Cranston City Council candidate Kate Aubin calls on Republican opponents to denounce Trump’s hateful rhetoric


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

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

Aubin“The language Donald Trump has used to describe Hispanic Americans, Muslims, women and others is both hateful and dangerous. It is a lot more than ‘putting his foot in his mouth,’ and it must be condemned,” said Democratic candidate for Cranston City Council Kate Aubin. “Incumbent City Councilor Michael Farina made the decision to switch parties from Democrat to Republican in March, when it was already clear that the national GOP would likely be led by Mr. Trump. His failure to denounce the hate ­filled language and ideology coming from the top of his new party shows a lack of judgment, courage, and leadership.”

Trump for President signs can be found around Cranston, says Aubin, displayed next to signs for the three Republican City Wide City Council candidates. Their names also appear on signs with local GOP standard bearer, Mayor Allan Fung, who told WPRI in August that he supported “the Republican nominee” and said of Trump’s hate speech that the presidential nominee “keeps putting his foot in his mouth.” By aligning themselves with the mayor and not publicly disavowing Trump, Michael Farina, Ken Hopkins, and Louis Petrucci are sending a signal that Trump’s message of racism and division is okay by them.

IMG_20160921_155003Farina, reached by email, did not reply directly to Aubin’s call for him to disavow Trump. “I am running for city council not President,” said Farina, “and this is a lame attempt for her to garner attention in a race against 2 incumbents and other more popular candidates herself. She should run on the issues and how she plans on making Cranston better. I stand by my record of positive improvements in the city of Cranston.”

This isn’t enough for Aubin. “When nomination papers were filed in June, Trump was already the presumptive nominee of the Republican party. No one forced Michael Farina to switch parties and become a Republican, and his continued unwillingness to disavow Trump’s racism and bigotry — even when given a direct opportunity — demonstrates a severe lack of judgment, courage, and leadership.

“So this absolutely matters to Cranston and the people of our city deserve to know where Mr. Farina stands on Donald Trump. I believe that Trump’s near constant hateful and incendiary comments are dangerous for America and for Cranston. I have spoken clearly about the issues I am passionate about for our city — improving our neighborhoods by making them more walkable and affordable, protecting our environment, improving our local economy, reducing wasteful spending, and making sure Cranston has top performing schools.”

At the time Farina switched party affiliation from Democrat to Republican he said he believed there had been “efforts to inhibit or obstruct him from taking positions on certain issue contrary to fellow Democratic leaders.”

“As a Democrat I have felt pressure,” said Farina, “to conform to party positions … more about political maneuvering and personal ego than the constituents.”

Aubin says that as a longtime advocate for social justice, she believes in a Cranston that is strong, diverse, and equitable. The America that Donald Trump is selling, based on xenophobia and intolerance, has no place in Cranston or anywhere in our country.

Cranston TicketGate was just the tip of an iceberg


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

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

2The ‘-gate’ suffix has become something of a cliche and many of these scandals often fail to compare to the downfall of Richard Nixon. But a new report, issued by the Rhode Island State Police on Monday, certainly paints an image not unlike the Woodward and Bernstein template.

What began in January 2014 with the issuing of a flurry of illicit parking tickets, TicketGate, seen as payback to city councilors for rejecting a police union contract, has snowballed into an exposé of a Department “in turmoil and hampered by a lack of leadership.” Officers were pitted against each other for favor with the chief and mayor from their first day on the job. Employees secretly recorded their conversations with each other so to protect their futures. Private investigators were hired to monitor officers, something going against both past practices and procedure. An unmarked car detail to monitor the activities of a civilian computer technician was directed to leave the jurisdiction of the city of Cranston and which was marked down on overtime sheets as part of another ongoing investigation. And at the center of the report’s diagnosis is Mayor Allan Fung, who came to the office promising fiscal conservatism but is now facing over $5,000,000 in liability from lawsuits brought by officers, fees for the investigations both legitimate and illicit, and expenses to pay the pensions of officers who were put on disability for reasons having more to do with realpolitik than actual ailments.

“The Department is run like the Mafia.”

