a poll shows more people trust Obama to handle Medicare than they do Romney.

Why do people trust Obama more than Romney? Because the GOP is moving even farther to the right. In fact, the Republican platform this year is more right-wing than ever before.

Today in 1927, America’s most famous anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti were executed. They are said to have murdered a man in Braintree, Mass, though the trial was at the very least controversial.

And today in 1970, Lou Reed plays his last show with the Velvet Underground.

August 19, 2012August 19, 2012

Bad Time to Announce A Free-To-Play Copernicus

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

Thanks to WPRI.com reporter Ted Nesi’s Twitter pontifications, we’ve learned from Boston Magazine‘s Jason Schwartz that 38 Studios had planned to release their flagship game (codenamed “Project Copernicus“) under the “freemium” model of gaming (a portmanteau of “free” and “premium”, referring to the dual use of free and premium accounts, dominant in tech-savvy South Korea). It’s a bit like the razor blade model of business; send out the initial product for free, hook the customer, and then charges for supplemental services. Essentially, in a freemium game, players can play essentially everything with a free account; you can download the game online and then play with no additional costs. However, players can buy perks or unlock additional content for actual money, giving them a leg up on other players. Massively Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Games (MMPORGs) lend themselves particularly to this kind of business model.

This was actually a smart business move for 38 Studios. OnlyWorld of Warcraft can maintain a subscription model, mainly because they operate as the Facebook of online games; people play because their friends are there. They also benefit from the sunk cost fallacy; since players have already blown hundreds or thousands of dollars on World of Warcraft, it would be insane to stop paying and thus stop playing now. It’s a logical fallacy, but plenty of businesses profit off of it. That 38 Studios had managed to convince Curt Schilling to come around to the free-to-play model shows a willingness to adapt to changing circumstances.

Unfortunately, learning now that it would’ve been an announcement that “shocked the world” (according to Mr. Schilling’s remarks to Mr. Schwartz) is too little too late, and adds fodder to the narrative that 38 Studios was not a well-run company (one which is indelibly created from Mr. Schwartz’s previous story on 38 Studios). I was bashing 38 Studios for relying on the subscription model back in mid-February in some of my earliest writing for RI Future. It was a bad model in 2010, when the deal that moved 38 Studios to Rhode Island was started. Had 38 Studios announced that they were intending a freemium-type game much earlier (say, at any time before the company missed payroll), it could’ve given them serious boost. Plenty of projects continue on the basis of fan goodwill (plus, fanboys = identified market, which investors like to hear about).

An example of that is the venerable MechWarrior/BattleTech series of games. Beginning in 1984 as a board game, MechWarrior was the video game series, which had a great hit with 1995’s MechWarrior 2 (a personal favorite of mine), but ultimately the developer shut down in 2007 after subsequent games failed. Its founder is working with a new developer to create MechWarrior Online. It’s a free-to-play game already in its Open Beta stage of development (anyone can pay to help test the game while it’s be developed ahead of its planned release).

All of this is to miss another point I’ve made before: nothing was pointing to any great innovation on the part of Project Copernicus. In fact, that this would be the first triple-A release that was free-to-play would’ve been the first signal that 38 Studios was actually bringing something unique to a market crowded with same-samey games. But what we were getting about Copernicus is that it was essentially like Kingdoms of Amalur, a relatively old-hat type of game. In fact, World of Warcraft wasn’t particularly unique. It simply followed Apple’s model of development; rely on your dedicated fan base from other products to purchase your item and generate good buzz, let the innovators go out and do their thing, then do what they did, but better.

To compete in the online gaming arena, you need something new. The Belarusian company Wargaming.net has provided that with World of Tanks and done exceedingly well. Having played the game, it’s a incredibly fun initial experience, though there’s a bit of frustration as more skilled people turn your fun tank into Swiss cheese (I’m understating, more than once I’ve had to quit the game to let my anger over how much I suck at it subside). Wargaming.net is spinning the game off into World of Warships and World of Warplanes.

Alternatively, if new doesn’t float your boat, open is a good idea as well. Paradox Interactive is an example of a gaming company which doesn’t keep its cool stuff under its hat (they’ve recently announced they’re starting on the fourth version of Europe Universalis, their flagship game which launched the “grand strategy” genre of computer games). They’re always giving more information to fans about their games, via developer diaries with insight into the process and features, and also by fostering a lively forum community.

