‘Immoral’ that GOP stripped food stamp program


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

cicillineSpeaking about the controversial Farm Bill that also authorizes funding food stamps, Congressman David Cicilline said the House GOP “made a clear choice to protect generous subsidies for agriculture corporations at the expense of the hungry and working poor.”

He’s right. According to the New York Times: “Republicans muscled a pared-back agriculture bill through the House on Thursday, stripping out the food stamp program to satisfy recalcitrant conservatives but losing what little Democratic support the bill had when it failed last month. It was the first time food stamps had not been a part of the farm bill since 1973.”

Cicilline said about 1/5 of Rhode Island will be adversely affected by the GOP’s decision.

“Make no mistake today House Republicans are telling hungry children food banks struggling to meet the needs of their community and low-income seniors who depend on food assistance that there needs don’t matter,” he said. “They are not extraneous. This is disgraceful, it’s immoral and it’s contrary to our values as a nation.”

Whitehouse just introduced an awesome bill


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
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at Forward on Climate rally
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at Forward on Climate rally
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at Forward on Climate rally. (Photo by Jack McDaid.)

Working with Elizabeth Warren, Sheldon Whitehouse just introduced what I humbly submit is the second-best bill introduced in this Congress.  He introduced the Marquette fix.

This is a bit of a wonkish issue, but it’s also a BFD, so please bear with me for a moment.  Basically, this bill would overrule Marquette v. First of Omaha, the 1978 Supreme Court decision that was the biggest bank deregulation in American history.  What Marquette did was deceptively simple.  It said that when a bank chartered in one state makes a loan in another state, it’s the laws of the state in which the bank is chartered that apply, not the laws of the state in which the loan is made.  That seems innocuous, but here’s what happened after the decision came down:  South Dakota and Delaware completely deregulated their banking industries, and a bunch of banks chartered themselves in those states, effectively wiping out the vast majority of sensible state-based banking safeguards.

Usury laws were the most important banking restriction to fall.  A hard cap on interest rates, usury laws used to prevent banks from charging ridiculously high interest rates.  But South Dakota and Delaware do not have usury laws, which effectively allows all US banks to charge whatever interest rates they want to.  That’s a big deal.  Before Marquette, the business of abusive consumer lending really could not exist, and it was actually somewhat difficult for banks to cheat their customers.  Obviously, things have changed.

Perhaps most importantly, blue states no longer have the power to protect their citizens from banking abuses.  States like California and Massachusetts might like to protect their citizens from the banks, but they are essentially powerless.  Unsurprisingly, Rhode Island has some fairly right-wing lending laws.  Our usury rate is pretty high (21% or 9% above the Wall St. Journal prime rate, whichever is higher), and one of Bill Murphy’s first acts as Speaker was to put in a special carve-out for credit card issuers.

Because of Marquette, this is largely irrelevant, but there are some things we can do to combat banking abuses.  Payday lenders, interestingly, do not really have Marquette protection because of federal regulations, and states can and do regulate them.  (Of course, with former Speaker Murphy lobbying for the payday lenders and Gordon Fox as Speaker, that’s a long way from happening in Rhode Island.)

What Whitehouse’s bill does is grant states the ability to set cap interest rates.  If this bill passed, blue states would actually have the tools they need to really crack down on abusive practices by the big banks.  And immediately, a large body of pre-Marquette law would slam back into place.  We would have usury laws again.

The odds for this bill are slim, but I’m glad to see Senator Whitehouse keeping the conversation alive, and I’m glad to see Senator Reed, long a quiet champion of financial reform, cosponsoring this excellent piece of legislation.  Good work, Senators!

37th vote on Obamacare


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

Three years ago, over strong Republican opposition, Congress passed and President Obama signed into law a historic health care reform bill. Opponents of the bill took their case all the way to the Supreme Court…and still lost. And later today, Republicans in the House are going to vote for a 37th time to repeal all or part of this law.

I spoke on the House floor earlier today pointing out just how ridiculous this is and urging the Republican leadership to get back to the important task of getting our country back to work. Watch the video below and then leave a comment about what Republicans in Congress should be working on instead of another empty attempt at repealing health care reform.