The Cranston Police Department had for some time now operated with a schism in it. Officers were in either ‘Team A’ or ‘Team B’, pitted against each other for favor and promotions based solely on whether they were on the correct side of this imaginary line. When a rookie officer was brought in, they were automatically designated to a team and therefore their allegiances set in stone based on who they were partnered with as they were broken in for duty. The two groups competed against and actively sabotaged each other, with regulations and rules strictly enforced with harsh punishment for some while others, including the leadership of the force, ignored the same statutes.

As early as his 2008 election, Allan Fung was allegedly actively participating in the scheme, making promises to oust a sitting Chief and shuttle through a union contract in exchange for votes. The report includes the following:

Many Department members described how the shift in leadership was orchestrated by some within the Department, saying there was an agreement between IBPO, Local 301 President [Captain Stephen J.] Antonucci and then-Captain [Marco] Palombo [Jr.]. In exchange for support with the measure to reach a “no confidence vote” against Colonel [Stephen] McGrath, the union would support Captain Palombo as the next Chief of Police. The Executive Board of the IBPO, Local 301, led by President Antonucci, shared a good relationship with Mayor Fung and supported his 2008 mayoral campaign. There were widespread allegations within the rank and file of the Department that the IBPO, Local 301, offered its support to Mayor Fung’s campaign in exchange for the removal of Colonel McGrath as Chief and the settlement of the ongoing labor contract. It is of note that Colonel McGrath did retire, and the labor contract was ratified after Mayor Fung’s election.

Fung has denied any sort of bargain existed prior to his election. It was Antonucci who directed the revenge ticketing in January 2014.

Marco Palombo, former Cranston Police Chief.
Marco Palombo, former Cranston Police Chief.

After Palombo became chief, it appears that he ran the Department as his own personal fiefdom, refusing to answer to anyone but Mayor Fung. This included hiring and promotion decisions, disciplinary actions, and even verifying that injured officers were not faking their inability to work. Section 2.6 of the report included a selection of quotes that are worth repeating:

-“The Colonel needs to be replaced with someone from the outside, because anyone from within will have the same problems of the ‘good old boy’ network.”
-“The Colonel is a bully who has completely abused his power on some members.”

Mayor Fung was made aware of these issues multiple times and continued to retain the services of Palombo despite a growing and visible trend of demoralization and lack of confidence. With the appointment of Michael J. Winquist, an outsider, as Chief of Police, problematic culture has abated, but the legacy of Palombo remains, including officers with careers cut short or hindered significantly by his actions.

“I feel safer on the street than when I am inside the Cranston Police Headquarters building.”

The stories of Captain Todd Patalano and Officer Matthew Josefson illustrate the level of paranoia within the ranks. Both men actively recorded conversations with superiors frequently out of interests in self-preservation, as did other officers. Both men were targeted for harassment and disciplinary action for minute offenses.

In Patalano’s case, he was placed on paid leave for 22 months on charges that the State Police ruled were groundless, who also said the suspension “displayed a lack of fiscal responsibility.” In another instance, after being injured on duty while moving some office materials, Palombo went as far as hiring a private investigator to monitor an officer who “ranks among the very best police officers I have worked with…  Rhode Islanders, and especially the citizens of Cranston and the dedicated men and women of the Cranston Police Department, should be justly proud to be served by Captain Patalano”, according Fung’s own lawyer, Attorney Vincent Ragosta. When Palombo was summoned by Superior Court to testify regarding the Patalano issue, the Constable serving the summons was told on five different occasions that the Chief was unavailable. After Palombo brought a third complaint against Patalano, Michael J. Winquist, the current Chief in Cranston who was then a Captain with the State Police, wrote the following:

The timing of the Cranston Police Department bringing this complaint to our agency is questionable. It appears that the ultimate goal is to terminate Captain Patalano’s employment with the Cranston Police Department.

Patalano’s lawyer, Attorney Joseph F. Penza, Jr., himself said he felt a certain level of intimidation. The report includes this description:

[H]e felt fearful that something might be done to him in an attempt to discredit him and impact the Patalano case. Attorney Penza stated that he began to double-check his car doors to ensure that they were locked when his car was unattended, fearing that someone might plant contraband within his car. Attorney Penza advised in all the years that he has been practicing law and dealing with numerous cases involving dangerous people, this was the first time he had this sick feeling. Attorney Penza advised that the allegations against Captain Patalano were so outrageous and the lengths they would go to in an effort to prosecute him, gave him the sense that anything was possible.