38 Studios seemed to neglect this strategy. What did we know about Copernicus? Not much. Perhaps Kingdoms of Amalur was to be its predecessor and tie into the world. In the end, we didn’t even know its actual name.

So yes, free-to-play was an intelligent decision for 38 Studios. It’s a shame that we’re learning it now. But Governor Lincoln Chafee didn’t mess the company up, the people tasked with running it did. Had free-to-play been announced as 38 Studios was facing bankruptcy it would’ve looked desperate. It needed to be sold that way from the start. Of course, hindsight is 20/20, but then I was saying this stuff two years ago (just not publicly on the Internet). And I still standby what the majority of Rhode Islanders believed at the time, that this deal should not have been made.

Note: I’ve used “free-to-play” and “freemium” interchangeably here. Technically, that’s not exactly correct, one relies on ads and/or micro-transactions to generate profit, the other relies on paid accounts and occasionally ads and micro-transactions to turn a profit. However, they’re near enough as to make no difference here, and many of the games I mentioned use them interchangeably as well when describing their own games.

August 18, 2012August 18, 2012

I’m not Bruce Bayuk, and Other Tidbits from the Trail

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

When I started this column, Bob suggested that I stick to “Progressive political issues.” This column is one exception. It’s going to be a collection of political shenanigans, conversations with constituents, notes and anecdotes from the trail so far.

The Article that Was/Wasn’t…

I’ve been noticing a lot of divergence between the Providence Journal’s paper paper and it’s online editions… Huge hunks of articles, and even entire pieces are missing online.

Maybe you saw the big piece that Ed Fitzpatrick wrote last week? Chances are, you didn’t, or if you did, you were scratching your head. I spent an hour or so talking with Ed in my favorite part of the district, down by the Seekonk River. We watched herons and cranes and gulls, and discussed the 38 Studios debacle as well as the important issues that I’m focusing on. Ed followed up with some phone questions.

Then, last Thursday, I woke up at 5:30, excited to see the article about the campaign in the Providence Journal. I’d had long conversations with the reporter, and was hopeful about the piece.

The headline? Bruce Bayuk hopes to buck history, beat Fox. In blog terms, WTF?

What might have been a breakthrough article about the campaign became a head scratcher. A fair and balanced article with a headline that might have been written, Mark Binder hopes to buck history, beat Fox, was instantly irrelevant and inconsequential.

The cynic in me might think that the headline was rewritten on purpose. I wrote Ed and he called the headline the “ridiculous” mistake of a copy editor. A correction was posted in the paper the next day, but the article remains uncorrected in the online archive, and invisible from the newspaper’s website.

We sent an email today to the newspaper requesting they fix it online, but nothing has changed yet. I finally wrote a letter to the editor, which appeared online a few days ago, and finally appeared in the paper: Bad Headline Indeed, (Providence Journal, August 16.) Only one mistake… it says I’m running in the primary as a Democrat… I’m not. I’m running in the General Election as an independent. Sigh.

Q: If the online archive is incorrect, and a correction is issued, should the online edition be changed in retrospect?

Her Health Insurance is Killing Her

She was shaking her head as the kid a few doors up chased a ball into the street. Aside from the general economic climate, her biggest concern was health insurance. She worked, but her boss didn’t provide health insurance. Instead, she had to pay $640 a month. As a candidate, and not a reporter, I didn’t ask what her job was, or what she was getting paid. If she was making $10 an hour, though, that would be roughly 40% of her income before taxes.

The problem, she said, was that the only insurance available in Rhode Island is Blue Cross. “Even if you go to the United Way, they tell you that you have to see Blue Cross.”

Taxes and Roads

“What issues are important to you?” I asked the fellow answering the door.

“Taxes and roads,” he said. “The excise tax on cars is too high and the roads stink. Lower the taxes and fix the roads.”

How do you fix roads, I wanted to say, without taxing the cars that use them?

But he didn’t really want to talk just then. He was in the middle of watching a ball game.

Not Now!

It was about 7:30 on a Thursday night. I knocked on the door, and was about to walk off, when the door opened.

“What is it?” the woman said. “What?”

“I’m Mark Binder, I’m running for…”

“Not now! Not during dinner,” she said, turning away and shutting the door.

Note to self about campaigning in the evening: they’re either at work, just back from work, relaxing after work, about to sit down to dinner, eating dinner, just finished dinner, watching a ball game, or getting ready for bed. Aim for the windows in between those.