Elizabeth Warren: pensions for middle class workers

elizabeth warrenAre pensions coming back into fashion? Perhaps, said progressive hero Senator Elizabeth Warren who was in Providence last night at a fundraiser at the Convention Center for her Senate Banking Committee colleague Jack Reed.

Hailed as one of Wall Street’s worst nightmares and the intellectual godmother of Occupy Wall Street, Warren told me that public investment in education and infrastructure is the top priority for progressives in Congress. She also said the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions is looking at ways “to get more people of moderate income to be able to build their own pensions so they have something in addition to Social Security when they retire.”

Here’s the video:

Happy Earth Day, RI from Sheldon Whitehouse


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

Happy Earth Day, Rhode Island … to celebrate: enjoy some outside time. Or, if you’re stuck in front of a machine all day, at least enjoy this great piece by our own Senator Sheldon Whitehouse:

I’m working with Rep. Henry Waxman and other colleagues in Congress to draft legislation to put a price on carbon. Big polluters have had a free pass for far too long. Not only will a carbon fee reduce carbon emissions, it will force big polluters to pay for the damage their pollution does to public health and the environment, generating billions in new revenue for the American people.

 

He writes the piece for a new web zine called Medium … I like what it stands for: “Medium is based on the belief that the sharing of ideas and experiences is what moves humanity forward. The Internet is the greatest idea-sharing tool ever imagined, but we’ve only scratched the surface of its capabilities. More concretely, Medium is a system for reading and writing. A place where you can find and share knowledge, ideas, and stories—specifically, ones that need more than 140 characters and are not just for your friends. It’s a place where you can work with others to create something better than you can on your own.”

Click on the image to read Sheldon's full post on Medium.com
Click on the image to read Sheldon’s full post on Medium.com

Making It In America


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

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

As many RI Future readers may already know, I joined House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer and other House Democrats to announce the Make it in America plan – a comprehensive series of legislative proposals that will help reinvigorate American manufacturing and put men and women across America back to work in the kinds of good-paying jobs that built this great country’s middle class.

This agenda also includes a bill that I have introduced, the Make it in America Manufacturing Act, that establishes a competitive block grant program that provides small to medium-sized manufacturers with resources to retool their factories and retrain their workers to compete in a global economy.

I believe strongly that if we want to get our economy back on the right track, we have to start making things again in this country. That’s why, yesterday, I spoke on the House floor and highlighted the importance of Congress working to pass the commonsense proposals that are included in the Make it in America plan – a video of my speech is embedded below.

I hope you’ll join me in working to make sure that Congress acts soon on these pragmatic, progressive ideas for getting America back to work. Click here to visit the official Make it in America website and learn more right now.

David Cicilline Signs Grayson-Takano Letter


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

Thank you Congressman Cicilline for standing up against cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security!

When Barack Obama proposed cuts to Social Security in his current budget, progressives were horrified.  Fortunately, in the First District of Rhode Island, we have a congressman who opposes this dangerous unraveling of the New Deal.  David Cicilline has signed the Grayson-Takano letter, formally committing to never voting for cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security (http://act.boldprogressives.org/survey/survey_ss_grayson/#fullletter).

This is a critical move.  As American family budgets continue to be squeezed, and retirement savings continue to dwindle, Social Security is more important than ever.  We cannot afford to lose this fight.

As a member of the Budget Committee, Congressman Cicilline is in a strong position to help defend these core Democratic achievements.  But he needs allies.  Let’s hope more congressmen follow Cicilline’s lead.

Save Saturday Delivery


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

Thousands of jobs in Rhode Island would be in jeopardy if conservative forces in Congress successfully shut down Saturday delivery of the mail, said local post office employees at a  recent rally at Garden City in Cranston to call attention to the issue.

Postmaster General Peter Donahoe is trying to cut costs by scaling back service, even though the Postal Service’s problems aren’t stemming so much from a lack of mail but rather some very difficult accounting regulations. In 2007, Congress forced the Post Office to over-fund its pension obligation by $5 billion every year.