Section 8 of the report, DEMOTION OF SERGEANT MATTHEW JOSEFSON, is a story begging for the adjective ‘Kafka-esque’. After an arrest package was found to have been placed in a recycling bin in the Station, Josefson prepared a memorandum for the Office of Professional Standards that said “This is not the first time that something I did for work has been sabotaged”. When his complaint was heard by OPS, they turned the proceedings into an inquisition and, instead of pursuing the story of “a series of events that illustrated his allegations that he was being set up to fail”, he was charged with lying on his original memorandum because the arrest package was missing one page. The footnotes to this section drive the point home:

The paperwork, with the exception of one…document, required to arraign the defendant before the Justice of the Peace could have been reproduced/reprinted by anyone within the Cranston Police Department currently on duty as it was saved within the Department’s Record Management System (RMS)… The required complaint form could have easily been produced by an on-duty officer as all required information to produce this form was contained within the RMS database.

From there, things went from bad to worse. Upon discovering that Josefson was recording conversations, permissible under Rhode Island laws, the Department tried to have him charged with felony wire-tapping. They went his house and demanded all copies of his recordings, which they claimed were produced despite Department policy, then put him in a do-or-die stranglehold where he needed to either be demoted to Patrolman or face termination under the auspices of a rushed ‘last chance’ agreement. While on suspension, again Palombo hired a private investigator to monitor Josefson. The report includes this following passage:

We learned when an existing policy is revised, a new Microsoft Word document is created and the revisions are highlighted in yellow for easy identification of the modifications… The document is then forwarded to all Department members via the IMC email system to ensure complete dissemination of the revised policy. Simply opening the email is considered confirmation that the policy has been read and understood by a Department member… [N]o new revised rules and regulations containing the recording prohibition language had been disseminated to members through the IMC email system. In addition and as noted previously, numerous members of the Department advised that they were unaware of the recording prohibition contained within the rules and regulations until Sergeant Josefson was disciplined.

Or consider the story of Captain Karen Guilbeault, an account that describes blatant systemic sexism reaching into City Hall. Guilbeault repeatedly filed gender discrimination complaints to no avail and her case describes a promotion process rife with undue interference. Former Director of Personnel Susan Bello said the following in her testimony:

[I]n 2012, things kind of came to a head because as officers were coming in to review scores and that kind of thing…they started coming forth about things: that there…was improper targeting; that people were getting improper discipline. And I was most familiar with some…irregularities with Karen…Guilbeault. Because she had come to me and said that there were some things that were improper…[T]hey…didn’t make formal complaints with me, but what was complained to me repeatedly was that once Palombo came into office, that they could not go to the union because the union was picking and choosing whose grievance they wanted to go forward based on whether they were liked by the union or by Palombo. So when people were starting to come to me and say we can’t do anything, because, you know, my response would be go to the union and file a grievance, and I was told repeatedly that…the union, because they were in bed with Palombo, wouldn’t do anything about it. So these things started to filter through to me. But what…I was privy to directly was during the exam process in 2012,…there was an attempt to get the scores. And I am missing one email, but I do believe that I was contacted sometime in the beginning of October, and I believe it was by Major Ryan, in that they wanted the scores. The…pressure was clearly regarding the captains’ scores primarily, then the lieutenants’. There wasn’t that much interest in the sergeants’ scores. But I was contacted by them demanding to see the scores of the written exam for captain, and at that point, I said no,…you’d never get the scores: the Mayor doesn’t get the scores; the scores are…protected by law…They were claiming: oh, we don’t want anybody’s name and we don’t want anybody’s direct score, we just want the range. But in the case of Karen Guilbeault, since she was the highest scorer, if I for some reason illegally gave them those scores, they would automatically know because they had the other four scores that oh, that was her score.

Guilbeault had tried to attain a higher rank repeatedly and was denied while other officers were given promotions that violated the City Charter. The level of institutionalized discrimination has delayed her advancement despite serving seventeen years on the force.