Student Loan Rip Offs

One man owns a garage, works 60 hours a week, and his wife works as well. They’ve put two children through college and are enrolling their third. They’re mostly paying for their child’s education, but wanted to give their son some responsibility, so they applied for a loan. (I believe he said it was Fannie Mae, but I could be wrong.)

They were told that a $5,000 student loan would be payable at an interest rate of more than 9%.

Previous student loans for other children were in the 5% range.

Given that the current prime lending rate is so low, and that student loans are guaranteed by the Federal Government, and that they can’t be waived away in bankruptcy, they asked why it was so high. Was there something wrong with their credit rating?

“No,” the loan officer said. “Your credit rating is good, and the loan is for a small amount. That’s why the rate is so high.”

Time off for good behavior

“What are you going to do about criminals getting time off for good behavior?” the woman asked.

I hesitated. I’m learning how to be a politician. “Why do you ask?”

“My brother was killed by a man who had gotten fifteen years in prison for a violent crime, but got out in three. If there wasn’t any time off for good behavior, my brother would still be alive.”

What do you say to this? I was speechless.

On the one hand, I believe in people being able to redeem themselves. On the other, this woman’s brother was murdered.

“I don’t know,” I said. “If I think of something, I’ll let you know.”

August 9, 2012August 9, 2012

In Search of the Cleaner Campaign Contribution

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

Several years ago, when I ran my first political campaign against Patrick Kennedy, the first thing the reporter from the Providence Journal asked was, “How much money have you raised?”

I asked him why he wanted to know, and he told me the truth: You can measure fundraising. You can count the dollars. It dates back, he told me, to Watergate, when Ben Bradlee told Woodward and Bernstein to “follow the money.”

At the time, Patrick Kennedy already had millions in the bank. So, I ignored the reporter, and got about 25% of the primary vote on a budget of less than $500. When the Federal Election Commission called to check on why I hadn’t filed any paperwork, I joked that I’d received more votes per dollar spent for National Office since 1864.

But if you’re a ‘serious’ candidate, conventional wisdom says, you need to raise and spend money.

The media still considers fundraising to be one of the best advance measurements of a campaign’s success. Before any votes are cast, the oracles of our society only have a few ways of predicting the future. They can throw the bones (political polls) or read the spoor (report on campaign finances). Of the two, campaign finances are, by and large, more reliable, because they have to be filed publicly, reporting who gave what and when, and where the money was spent.

(This, of course, assumes that you don’t accidentally forget to report in-kind contributions of beer and shrimp from corporations who are owned by tax credit brokers—as my adversary did…)

Last week, the Providence Journal ran a front page article with this headline:

Heavy investment in 2nd District

The piece was all about Michael Riley’s campaign against James Langevin. According to the Journal, “…in at least one area — an ability to invest in his own campaign — Riley stands apart from the five others seeking Langevin’s seat.”

So far, Riley has “invested” more than $360,000 in his campaign. At first pass, I thought that this was a horrible and cynical headline, but the more I thought about it, the truer it seemed.

You see, candidates are allowed to “loan” money to their campaigns, and then repay themselves from the funds they raise. In fact, when I went into the State Board of Elections, for training on how to enter my own contribution to my campaign, I was advised to enter it as a loan, so I could be reimbursed later. “You don’t want to put in your money as a contribution,” I was told, “otherwise you can’t get it back.”

So, if Riley—or any other candidate—does a good job of fundraising, he or she will probably break even, or come out ahead by either winning the office or getting the publicity generated by the campaign.

I’ve since corrected this, marking my “loan” as repaid, and accepting a “contribution” from myself. I don’t think it’s fair to ask people to give more money than I’m willing to give. (Tip of the hat to Ken Block’s Op Ed, R.I.’s incumbent protection must go)

A Hope Chest, not a War Chest

I will spend the money you donate to the campaign on the campaign, and not accept any money with strings.

My goal is to spend the least amount of money possible to win. Personally, I’d rather not do any campaign fund raising. I’d rather ask you to convince ten or twenty of your voting neighbors to vote for me, and call it a day.

I don’t want a $250,000 “War Chest” to get a job that pays less than $15,000 a year. A small “Hope Chest” will do quite well, thank you.

The point of raising money for a political campaign is to get the word out. Days after I filed my candidacy I started getting letters and postcards from printers and tee shirt makers. I have received inquires from newspapers and magazines fishing for ads.