“I think there are alternatives to eliminating Saturday service,” said Congressman Jim Langevin on Sunday. “I think this is an action of last resort … but some members of Congress seem to think it’s an option of first resort. I disagree. I think that is a backwards approach.”

Congressman Jim Langevin at the letter carriers rally in Cranston. (Photo by Ron Matthieu)

In Budget Vote, Cicilline Betrays Progressives


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
As I predicted on Tuesday, Congressman Cicilline voted against the Progressive Caucus’s budget on Wednesday. For a vice chair of the Progressive Caucus, this is a major break—especially after Rhode Island progressives have made it very clear they do not want Cicilline to abandon House progressives.

This is a tough vote for Rhode Island progressives to swallow.  The progressive community threw our all into getting Cicilline reelected.  We are his base.  We chose not to attack him on previous votes where he has betrayed the progressive agenda because we thought it might damage him.  David Segal, a progressive who ran against Cicilline in 2010, opted not to run in 2012.  But he refuses to stand up for progressive values.

In a statement posted to RI Future in response to my post on Tuesday, Cicilline spokesman Rich Luchette argued that “it is absurd to suggest that David is anything other than %100 committed to protecting Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits.” Cicilline did sign a letter specifically opposing such cuts in a sequestration deal, but only in a sequestration deal.  However, the concern I raised was not that he would support such cuts in a sequestration deal but that he would support them in a grand bargain deal.  The letter Cicilline signed would not bar him from supporting those cuts in a grand bargain deal.  The letter he refused to sign would.

This is not a difficult issue.  If Cicilline believes his position has been misrepresented by his actions, all he has to do is sign the Grayson-Takano letter pledging never cut Social Security, Medicaid, or Medicare.  If he continues to refuse to sign it, his position will be clear.

Similarly, if Cicilline opposes sequestration, all he has to do is cosponsor the Cancel the Sequester Act.  The mainstream Democratic plan, which Cicilline supports, replaces sequestration with more acceptable austerity that has no chance of passage.  It cedes the ideological ground that we must be doing austerity in a jobs crisis, a battle Democrats will never win.  Had Democrats supported repealing the sequester, the debate would have been between Republicans who support the sequester and Democrats who oppose it.  Instead, it is between Democrats who want a Democratic version of the sequester and Republicans who want a Republican version of the sequester.

One doesn’t have to be a very active observer of politics to know that Democrats and Republicans would not come together on a sequester plan even vaguely acceptable to liberals.  When Democrats refused to call for a repeal of the sequester, it ensured the sequester would happen.  If Cicilline persists in opposing repealing the sequester, his position will be clear:  He prioritizes deficit reduction over jobs.

On Tuesday, I predicted Cicilline would abandon the Progressive Caucus and oppose the Caucus’s budget.  Yesterday, he proved me right.  This is about as clear a sign as you could imagine that Cicilline does not stand with progressives on economic issues.  If he had felt at all conflicted, he could have, like Jim Langevin, at least chosen not to vote one way or the other.  This vote indicates that he may soon be contemplating an exit from the Caucus.  Again, if he sees this concern as unwarranted, all he has to do is pledge he will never leave the Progressive Caucus.

Let us be clear, progressives are not going to vote against Cicilline in the general election.  We are not going to vote for a conservative primary challenger.  The question is whether we will continue to pour our limited resources into a candidate who does not stand up for our values—instead of state and local candidates who do.

This is not an idle concern.  During the 2012 election, for instance, members of the Progressive Democrats knocked on more than 3,000 doors for Cicilline in East Providence.  Had we instead been canvassing for Bob DaSilva (who lost by less than 2%), Bob DaSilva almost certainly would have won.

If Cicilline would like to see his base work for him instead of on General Assembly races, he has some explaining to do.  I encourage him to begin that process by defending his vote on RI Future.

Budget Vote Doesn’t Mean Cicilline Isn’t Progressive


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Congressman David Cicilline challenges Paul Ryan’s facts.