Captain Thomas Dodd was another officer of high standing who seems to have simply gotten in the way of Fung. On July 22, 2013, Fung was instrumental in getting Dodd put on a disability pension despite the fact that doctors felt the officer did not qualify. Cranston City Councilman Richard Santamaria later said of his vote to grant Dodd the pension “I wish I could have that one back.” Dodd went on to file a complaint and requested an injunction from Superior Court to prevent him from being forced into retirement. Two days after Dodd was retired, Stephen Antonucci, the police union president and later head of the illicit ticketing, was promoted to fill the vacancy.

“So I no longer have to feel my safety is in jeopardy?”

In February 2013, Palombo was a man on a mission. The City and Police Department had a computer network that was part of a larger City of Cranston schematic. Both due to a convoluted process in obtaining files and Palombo’s own security concerns, the Chief ordered the implementation of a process of separating the two systems. On February 14, Palombo insisted on that day he required a set of passcodes from a computer technician contracted by the City. The technician’s name, company, and residence have been redacted from the report, but the individual in question was the Vice President of the company at the time. When Palombo was told the tech could not provide him the requested passcodes, the Chief flew into a rage. One witness said this in the report:

[I]t’s mid to late morning. At this point, the Colonel didn’t want to hear it anymore and basically, again, it appeared to be like a psychotic episode where he flipped out, and he was screaming at this guy to surrender the credentials, and the guy was trying to tell him I….I can’t, I got to get back to the technicians and stop…

After getting off the phone call, Palombo sent a squad car out of their jurisdiction to the technician’s home in another city. After spending a few hours monitoring the man’s home, the tech was able to get the codes delivered to the Chief Records Clerk. The tech called Mayor Fung, who convened an 8:30 am meeting that Palombo failed to appear at. Fung then sent him an e-mail message that reads:

I am extremely disappointed to hear that you failed to show up at the 8:30 AM meeting that Director Cordy had requested by text last night to you regarding the IT situation at the police Department…Thus, please be available this afternoon at 2PM so that we can discuss this entire situation and how we need to move forward.

On February 24, Cranston City Director of Administration Gerald Cordy received this anonymously mailed letter:

We had another incident occurring involving our chief who yelled at a rep from a computer company who works for our police Department and had some codes the chief wanted. Maj. Ryan said the chief yelled and sweared at the guy and threatened him… What is happening again is more assignments given by the chief to fight and push people around. He’s using us to threaten the computer guy. After the chief made threats to the computer guy he sent Maj. Ryan to make us follow the guy like a criminal because he argued with him. Most of us refused OT [overtime]. We can’t work on criminal cases cause (sic) OT has been stopped but we can go make OT and follow the guy who lived in…and follow him all night and write down everywhere he goes. The detective was told to fill out an OT slip and put he worked on a robbery case because city hall would find out. The OT slip has a fake reason so you won’t know the chief has a detective follow a guy for this reason. The chief said he don’t (sic) answer to Cordy only the mayor. Making us do things we can’t do is illegal and we got no jurisdiction in… The whole place has no trust or moral [sic] left here. We think is it almost criminal to make a detective lie or he won’t get paid to hide it from you. They didn’t want the OT reason to say the surveillance on the computer guy.

No investigation or disciplinary proceedings were ever taken up by the Department in response to this incident. On March 17, 2014, Palombo announced his retirement.

“This is political.”

With the appointment of Chief Winquist, the infighting and ‘Team A’-‘Team B’ rivalry did seem to die down. But even after his appointment, apparently Fung was set on preserving some of the old culture. On November 10, 2014, Fung and Winquist had a meeting where he insisted that the Chief support his decision to re-instate Captain Antonucci, the leader of the illicit ticketing at the beginning of that year. Winquist refused, stating that he felt the impending review of the officer’s termination should run its course while the Mayor’s interference in Department affairs would seriously affect Winquist’s standing in his new position. Fung said the situation “dragged on long enough and it was time for Stephen to join the team to help move the Department forward.” On another occasion, his Chief of Staff Carlos Lopez said “Stephen was a good guy, who did a lot of good things for the Cranston Police Department.” Winquist at one point seriously contemplated tendering his resignation, a move that would have raised eyebrows both within the Rhode Island police confraternity and the general public. Over a series of meetings, including one on a scheduled vacation day, Fung continued to refuse to recuse himself of the situation and saw things in terms of palace intrigue instead of administration. Winquist furthermore insisted that returning Antonucci to duty would kill morale in the Department that was only beginning to be repaired, but Fung remained belligerent. The report includes Winquist’s personal statement of events since becoming Chief, which ends with the following:

I continue to believe the best course is for the case to be adjudicated through the LEOBOR [police union adjudication process] hearing committee and allow the LEOBOR committee to either sustain the recommendation of termination, instill a punishment they determined fair and appropriate or dismiss the case if it is determined to have no merit. Attorney Ragosta advised me as well as Mayor Fung that the investigation was strong and the evidence supported the pending charges.

This past June, NBC 10 revealed that Antonucci had reached a settlement and retire in April 2016. On August 3, the Cranston City Council called for a special session to question Fung on the report.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

It’s time for another People’s Pledge


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

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

tableAs regular readers of RI Future know Common Cause Rhode Island pushed for a People’s Pledge in the race for governor last year. Despite some skeptics the three leading Democrats agreed to the Pledge in April. Up until the final days the Pledge held and we saw not a single TV or radio ad run by an outside group in the primary. The one violation was quickly dealt with and represented only 1/10,000th of the total spending in the race.

Today we wrote letters to the party nominees and asked them to negotiate another Pledge. While we didn’t literally offer our table again, we stand ready to facilitate a negotiation between the candidates. Last time we called for a Pledge we were armed with evidence from the Scott Brown-Elizabeth Warren U.S. Senate race. Common Cause research showed that the Pledge reduced the amount of negativity, the amount of undisclosed money, and increased the percentage of small dollar donors. Now we have evidence from Rhode Island that the Pledge keeps outside money out of the race. And there is a great survey by Lake Survey Partners showing bi-partisan support for the People’s Pledge.

Let’s hear from the candidates between now and November 4th and insist on a People’s Pledge!

Why conservatives play fast and loose with RI’s credit


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

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

Don Carcieri’s epic economic fail of investing in 38 Studios may have a silver lining for the local conservative movement he once led. And both Republican candidates for governor are for it, while the Democrats are opposed.

The Providence Journal points out that gubernatorial candidates are split along party lines when it comes to repaying the 38 Studios bond.

Allan Fung said the warnings from Wall Street about fiscal repercussions are overstated and Ken Block, who never met a opportunity to issue a press release he didn’t exploit, railed against “the threats coming from Wall Street insiders of dire consequences for the state if they fail to make good on the 38 Studios bond,” according to the ProJo. Leading Democratic candidates were equally united that the bond should be repaid and Sam Howard wrote about why the bond payment should be made in a post yesterday.

Rhode Island owes $12.5 million on the bond we floated to loan Curt Schilling $75 million to move his unproven and ultimately unsuccessful video game company here from Massachusetts – an economic growth strategy birthed by Don Carcieri, the last politically powerful Republican in Rhode Island. The gamble failed in spectacular fashion when 38 Studios went bankrupt in 2012. Because we took a moral obligation bond rather than a general obligation bond, there is no legal responsibility to pay the bond, though not paying would likely make future borrowing more expensive.

That may be a bad outcome for Rhode Island, but that’s not necessarily a bad outcome for the Grand Old Party in Rhode Island. Best known for espousing 40 years of Democratic failure and seeking to shrink the size of government, damage to the state’s credit rating as a result of not paying the 38 Studios bond would serve both these conservative political objectives. It would also make it more expensive to repair aging infrastructure, which would give the construction industry a nice boost. These are policies pushed by local Democratic candidates that Republicans generally don’t care for.

Rhode Island is the only state in the nation with a law that stipulates bond holders will be paid prior to other obligations when it comes to municipal financing. The general assembly passed that law at the expressed interest of protecting city’s and the state’s credit ratings. Maybe the General Assembly should consider legislation that would prevent Republicans from damaging our credit rating too?

Not needed: crank economic opinions on the Minimum Wage


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

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

DSC_8172Arguments against raising the minimum wage are tedious, immoral and wrong.