There are already some hard costs. The website and URL cost a little bit of money. We bought some refreshments on the Fourth of July. Our current campaign flier is simple: blue cardstock with black type, printed locally at minimal cost. It says, “I’m running a grass roots neighborhood campaign, and I’d like your vote…” And we ordered some bumper stickers. (Let me know if you want one.)

My plan has been to knock on doors – but there are a lot of doors, even in our small neighborhood, and I have to earn a living and take care of my family too.

But then I drive around and start seeing the lawn signs…

So, yes, I’d like you to contribute to my campaign. I’ll spend the money on printing and advertising, on pizza for campaign volunteers, mailings and such.

At the end of the campaign, whatever is left over won’t be kept in a “War Chest” for future campaigns. We’re going to donate it to the following charities: The Friends of Rochambeau Library, Mt. Hope Learning Center, MLK PTO, and The Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence.

To make a contribution, please visit the http://markbinder.org/contribute/

Footnote: Can you fund raise without creating a web of obligation or broken promises?

I don’t know. I’m going to try. I’m running to try and make things work better for our entire state and end the cycle of real and perceived corruption.

Here’s why I’m donating to my own campaign, along with some caveats…

Giving money to an inspiring candidate feels good.
But… The inspiring candidate could fall short of his promise, leaving you disappointed and dissatisfied.
Contributing to a candidate is a way to push the causes and political agendas you support. For example, you might donate to a candidate who you believe will vote for Choice or Marriage Equality.
But… If your candidate isn’t the Speaker of the House, he might not be able get an important bill to the floor. Or, if he is the Speaker, he might not call for a vote on something like Marriage Equality.
The current office holder has disappointed you or made you angry, so you’ll fund his opponent as a way of demonstrating your disapproval and discontent.
But… If you back the challenger and the incumbent wins, then you might experience political retribution.
You can “invest” in a candidate with the hope that she or he will help improve your business. Personally as a professional author and storyteller, aside from the $14,000 annual salary I don’t see this happening for me. However, if you run an auto body repair shop, you might give support a candidate who supports a particular agenda. Or your friendly candidate might take a meeting with an ex-sports star in your office to discuss a multimillion-dollar loan guarantee.
But… Your candidate might just be honest and ethical and not make political decisions influenced by your “investment.”

So far, I’ve donated $200 to my campaign. That’s money I’m not getting back in loans. Won’t you join me?

To make a contribution, please visit the http://markbinder.org/contribute/

July 5, 2012July 5, 2012

Progressive vs. Old School

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

mark_binder2 — Mark Binder is running against Gordon Fox.

Bob Plain asked me to keep the focus of this blog on the progressive aspects of my campaign. (And thanks, Bob, for standing up for the rights of the free press — particularly in an election.) I’ll do my best, but the writer in me also thinks that the strange things you need to do as a politician are interesting to all readers—not just progressives.

So, I’ll be doing a bit of both.

Disclosure: Yes, I’m running for office, so everything I write will probably be self-serving and “designed” to get me elected. Take it all with a grain of salt. (Or sodium substitute.)

If you want a more personal essay, I wrote about my experiences campaigning on July 4 on the Campaign site.

Grassroots vs. Entrenched

Whenever I introduce myself and say that I’m running for Representative to the RI House from District 4 there is a long pause and people ask, “Isn’t that Gordon Fox’s District? He’s the entrenched speaker of the House. He’ll have all sorts of people supporting him.”

I smile and (like a good politician) reply, “There are 10,000 voters who live in this district. I’m one of them.”

Then they ask me, “Are you insane?”

This is usually followed by a long explanation that my opponent is entrenched, has the support of everybody, hundreds of thousands of dollars in the bank, and how unworkable and dirty Rhode Island politics can be.

To which I reply, “Then you certainly ought to vote for me.”

A few days ago, I got an email from a constituent:

Your candidacy is already making a difference, as Fox wants to win back his marriage equality constituents.

Answering Mr. Fox on 38 Studios

Gordon Fox doesn’t know. He just doesn’t know. (“I don’t know,” he says, on Fox news, June 7.) I’m no sure why he doesn’t know, but he doesn’t.

The basic idea behind the 38 Studios deal was this wager

If we win, we get 400 high paying jobs in Rhode Island that cost the taxpayer a cent
If we lose, we lose millions upon millions of dollars and all the jobs.

Because of this candidacy, Gordon Fox has increased his communications with the press about the 38 Studios disaster. (Listen on RIPR. Read in the Providence Journal NOTE: The printed edition of the story differs dramatically from the online version. An interesting shift in history being rewritten as it happens.)