Congressman David Cicilline’s office confirmed he hasn’t signed the Grayson-Takano pledge to oppose “every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits” and that he is “leaning” against supporting the progressive Back to Work budget proposal being supported by the Progressive Caucus in the House of Representatives. (Instead he may support the more moderate House Democrat proposal being voted on today.)

But Cicilline spokesman Rich Luchette wants progressive Rhode Islanders to know that these tough votes don’t necessarily mean that David is no longer fighting for us.

“You don’t sign every letter or bill you agree with,” Luchette said in an email. “That’s just not how the House works.”

He sent this statement that he wanted me to share with progressive RI:

It is absurd to suggest that David is anything other than 100% committed to protecting Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits

In February 2013, David co-signed a letter from Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, Congressman Keith Ellison and Congressman Raul Grijalva that pledged to oppose cuts to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid benefits as part of a deal to avert sequestration.

In December 2012, David co-signed a letter pledging to oppose any budget proposal that included chained CPI to calculate COLAs for Social Security.

David voted against the Ryan budget in April 2011.

In August 2011, the Rhode Island Alliance for Retired Americans presented David with the Social Security and Medicare Hero’s Award thanking him for his work to protect Social Security and Medicare.

In July 2011, David co-signed a letter to Leader Pelosi expressing support for her strong advocacy during debt ceiling negotiations to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

He called on the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to protect Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security in October 2011.

“Rep. Cicilline draws the line on protecting Social Security, Medicare benefits.” – The Hill, October 2011,

David spoke on the House floor and voted against the Ryan budget in March 2012 because it would end the Medicare guarantee for seniors.

In both of his terms, he co-sponsored the Preserving Our Promise to Seniors Act, legislation that would strengthen the finances of the Social Security Trust Fund and improve how cost of living adjustments (COLAs) are determined by using a new Consumer Price Index (CPI) that more accurately tracks changes in the cost of goods and services purchased by seniors.

He also co-sponsored the Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act in both terms – legislation that would authorize the Health and Human Services Secretary to negotiate with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices of prescription drugs for beneficiaries of Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage, which could save taxpayers billions of dollars while also reducing drug prices for seniors.

Just last week, he fought for these priorities during the Budget Committee markup of the Ryan proposal.

Congressman Cicilline introduced an amendment that would have included language in the budget resolution expressing the House’s opposition to the privatization of Social Security. Due to Republican opposition, the amendment failed by a vote of 22-17.

Congressman Cicilline co-sponsored, and spoke in favor of an amendment offered by Representative Jim McDermott (D-WA) that would have formally affirmed our commitment to not ending Medicare as we know it. Due to Republican opposition, this amendment also failed by a vote of 22-17.

Congressman Cicilline co-sponsored an amendment offered by Representative Michelle Lujan-Grisham (D-NM) to restore Medicaid assistance to cover the costs of nursing home care or home and community-based services for seniors. Due to Republican opposition, this amendment also failed by a vote of 22-17.

Will Cicilline Abandon Progressives On Budget?


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

Many progressives worked hard to reelect David Cicilline. I spent a lot of my summer and fall knocking on doors for him instead of helping out progressives in tight General Assembly races. When everyone was piling on Cicilline a year ago, we were defending him. We took a lot of flack, but we knew that we could not let progressives lose such a heavily Democratic seat. The sad thing is, that may be happening anyway—because Cicilline is making worrying signs of an exit from the Progressive Caucus.

The first warning signs came when Cicilline refused to sign the Grayson-Takano letter pledging not to cut Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid.  That sent a shiver of fear down the neck of Rhode Island progressives who worry this is setting up for a vote in favor of a grand bargain that sells out the middle class by cutting these essential programs in the middle of a jobs crisis.

Then he refused to cosponsor the Cancel the Sequester Act. This common-sense initiative of the Congressional Progressive Caucus cancels the sequester. Does not replace it with a slightly less devastating austerity package. Just cancels it. Ends this messy debate with no damage to the economy. It is about the most common-sense progressive initiative you can think of. But Cicilline still has not signed on.