Writing about the need for a substantive raise in the minimum wage to alleviate the crushing poverty of the working poor opens the floodgates to conservative and libertarian cranks who argue, against all reason and compassion, that minimum wage laws should be abolished. Tearing quotes from their dog eared copies of Rothbard and Mises, two economists who never met a real-world constraint on their precious theories that they can’t talk themselves around in an assault of dense, senseless prose, Libertarian and free-market conservatives (as if there is a real difference) barrage the Internet with drivel.

Entering into discussions with people who advance economic models over economic reality is like jumping into choppy waters to rescue a drowning victim: If you are not extremely careful you will be dragged below the waves and drowned yourself.

After I wrote a piece on this blog taking Republican gubernatorial candidates Alan Fung and Ken Block to task for opposing an increase in minimum wage, I was hit with this objection from frequent commenter “jgardner”:

The minimum wage has never been, nor will ever be, a job creator, but will always be a job destroyer.

First, I never said raising the minimum wage would directly create jobs, but I did cautiously assert that providing the working poor with more money would have the effect of stimulating the economy, because poor people spend their money. More importantly, however, is the the second contention, stated without any proof as though delivered from God to Moses: The minimum wage is a job destroyer. From this I am to then conclude that abolishing the minimum wage would create more jobs. Perhaps. But these jobs would only be paying slave wages that keep the working poor working and poor.

As explained way back in 2009 by economics professor Bill Mitchell:

The winds of change strengthened in the recent OECD Employment Outlook entitled Boosting Jobs and Incomes, which is based on a comprehensive econometric analysis of employment outcomes across 20 OECD countries between 1983 and 2003. The sample includes those who have adopted the Jobs Study as a policy template and those who have resisted labour market deregulation. The report provides an assessment of the Jobs Study strategy to date and reveals significant shifts in the OECD position. OECD (2006) finds that:

-There is no significant correlation between unemployment and employment protection legislation;

-The level of the minimum wage has no significant direct impact on unemployment; and

-Highly centralized wage bargaining significantly reduces unemployment.

Having to finally concede that there is no real world evidence for his contention and instead a wealth of evidence against his position (though in truth no concession was made, the issue was simply sidestepped), “jgardner” pulled out his trump card:

If the minimum wage could lift people out of poverty with no adverse effects for anyone, why not raise the minimum wage to $25/hr?

One might as well ask why, if one beer relaxes you, why not drink twenty-five beers. The answer is because doing that will kill you. When answering such objections, no matter how nicely you try to put things, you feel like you are talking to a petulant child: “A little of something can be good for you, but a lot of something can hurt you. That’s why you can’t eat all your Halloween candy in one night.”

Here’s a nice way to say it, from the Social Democracy blog:

There is another objection that has been going the rounds (mostly on libertarian blogs): if we make the minimum wage $9, then why not $900? That objection is, quite frankly, brainless.

The minimum wage is a floor concept: the floor is roughly the poverty line (or slightly above it). That is where you set it, and not well above it.

Not even Post Keynesians deny that excessive wage increases can feed into cost push inflation – wages being a big factor in input costs. But a rise from, say, $7.25 to $9 is quite small. In the real world, whole swathes of the market have corporations and businesses that actively set prices and control them by price administration. They leave prices unchanged for significant periods of time, even when mild to moderate demand changes happen, or even when mild price increases affect their factor input costs.

I’ve been hard on “jgardner” because he was brave enough to put his opinions out there, and I would like to believe he’s a decent person. But like so many otherwise decent people who believe terrible things because of their religion, “jgardner” seems similarly trapped by his economic beliefs. Ultimately, shouldn’t all this back and forth economic theorizing should be secondary to other, more pertinent concerns? People right now are working full time at two or more jobs and being forced to subsist below the poverty line. This situation is plainly immoral and monstrous.

Moral arguments for raising the minimum wage include lifting people and families out of poverty, paying people an honest salary for an honest days work, moving away from the economic paradigm that suggests unemployment is voluntary and that workers are “shirkers” and reducing in some small way the vast economic inequality that threatens to destabilize our democracy.