The salient points are this: Mr. Fox trusted that the EDC was going to keep track of things, and didn’t have any checks or balances in place to protect the state of Rhode Island.

Did they? Back in June, Mr. Fox said, “I don’t know.”

I understand that public officials have to trust the people who are working for the citizens of the state. That said, I am fed up with our government giving away tax payer dollars with no concrete backend or long-term payoff.

Some tax breaks benefit… Some not so much.

Do tax reduction incentives and credits bring in business? Sure. Do these reductions and incentives create loyalty? Absolutely not.

The Film and TV credits provided jobs and got movies made and dollars spent here. But movies are by nature short term projects. The Historic Tax credits (by and large) got buildings reconstructed and rebuilt infrastructure that is still standing, regardless of the economic health of the corporation.

Time and again we’ve cut taxes, given credits and breaks and seen projects collapse without benefiting the state, or companies flee Rhode Island when these benefits are done and they’ve made their profits.

Repeat after me: major corporations are loyal to their shareholders, not the citizens of Rhode Island.

Update

For a while, I got caught with the rhetoric that Rhode Island was offering “Loan Guarantees” and it wasn’t going to cost us anything. I was wrong. We, the taxpayers, sold bonds and have to pay them back. Kudos to Gina Raimondo for insisting we own up to the debt.

With unemployment up and the economy down, how are we going to pay them back?

Revamping Education vs. Power… at the 11th hour

One of the key issues in my campaign is a very simple shift in the way this State deals with public education.

I believe that the use of high stakes testing to determine school financing and teacher evaluations is a misdirected travesty. It’s bad for the students, bad for the teachers and good for the testing companies and consultants.

Here’s an equation. An “A student” and a non-English speaking student take a test. One scores 100%. The other gets a zero. The average? 50%, which means that school is failing. Never mind the teachers, potential of the students to learn more or the curriculum…

Yes, I know there is a ton of federal money tied into this, but how much money would we save if we weren’t spending our time on testing, test prep, test evaluation and test intimidation? More important, how much more would students learn if they weren’t losing class time to testing?

The other week I was listening to NPR, and Diane Ravitch, the former head of education under George H. W. Bush, said something that clicked. I’m going to paraphrase:

Testing kills innovation and creativity. You don’t teach a kid to love and play baseball by testing them on it. You don’t start by teaching them the rules, then give them a test. Then next year, you make them memorize the history of the game to World War II (including the Negro Leagues) . Then give them a test. Next year it’s Post War baseball. Then a test. Then you have options. You can study the statistics of baseball (with tests) or the chemistry and biology of baseball (with tests on testing). Then, to celebrate, they’ll take you to a ball game.

Legislative bodies can pass laws, repeal laws, change laws, or leave things alone. When it comes to testing, I recommend that we back off. Let the schools and teachers use tests to understand what the students need to learn — so that they can teach those students, not as proof one way or another that something is failing or succeeding.

What did Mr. Fox do about education?

In addition to approving full-steam ahead testing, Mr. Fox and the gang decided on a different approach. They thought that a mashup of the Board of Higher Education (the colleges and university) and the Board of Regents (K-12) would save money and be… better. Never mind that pretty much everyone in those departments was opposed. Never mind that the public didn’t know about it. The whole process was taking too long, so they decided to just jam it into the budget at the last minute, and tell everyone, tough. (R.I. House passes plan to merge education boards, Providence Journal.)

Will it work?

Answering Mr. Fox on Marriage Equality

Recently, Gordon Fox promised that if he’s re-elected, he will run for Speaker of the House, and if he wins that, he will push for an immediate vote legalizing same-sex marriage in Rhode Island.

Yaay! Whoo hoo! (About time.)

As a supporter of marriage equality, I applaud my opponent and am glad that regardless of whomever wins this election the Rep from District 4 will cast a vote for this important piece of law.

Why didn’t Mr. Fox push it through using all the power at his disposal as the Speaker of the House? “I don’t know.”

Personally, I wish that years ago, when we had the chance to be the first state in the Union to legalize same-sex marriage, we’d done so. If we had, Rhode Island would have gotten all the tourist dollars from same-sex couples wishing to get married in our beautiful state.

June 29, 2012June 29, 2012

Progress Report: Religious Symbols on Public Property in RI, Curt Schilling’s Fib, Local Journalism

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

There is a major and potentially very ugly battle brewing in the Ocean State that has nothing to do with tax rates, struggling cities or bankrupt ballplayers: I’m talking about religious symbols on public property, and it’s getting out of control.