But when I called Cicilline’s office (202-225-4911) last Thursday to ask why he is not standing with the rest of the Progressive Caucus on these basic economic issues, a staffer told me something even more disturbing: Cicilline’s budget plan is not the Progressive Caucus’s budget, the Back to Work Budget. It is the standard House Democratic budget.

Budget votes are a statement of core principles. They are usually the most important vote a legislator will make on economic issues. Not supporting the Progressive Caucus budget would be about as clear a sign as you could make that Cicilline is planning on leaving the Progressive Caucus.

The Back to Work Budget is not particularly progressive. It completely capitulates on the terms of the debate with a fiscally irresponsible focus on deficit reduction instead of jobs or debt in the real economy. Unlike the Ryan budget, which is a conservative wish list, the Back to Work Budget is a compromise package that leaves out most progressive goals. It contains only very limited stimulus, no housing plan, no plan to stop climate change, no Medicare for All, and no private sector debt relief. Instead, it is a compromise designed to attract conservative Democrats. But it is still the only budget actually focused on economic growth. It should be an easy, non-controversial vote.

The Back to Work Budget is coming up for a vote tomorrow. I sincerely hope that staffer was mistaken. Rhode Island will be watching.

Cicilline To Paul Ryan: ‘My Question Is A *Factual* One’

Congressman David Cicilline challenges Paul Ryan’s facts.

This is exactly why Rhode Island reelected Congressman David Cicilline: so we would have someone who would stand up to Paul Ryan.

From The Hill today about his bizarrely inappropriate budget proposal:  “Ryan this year made a concession to conservatives and moved up the date when his budget balances.” Paul Ryan making a concession to conservatives is like saying the Sex Pistols made a concession to punk music – it’s hard to tell what’s the dog and what’s the tail and which is wagging which!

“With all due respect Mr. Chairman, that question was asked by Mr. Van Hollen and there actually is no substitute in this document,” Cicilline retorted to a Ryan non-answer. (Ed. note: The phrase “with all due respect” is not a way to convey respect for someone!)

Cicilline should get a couple pats on the back in the House Lounge for this one: “My question is a factual one,” he said. No one on Ryan’s leadership team seemed to know how to field such a question.

Enjoy…

This misidentified footer was only up for a moment, but it’s a scary thought:

Delegation Supports Think Progress’ Wish List


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

Rhode Island’s entire congressional delegation supports Think Progress‘ new wish list of progressive policy proposals to get passed.

Gone from the list is the Violence Against Women Act, which Obama signed into law yesterday … thanks Sens. Reed and Whitehouse and Congressmen Cicilline and Langevin, for supporting it!

Here’s the newly revised list, in case you didn’t get this in your inbox last night:

  1. Raising the Minimum Wage: In his State of the Union speech, the president called for the minimum wage to be raised to $9.00 an hour. And just this week, two leading progressives, Rep. George Miller (D-CA) and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), introduced legislation to raise it to $10.00 per hour. A poll out yesterday found that 71 percent of Americans back raising the minimum wage to $9.00.
  2. Universal Background Checks for Gun Purchases: The Senate Judiciary Committee is working on gun violence prevention legislation as we speak and is expected to advance a universal background check bill to the full Senate as soon as tomorrow. This is a no brainer. Not only would this be the most effective policy to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them, it’s supported by nearly everyone. The most recent poll, out just today, finds that 88 percent support universal background checks — including 85 percent of gun-owning households. Other polls have shown support of over 90 percent.
  3. Additional Revenues to Reduce the Deficit: A whopping 76 percent of Americans agree with the president that we need a balanced approach to reduce our deficit, one that includes both spending cuts and additional tax revenues. Just 19 percent back the Republican view that we should reduce the deficit through spending cuts alone.
  4. Job-Creating Infrastructure Investments: A majority of Americans support making investments to repair and replace our deteriorating national infrastructure — investments that could create hundreds of thousands of jobs. In fact, investmenting in our roads, bridges, airports, and other infrastructure was the most popular job creation policy. Unfortunately, Congressional Republicans have repeatedly voted down such proposals in recent years, citing their unwillingness to finance them using tax hikes on the wealthy and corporate special interests like Big Oil.
  5. Pathway to Earned Citizenship: A pathway to earned citizenship is an integral part of reforming our broken immigration system and bringing the 11 MILLION undocumented immigrants already here out of the shadows. Even 60 percent of Republicans support a pathway to earned citizenship, which receives the support of 70 percent of all Americans.
  6. Expanding the Medicaid Program: Two-thirds of Americans favor the part of ObamaCare that calls for expanding the Medicaid program. in order to insure millions of lower-income Americans. The Supreme Court made the expansion voluntary and, thankfully, even many conservative Republican governors are coming around and now support expanding the program in their states.
  7. Marriage Equality: Support for full marriage equality is now a mainstream, majority view. A study out today found that opposition to marriage equality is now concentrated “among a few narrow demographic groups.”
  8. Universal Access to Birth Control: ObamaCare requires health insurers to offer birth control at no additional cost, a policy supported by 70 percent of Americans. This policy is also supported by a majority of Catholics despite continuing opposition by Catholic bishops.
  9. Expanded Early Childhood Education: In his State of the Union speech, the president proposed universal pre-kindergarten for every four year-old and a significant expansion of other early childhood education programs. Unsurprisingly, two-thirds of Americans support making these kind of vital investments in our children — investments which come with significant returns.

BOTTOM LINE: Support for progressive ideas and values isn’t limited to Democrats or the left side of the political spectrum. Most progressive policies enjoy broad, bipartisan support and are simply mainstream views held by a majority of Americans. By contrast, conservatives are clinging to an ideology and views that are seen as extreme and out of touch by a majority of Americans.

Sen. Reed Calls For Federal Minimum Wage Increase


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

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

Sen. Jack Reed are Tom Harkin of Iowa are sponsoring legislation to raise the federal minimum wage $10.10 in 2015.

“Raising the minimum wage is vital because too many people have been left out of the economic recovery,” Reed said in a press release. “The stagnation of earnings in the face of soaring prices for gasoline, home heating, and health care is squeezing the middle-class.”

The federal minimum wage is $7.25 and Reed and Harkin’s proposal calls for phasing the increase in by $.95 per year.

His press release on the legislation references a report that RI Future reported on January 2. It shows the majority of companies that pay minimum wage are large corporations that have fully recovered from the economic crash.

According to the report, “the majority of America’s lowest-paid workers are employed by large corporations, not small businesses, and that most of the largest low-wage employers have recovered from the recession and are in a strong financial position.”

Reed said in the press release, “Strong productivity has translated into higher profits for companies, but not more take-home pay for employees.”

Rhode Island’s minimum wage is $7.75 and was increased $.35 in January 1.

Buffett Rule Is Back


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
Sen Sheldon Whitehouse talks with Rhode Islanders last year about improving the economy. (Photo by Bob Plain)

The Buffett Rule is back in play inside in the beltway.

Author of last year’s signature piece of progressive legislation in Congress, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse announced today that his 2012 Paying A Fair Share Act, aka the Buffett Rule bill, will be a component in Senate Democrats plan stave off the sequester.

It’s a common-sense addition to any deficit-reduction plan, and I’m glad it has been adopted by Senate leadership,” Whitehouse said in a statement released today.  “I would have preferred to focus even more on loophole-closing in our effort to replace the sequester, and I hope to have an opportunity to improve the plan as the process goes forward.”

The Buffett Rule, so named because billionaire Warren Buffett has mocked the US income tax code because he pays a lower rate than his secretary, would guarantee that millionaires would pay at least 30 percent in taxes. It would raise more than $50 billion over ten years and affect a very small percentage of Americans.

 

Commonsense Gun Laws


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

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

The horrific images from the shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School are still seared into our minds – of six-year olds fleeing from danger, law enforcement officers overwhelmed with emotion, and parents grieving for loved ones taken from them forever.