A decent society, made up of decent people, does not let unemployed people starve, it does not plunge families into homelessness and it does not encourage businesses to pay slave wages for hard work.

Economic theories that do not fit in with observations made in the real world need to be modified or discarded. Science is not a process of inventing a set of ideal rules that support pre-existing prejudices. It is a process of suggesting possible rules, and then testing them against reality through experimentation and observation. In this way Libertarian economists such as Mises and Rothbard catastrophically fail as scientists. I should add here that as bad as Libertarian economic theory is, even mainstream economics needs a scientific wake-up call. (See: “Economics needs a scientific revolution” by physicist Jean-Philippe Brouchard.)

Inviting Libertarian economic views into serious economic and political policy discussions is as useless and counterproductive as inviting the views of Trofim Lysenko into a modern genetics conference or inviting Erich von Däniken to give a talk at an ancient history seminar.

The damage done to human wellbeing by corrupt economic theory far surpasses the damage down to our society by the teaching of creationism in schools, anti-vaccination conspiracy claptrap, the anti-birth control advocacy of the Catholic Church and Islamic terrorism combined. It is time to grow up, abandon the religion of economic idealism, and start living in the real world of testable economic hypotheses and scientific economic rigor with the intention to abolish poverty once and for all.

Republicans are wrong about minimum wage and economists know it


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

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

DSC_8263In response to Democratic gubernatorial candidate Angel Taveras supporting a minimum wage increase in Rhode Island from its current $8 to a kingly $10.10, both Republican candidates, according to the ProJo, have opposed the idea. Ken Block is quoted as saying, “We have seen repeatedly… that Democrat-driven mandates, like increasing the minimum wage, raise the cost of doing business and ultimately lead to fewer jobs,” while Cranston Mayor Allan Fung declared, “Raising the minimum wage isn’t a solution. It’s a symptom of a larger problem.”

Are Block and Fung right when they say raising the minimum wage will have an adverse effect on Rhode Island’s already struggling economy? The short answer is no, and the truth is that economists have known this since at least 1994 when David Card and Alan Krueger published Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Card and Krueger did an analysis in 1992 when New Jersey raised its minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.05. Contrary to what Ken Block seems to believe, the study found “no indication that the rise in the minimum wage reduced employment.”

As to Fung’s position that raising the minimum wage isn’t a solution, one needs to ask, “A solution to what?” If we are looking for a solution to the problem of how to keep workers poor and minimum wage employers rich, then Fung is right. However, if we are looking for a way to potentially lift hundreds of thousands of low paid workers out of poverty, then raising the minimum wage is a solution worth pursuing. A report from ROCUnited shows how this is possible.

Both Block and Fung, it seems, are content with the status quo, in which large corporations and other other businesses underpay their employees. This puts the burden of public assistance for these underpaid workers squarely on the taxpayers. Raising the minimum wage, however, does not put any additional burdens on the taxpayer, and in fact, by getting people off public assistance, tax burdens will be lowered.

To those who think that raising the minimum wage will just benefit a bunch of teenage kids working for date money or people too lazy to find real jobs, this chart, from the AFL-CIO and put together with info from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, should dispel that idea.

fMCwyRZ

Both party primaries for governor come into focus


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Gina Raimondo, Linc Chafee and Allan Fung at the unveiling of the Truth in Numbers report.
Gina Raimondo, Linc Chafee and Allan Fung at the unveiling of the “Truth in Numbers” report.

The calendar may still say 2013, but the 2014 election year kicked into high gear this weekend. Providence Mayor Angel Taveras said he will announce his candidacy today at 10 am at Meeting Street School in Providence; General Treasurer Gina Raimondo told WPRI Newsmakers if she does run for governor, she will do so as a Democrat; and “moderate” Ken Block finally admitted he’s really a Republican.

Progressives have reason to celebrate all three announcements.

Angel Taveras is the most obvious, as many local liberals are hoping he becomes the first Democrat elected governor since Bruce Sundlun was 18 years ago. He’s won praise for winning concessions from a wide swath of special interests and more recently he’s been panned for not cow-towing to neighborhood interests (and astroturfing Republicans) who want their public sector pool re-opened. More than anything, I think, progressives hope Angel can usher in a new era of working across the aisle without giving in to influential and often discreet out-of-town corporate forces.