The most recent example (which you learned about first from RI Future), a cross that a car wash owner put on a strip of city-owned land that he has long taken care of, is an interesting example: is it a religious symbol, a memorial or an act of protest? The business owner, Peter Montaquila, told WPRO yesterday he put it up to stand in solidarity with the Woonsocket Cross, also a less-than-Constitutionally-clear case.

But issues of legality are relatively easy to sort out … the danger is that the non-legal battle lines are being drawn in the sand – and the situation is getting tense. Montaquila, like the owner of the flower shop who refused to deliver a bouquet to Jessica Ahlquist when she won her case against a religious symbol in Cranston West High School, said he doesn’t want to do business with those who don’t agree with him on this issue. Could we start seeing signs in business windows: “We don’t serve atheists.”

Politicians, like Rep. John McLaughlin of Central Falls, and shock jocks like John DePetro, are fanning the flames with angry rhetoric against those who see a line between church and state. Their colleagues should call them out and implore them to be leaders rather than instigators.

People take both their religion and their Constitution protections very, very seriously and this is the third such nasty fight over the nexus of the two in a year here in Rhode Island. Someone should step and act like a leader before something really ugly happens.

Speaking of John DePetro, he is inviting some interesting karma picking on Gov. Chafee’s 18-year-old son for having a party … the mean-spirited talk show host could find himself in a similar situation someday…

Don’t believe a word Curt Schilling says about Gov. Chafee’s public comments about solvency crippling the company … the Associated Press reports that 38 Studios was already considering bankruptcy by the time the story went public.

AP reporter Laura Crimaldi obtained the confidential documents that led to this very telling development. Unfortunately for Rhode Island, today is her last day with the Providence bureau as she is moving on to a job with Boston Globe … what a way to go out Laura and best of luck in Beantown!

Speaking of great local reporting … no one covered the local effects and reactions to the Supreme Court’s decision on the Affordable Care Act better than Ted Nesi yesterday (check out his blog for a variety of different stories). We pick on Ted often because of the pro-business/pro-establishment bias he sometimes displays, but it’s also well-worth pointing out that he is far and away the most talented journalist covering the Ocean State.

One more note about local reporting … here is Kathy Gregg’s lede from her story yesterday on campaigns for seats in the State House: “How many Rhode Island lawmakers will return to the State House next year without having to face an opponent? The answer is: very few.” And here is the lede on her story today: “One out of five General Assembly incumbents is running unopposed.”

Is 20 percent “very few”? On the contrary, we think it’s a great many. Perhaps the Projo can report this yet another way tomorrow…

June 20, 2012June 20, 2012

Occupy Prov: Bail Out Workers, Not CEOs

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

Note: This was written by Paul Hubbard, Chris Murphy and Jared Paul. It reflects Occupy Providence’s position on the 38 Studios debacle. The die-in represents the destruction of jobs by trickle-down strategies not the workers who lost their jobs.

CHANTING “MONEY for jobs and a decent wage, not for bailouts and 38,” 75 members and supporters of Occupy Providence (OPVD) rallied and marched through the streets of Providence on June 9.

OPVD organized the protest around three demands: No bailout of Wall Street/38 Studios bondholders, tax the rich, and solidarity not austerity, locally, nationally and internationally.

Assembling outside the Rhode Island Convention Center where the liberal blogger conference Netroots was in progress, the crowd heard personal testimony from working people who described how the economic crises and austerity agenda of the 1 percent have impacted their lives.

OPVD then marched several blocks to the former headquarters of 38 Studios, which spoken-word artist Jared Paul, an organizer with OPVD, described as a “crime scene.” Dozens of marchers then laid on the ground and were outlined in chalk as they participated in the great RI Jobs Dead On Arrival “die-in.” The action was designed to dramatize the destruction of good jobs caused by the “trickle-down” policies of the 1 percent and evidenced by the 38 Studios debacle.

38 Studios, a video game company owned by former Red Sox baseball star Curt Schilling, was financed in 2010 with a $75 million loan from the RI Economic Development Corporation (EDC). Gambling on Schilling’s risky start-up with taxpayer funds, the quasi-public agency floated up to $125 million in “moral obligation” bonds on Wall Street to guarantee the deal.