President Obama’s powerful words after the shooting spoke directly to the soul of a nation searching for answers following another in a long line of gun-related massacres.

During my time as Mayor of Providence, one of the most difficult responsibilities I had was to meet with mothers and fathers whose children were victims of deadly gun violence. No words of mine could ever match the excruciating pain they felt.

Following this tragedy, I hosted a meeting on Capitol Hill, along with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and met with families whose lives have been devastated by gun violence. These were families who lost loved ones in brutal attacks at Columbine, Aurora, and Virginia Tech. I thanked them for their courage and willingness to push now for commonsense policy changes – stronger limits on assault weapons, tighter restrictions on sales of ammunition, and more thorough background checks on gun sales. But for many of the families I met with there was a larger concern – each of them have experienced the pain of not only losing a loved one, but also watching in vain as our leaders in Washington failed to take action to ensure these tragedies never happened again.

And, unfortunately, this apathy seems to be the rule rather than the exception in recent years.

Our national lawmakers have refused to act on the issue of gun safety even after every mass shooting that has taken place in recent years. There has been no serious push to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 or to require tougher background checks on all gun sales. And there has been no real effort in recent years to strengthen background check requirements to keep guns from ending up in the hands of criminals or individuals suffering with serious mental illness.

The tragedy in Newtown is, unfortunately, only the most recent of a long series of violent killings involving guns, but it is especially horrific because it involved the slaughter of 20 innocent children and their teachers.

It is my hope that it will mark a turning point in the debate over commonsense gun safety laws.

The response of the leaders of the National Rifle Association to the horrors of gun violence and in particular to the devastation at Sandy Hook Elementary School was to argue for more guns in schools and to use this occasion to re-state their strong opposition to any commonsense gun safety legislation.

We should move ahead to protect our children and communities from the dangers of gun violence despite strong opposition from the powerful gun lobby. While there is no perfect solution that will eliminate all gun crimes, there are many things we can do to significantly reduce the danger of guns getting into the hands of criminals and those that are seriously mentally ill, as well as restricting the sale of particularly deadly weapons and ammunition.

The fact is, we don’t need to wait for new proposals to be put forward – there are already a number of bills that I and many gun safety advocates have already co-sponsored that would provide significant changes to existing laws.

  • The Fix Gun Checks Act would ensure that anyone who should not be allowed to have a gun is listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.
  • The Gun Show Loophole Closing would require background checks on any firearms sales that take place at a gun show.
  • The Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act would require in person purchases of ammunition, licensing of ammunition dealers, and reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition.
  • We can ban the types of devices typically used in mass shootings by passing the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act which would achieve this and also re-enact the Assault Weapons Ban.
  • And the Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act to end the practice by which gun dealers who lose their license can convert their inventory into a “personal collection” and sell them privately.

The time for action is now. Enough is enough! We owe it to the families of all those who have lost loved ones to gun violence to do all that we can to end this human carnage. We have many good proposals pending in Congress right now. Let’s honor the memories of those who were murdered at the Sandy Hook Elementary School by taking strong action immediately.

They deserve nothing less.

**This blog was originally featured on The Huffington Post

Americans Call for Tax Increases on the Wealthy


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

House Republicans may not want to see taxes raised on the rich, but the American people sure do. Reporting from outside the Capitol building is Graham Vyse, a former Chafee communications staffer who is now a grad student at American University’s Journalism and Public Affairs program.

Whitehouse: GOP Holding Middle Class Hostage


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

“Republicans fighting for millionaires and billionaires is not a new story,” said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse on the floor of the US Senate yesterday. It happens to be the current story too.

Well, in the case of the fiscal cliff, House Republicans are actually fighting for the 2 percent, or the affluent American families who earn more than $250,000 a year.

“…threatening middle class families with higher taxes is their strategy,” Whitehouse said. “The hostage strategy, with the middle class as the hostages, as Republicans fight for who they really care about.”

Watch it here:

Doherty Shows Uncommon Lack of Integrity in Bid


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
Brendan Doherty demonstrating uncommon integrity

Intergrity. Really? INTEGRITY.