To that end, with Raimondo almost certainly commanding the most out-of-state super PAC support in 2014, the left will be lucky if it has to face those influential and often-discreet corporate forces in a primary rather than the general election. Perhaps. At least there will be something refreshing about seeing the Citizens United approach to campaigning square off with real grassroots, boots-on-the-ground organizers.

Raimondo probably has the best shot of winning a general election, but because she has a wider appeal among all Rhode Island voters than she does among Democrats. But since she will need party support if she ever wants to run for national office, she’ll remain a Democrat.

While Raimondo’s career aspirations keep her in one mainstream political party, Ken Block’s has him joining the other. Now, instead of siphoning off votes from Republican Allan Fung in a general election, he’ll compete against him for the nomination. That, too, will likely be a bruising primary – if for no other reason than both Fung and Block are hot-headed and argumentative politicians. I think Fung will prove victorious and the more moderate of the two. More importantly, a contested GOP primary will be an interesting look at the right wing in Rhode Island.

Then there is Clay Pell, the grandson of former Senator Claiborne Pell who is flirting with the idea of making his foray into politics by injecting himself into an already divisive Democratic field. His family fortune and connections make him an instant contender, and he sent shivers down the spine of some Taveras supporters when he showed up at an NEARI event last week. While political operatives might not like the prospect of a three-way primary, political philosophers can ask for a lot worse than to get to see a Latino from South Providence take on a Wall Street Democrat and a registered member of the 1 percent.

Let the Taveras, Raimondo horse race begin!


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Gina Raimondo and Angel Taveras supporting payday loan reform. (Bob Plain 5/18/12 Click on image for larger version)
Gina Raimondo and Angel Taveras supporting payday loan reform. (Bob Plain 5/18/12 Click on image for larger version)

The Taubman Center’s recent poll is probably the ultimate kick-off of horse race coverage of the 2014 campaign for governor. In a somewhat regular occurrence for Director Marion Orr, the poll’s methodology was called out almost immediately. WPRI’s Ted Nesi has an interview with Orr explaining the methodology; here on RI Future our editor Bob Plain has a quick list comparing the actual results of elections versus Taubman’s predictions.

Polling is great for horse race coverage, and shoddy polling is politically dangerous. A year out, with the primary candidates for governor as yet undeclared, we don’t care much for talking about the issues the next governor will face; even though recent history suggests the decisions made in this next year will likely have great impacts on the next administration. Thus the polling provides a simple narrative for who has the “advantage” going into the actual race.

That narrative is something to be cautious about, especially in Rhode Island. What the media is saying is not necessarily what is happening. Sometimes, unfortunately, media outlets can fall too much in love with the narrative they’ve created. 2012 should remain a sobering moment; the narrative (based largely on polling) was that Rep. David Cicilline was in for one of the closest races of his political career. On the eve of the election, WPRI showed Cicilline with a 1-point lead over challenger Brendan Doherty. A month before, both the Taubman Center and WPRI had Cicilline with a 5- or 6-point lead. Cicilline went on to win by an unexpected 12.2% margin.

The Taubman Center’s polling also shows where the narrative is going. Included is a question comparing a 4-way race between Gina Raimondo, Angel Taveras, Allan Fung, and Ken Block. The operating theory is that Raimondo will choose to skip the Democratic primary, run as an independent and Chafee her way to victory. But here’s the thing; she’s already told NBC 10’s Jim Taricani that she won’t run for governor as an independent. Why does this narrative persist? Because people want it to.

In the meantime, there are strong questions to be asked. For instance, how does the next governor fix the state’s economy? Can they, considering the office’s major policy-making ability is as a leader in budget creation and through the bully pulpit? For the Democrats, we have to ask ourselves what the General Assembly does if the governor is no longer a useful foil to play off of? How do the candidates view the office they’re running for? There are social issues that are going to come up during the next term; will gubernatorial candidates protect the recent advances, or will they roll back progress? What are their educational policies?

David Preston has a great review of the usefulness of polling, and how to watching a political campaign without using numbers that are either unreliable or meant to manipulate.