Chris Mastrangelo, an organizer with OPVD, made the analogy of a gambler who goes “on the street” to a loan shark for money to bet on a horse. Schilling, for many years a right-wing proponent of “small government,” was only too happy to accept the EDC loan.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

NOW THAT 38 Studios has collapsed, laid off its entire workforce in three states (700 people) and filed for bankruptcy, the bondholders (sharks) on Wall Street still expect to be paid. Gov. Lincoln Chafee and the Rhode Island Legislature have promised full payment. This will cost Rhode Island’s taxpayers $112 million over the next 10 to 20 years.

Speaking at the die-in, Paul Hubbard of the International Socialist Organization said:

The austerity agenda of Rhode Island’s 1 percent, recently imposed by the governor and the Rhode Island legislature, means massive cuts to education, the developmentally disabled, state worker pensions, public transportation and Rhode Island’s poor. These are the real crimes, crimes perpetrated against Rhode Island’s working families, against the 99 percent, against humanity…Our sisters and brothers in Greece, Egypt, Spain and Quebec have risen up against the austerity agenda of the global 1 percent. Occupy Providence is proud to stand in solidarity with the global 99 percent.

OPVD then marched through the city of Providence to the State House, where dozens of protesters assembled in front of the building’s main entrance. Chalk outlines of dead bodies, representing another crime scene, were drawn on the plaza outside.

Marching back to the convention center, the site of OPVD’s four-day “sidewalk occupation,” dozens of protesters stopped by another crime scene–the tax-exempt Providence Place Mall. Sixty protesters marched through the first floor, chanting, “Tax the rich! Solidarity not austerity!”

Security guards appeared and began assaulting peaceful protesters at the front of the march, physically pushing them toward the middle exit. A large group of protesters easily avoided the guards and continued to the exit at the far end of the mall as planned. There, a “mic check” ensued as OPVD again started chanting.

Security guards called in the Providence police, who detained and handcuffed about a dozen protesters as they attempted to leave. An hour later, all were released after signing agreements to stay off the mall premises for one year.

OPVD then re-assembled and finished the march, returning to cheers from those at the sidewalk occupation as well as bystanders outside the convention center. Speaking to the media, organizer Mariah Burns said, “The police used handcuffs on peaceful protesters simply exercising their rights to assembly and free speech. These tactics were clearly designed to intimidate and were completely unnecessary.”

As the scandal surrounding 38 Studios continues to unfold, OPVD has pledged to continue its struggle for justice and against Wall Street bailouts.

June 17, 2012June 18, 2012

No Shield Against the Results of Public Speech

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

So the other day I received this email shortly after an article I wrote appeared in RI Future (I’ve only edited it due to some sentence breaks:

Sam;

Publishing the contents of the OP discussion list serve on -line with links at RI Future blog is a violation of our safety/security policies.

Of course, anyone is free to criticize OP, publicly or on the list itself, but exposing the discussion list to the public is not acceptable.

Unfortunately, this is seen by OP as a serious infraction.of our rules for the list. We have had to ask members of the press to leave the list for that exact reason – they wouldn’t respect OP confidentially on its’ list..

We’re requesting that you remove yourself from the OP discussion list.

solidarity;

[Name Redacted]

Well, I’m a good sport, so I fired back this:

I’m sorry, I thought Occupy was committed to a higher level of openness and communication; you know, that the 99% should be able to see the 99%’s list. I’m sorry that’s not the case. Go ahead and remove me.

Sincerely,

Sam

Which lead to this reply that I’ve since sat on:

Sam; I hope this is just a misunderstanding. When people post to the OP discussion list, they have to have a certain level of trust that their posts will not be published in the [public] media (certainly not without their prior permission). That’s just common sense. In the past, people have been targeted by the government, employers (lost jobs), and been the subject of harassment for belonging to social protest movements like Occupy. For instance: there’s currently a war on public education, a war on women, and a war on the middle class, designed, engineered and promulgated by both parties – a broad austerity and state security agenda that we’re opposed to. We have teachers, students, and working people in our movement – people who could be targeted and hurt from exposure. In case you haven’t noticed, the US is not really a ‘free’ society anymore. Publishing the contents of emails from the OP list is wrong on so many levels and has nothing to do with any perceived ‘higher openness’. That’s not the same thing as publicly criticizing OP’s tactics or ideas. The right wing does that all the time and we’re perfectly capable of publicly defending our ideas and tactics, but we draw the line at intentionally opening up our people to potential harassment, intimidation, and reprisals. We don’t really want you to leave the list, but do need your promise that you will not publish or publicly expose posts, discussions, threads, etc.from the OP list. If you will make that commitment and agree not to in the future, we’re perfectly happy to have you stay on the list and participate in OP activity. If you feel that you can’t agree to this, then we will have to agree to disagree and you will be removed.