Mr. Doherty’s latest attack ad on television towards Congressman David Cicilline is loaded with insinuation, negative innuendo, a bit of or no truth at all. Remember, Mr. Doherty approved this divisive negative ad.

I was also recently subjected to a robot-call – a female spewing half-truths and innuendo in a very snide tone of voice – that, though it was generated by the National Republican Campaign Committee in support of Brendan Doherty, required his approval for publication. The call was disgusting.

So I ask you, integrity? Mr. Doherty has run a spiteful, negative campaign. Where is his integrity?

I am not surprised that there would be animosity between a retired state police colonel and an attorney whose job it was to provide representation to those accused of alleged criminal activity. Criminal attorneys tend to represent those accused of committing crimes as prosecutors tend to pursue convictions of those crimes. It is the job of these attorneys to do just that – represent one side or the other. This is a fundamental process of fair representation; a tenet of the freedoms granted by our
Constitution. An attorney representing the accused is not guilty of his client’s crimes. Mr. Doherty’s campaign has repeatedly alluded to just that. It is wrong and unbecoming of an individual touting his integrity. Mr. Doherty knows better.

And, to infer that Congressman Cicilline did more than state, though erroneously, that the City of Providence was in good financial state – to raise the aura of corruption without a basis to do so – is pure theater and utterly irresponsible.

Though I have tried to learn more about Mr. Doherty, his negative campaign has taught me only one thing. Integrity is one thing Mr. Doherty can use more of.

Abel Collins for Congress


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

For progressives living in the Second Congressional District, there’s no tougher choice on this year’s ballot than deciding whom to vote for in the race between Jim Langevin and Abel Collins. Both are sufficiently liberal to warrant your support, but they represent opposite extremes of the left side of the of the state’s political spectrum, and would bring very different attributes to the office.

Langevin would continue the consistent and competent job he has done representing Rhode Islanders while Collins would instantly be among the most liberal members of Congress. Both have their benefits.

Langevin will continue to amass clout in the Congress, and by and large he’s done well by progressive Rhode Islanders.

On economic matters, which are of the utmost importance this election, he’s proven almost, but not quite, as progressive in his voting record as either Senator Sheldon Whitehouse or Congressman David Cicilline – the standard bearers for representing Rhode Island’s liberal base inside the beltway.

On social issues, Langevin has moved left during his tenure in Congress, and I’ve got a lot of respect for politicians who are open-minded enough to evolve. He’s a practicing Catholic who has done a great job of standing up the bully tactics of Bishop Tobin, and I’ve got a lot of respect for that too.

Langevin now believes all couples should be able to marry, which wasn’t always the case. While he’s anti-choice on abortion issues, it’s hard to argue with his very personal reasons – because of the accident that left him wheel chair-bound since he was 16, he wouldn’t wan to deprive anyone of a chance at life. Besides … given how far to right the House has shifted on social issues, Langevin can generally be counted on to vote with the good guys on the choice issues that do come up.

Collins, on the other hand, is not a compromise.

He’s what progressives should want their politicians to think like. He’d fight for a fairer tax code, and we already know from his service at the State House that transportation issues are tantamount to him. He’s also a tireless advocate for the environment, sustainability and civil liberties. These are arguably the most important issues for the country grapple with if we’re to fix our economy in a meaningful way.

His downside is he’s still a little politically naive, and the Collins campaign has been something short of a well-oiled machine. Some of that has to do with money, and a lot of that has to do with his lack of party support, but some of that also has to do with leadership and Collins would have done well to have learned the ropes a little better before running for U.S. Congress. My biggest beef with Abel is he could have been an effective state legislator if he would have run for a seat there this year.

Thanks in large part to Mike Riley’s lackluster campaign, I’m confident enough in a Langevin landslide to throw my humble support behind Abel Collins, but if he were running in the First District, I’m not sure I’d be writing the same thing … That said, I firmly believe it would be great thing for both Rhode Island and the progressive movement if he could pull off an upset.


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