There’s a lot to unpack in that statement. There’s a lot I agree with. I mean, honestly I didn’t need to share this list. As long as I could quote people (even if it’s anonymously) Occupy Providence benefits. The more I can see and read what they’re thinking, the more they benefit. And I’m with the writer on a number of points; austerity is the best example.

But there’s a lot I disagree with here. First, that the United States “is not really a ‘free’ society anymore.” I disagree. That’s a philosophical, personal disagreement, but I think the experience of Occupy sort of proves that. Police have not been hunting down its members. Occupy members have not been disappeared. Certainly, many were infiltrated by police, and the Department of Homeland Security was involved in coordinating crackdowns. But frankly, if police officers are competent, the police already have the names of everyone who ever signed on to Occupy Providence’s email list (enough people were getting those initial emails that it seems impossible to maintain security. Besides which, Occupy Providence ended with a negotiated decampment when the city was within its legal rights to forcibly clear it away.

The other thing is this break from the past and even from the present. This large disconnect about civil disobedience. Occupy often claims to draw inspiration from sources as varied as the Civil Rights Movement or the Arab Spring. But what it reminds me of is Take Back NYU. If you don’t remember it, or haven’t heard about it, here’s the embedded student reporter giving his thoughts after it ended. There’s also a good “7 Errors” post. From the slogans (e.g., “Occupy Everything”) to the tactics, to the organization, TBNYU is far more Occupy’s predecessor than any Arab Spring Revolution or Civil Rights Movement.

In the past, yes, social movements have been subjected to government and private harassment, intimidation, and reprisals. But you know what: they faced those down. Otherwise, this doesn’t happen. Or this. Or this (warning: contains filmed murder). See, a social movement lays down its life in pursuit of a higher goal. In fact, every time an act of intimidation happens, you protest it. If a member is fired due to their political beliefs, you go and protest their workplace and draw attention to it. If government harasses your members, you protest the department harassing them. Or you do something drastic.

You also have to be protesting the right thing. The day after 38 Studios went bankrupt and the state announced a criminal investigation, I went and visited the Occupy table to learn if they meant literal “bailout” or if they meant paying back the loans. A protestor assured me that it was a bailout situation, and that Governor Lincoln Chafee was completely behind a bailout and had indeed wanted to bring 38 Studios to Rhode Island. News, I’m sure, to the Governor, who is on record opposing both the initial deal and any potential bailout. The other “protestor” didn’t know what we were talking about.

It infuriates me. Right now, other Occupy movements are blocking the fraudulent mass foreclosures on people’s homes. American labor is marching and organizing to defend their hard-won rights. There are movements in Canada and Chile protesting in support of education (the Canadian one has really begun to focus on debt). Arab nations are or have been in full-scale civil war over the lack of democracy in their nations. And what was the most recent thing that Occupy Providence did: setup an occupation across the street from a conference of lefty bloggers (although admittedly, they did turn out to protest on behalf of the tax equity bill). I think the really ironic part of the occupation was that though it was aimed at Netroots Nation, they were sleeping next to the Providence Journal‘s building; which is seeking $5 million from the city (Netroots Nation was estimated to bring in $3.5 million to the local economy). If Occupy Providence had turned to face the other direction, they would’ve looked prescient.

If Occupy Providence wants to eject journalists from reading its listserv, alright. Privacy is fine and good. But don’t expect me to sympathize with your members who are protesting social injustice if they don’t understand they’re going to be subjected to that injustice. Every time I write for RI Future, I make a decision; is speaking my mind more important than protecting my ability to be hired or to do a job? I’ve always said “yes, it is.” I’m fortunate enough to have an employer that respects that. But there is no guarantee that in the future I won’t be applying to jobs where the people don’t respect that; where my well-broadcast opinions will become liabilities. I’ve made that decision, and I understand that there is no possibility of going back.

Every time we go out into the public square to protest, we are making a statement: my individual fate is nothing compared to the fate of my friends, family and the society in which I live, and I accept the consequences of these actions. Those who try to mitigate this statement by attempting to shield themselves from the consequences create dying movements. Those who have the integrity to embrace it embrace a better future.

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