Connecticut – RI Future

October 26, 2016

Pipeline tariff killed in Connecticut, Rhode Island an outlier

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

The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) has decided against the proposal for gas capacity tariffs on the Spectra Access Northeast pipeline. This announcement comes on the heels of decisions by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission rejecting similar proposals. The Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) declined to kill the local version of the plan in September, but the plan seems doomed anyway.

“With yet another state abandoning proposals for more natural gas pipeline capacity, these efforts to expand fossil fuel infrastructure in New England have hit a virtually unsurpassable roadblock,” said Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) president Bradley Campbell in a statement. “Without Massachusetts, New Hampshire or Connecticut in the mix, Spectra has lost a whopping 84 percent of the customer base needed to finance this ill-conceived proposal. It’s time to kill this project altogether and look forward to opportunities for the clean, renewable alternatives that our families demand, our markets expect and our laws require.”

It is unknown when the RIPUC will act to reject the proposal here.

October 23, 2016October 25, 2016

Vote like your life depends on it

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

2016-06-02 Orange for Gun Violence 009 — Jennifer Boylan

This coming December will mark four years since the shooting of 20 first graders and six educators at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. Since that shooting, our federal government has not passed a single law to protect Americans from senseless gun violence.

Fortunately, Congress isn’t the only avenue for change. Efforts at passing meaningful legislation at the state level, especially in the northeast, have been a totally different story. Picking up where the federal government has failed us, the state first out of the gate was New York in January 2013. The Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act expanded the definition of assault weapons banned in New York, created a state database for pistol permits, reduced the maximum number of rounds legally allowed in magazines from ten to seven, and required universal background checks on all gun sales.

In April 2013, Connecticut passed new restrictions to the state’s existing assault weapons ban and required universal background checks for all firearm purchases. Governor Malloy signed them into law later the same day.

Also in April 2013, Maryland passed the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, banning the purchase of 45 types of assault weapons and limiting gun magazines to 10 rounds. It requires handgun licensing and fingerprinting for new gun owners, and bans those who have been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility from buying a gun.

Then in August, 2014, our neighbors in Massachusetts passed a bill reforming the state’s gun laws, with provisions focused on school safety, mental health, background checks and enhanced criminal penalties for gun crimes.

So what has Rhode Island’s General Assembly been doing about gun violence? So far, virtually nothing. Other than one small measure to require that courts report those who have been involuntarily committed to mental institutions, our lawmakers have yet to enact any significant gun laws since Sandy Hook.

Rhode Island can and should be doing more to protect citizens from senseless gun violence. This past session, the Rhode Island chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America supported a bill sponsored by Representative Teresa Tanzi (D – Naragansett, South Kingstown) that would have effectively kept guns out of the hands of domestic abusers. This bill represents a modest and reasonable improvement to our state gun laws, generally bringing Rhode Island law in line with federal law. The bill is straightforward: if you are a domestic abuser, you should not have access to firearms. Polling results that show that four out of five Rhode Islanders agree that domestic abusers should be prohibited from having guns[i]. And we know that domestic violence affects Rhode Island’s most vulnerable citizens: children, women, and families.

Why have our neighbors in Connecticut, New York and Massachusetts passed meaningful gun laws in recent years, while Rhode Island can’t so much as advance a relatively modest, commonsense bill out of committee? The disconnect lies with our elected officials and includes leadership in both chambers of the legislature. Increasingly, it appears that elected officials are more inclined to listen to the gun lobby than their constituents.

But this November, every registered voter can make an informed decision about who gets their vote. I urge all Rhode Island voters to pledge to support candidates who will fight for common-sense laws to reduce gun violence. Take a few minutes to contact candidates if you do not know where they stand on gun issues and vote accordingly. Vote like your life depends on it. Because with over 33,000 deaths from gun violence every single year in our country, your life and the lives of your loved ones very well may.

February 12, 2013February 13, 2013

The Responsible Contract Resolution Act And Conn.

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

The Responsible Contract Resolution Act – better known as binding arbitration – will be debated in committee at the State House today. At this hearing, and in the local media before and after it, you will hear many of the Rhode Island’s most vocal union busters complain that the bill is tantamount to letting labor sign its own checks.

Nonsense.

Connecticut has binding arbitration for teachers and none of the doomsday scenarios that conservative pundits claim binding arbitration will bring have played out there. (Note that chattering class here typically only compares Rhode Island to our neighbors when it benefits right-wing talking points, but Sam Howard has a great piece on this local tradition today!)

Interestingly enough, the teachers and taxpayers from Newtown, Connecticut went to binding arbitration in October.

Connecticut has had binding arbitration for teachers since 1979 and in 1986 the state expanded the program to include all state workers (municipal workers were already covered). This is a clear cut sign that the state thought the system worked.

In fact, 26 states have binding arbitration for public sector workers. And Rhode Island is one of them! We even have binding arbitration for teachers, just not on financial matters.

Binding arbitration is just a dispute resolotuion tool that protects vital social services from being interrupted because of financial disagreements. Rhode Island, per its laws, believes public safety is worth this protection but not public education. This bill would elevate education to a similar standard as police and fire, show teachers that the state supports their efforts and, yes, it would also likely cost local taxpayers a little bit more.

But that isn’t necessarily bad for the economy and you can certainly make a strong argument that it is good for education. We should have the debate about finances, for sure, but we should have the other debate too.

January 6, 2013January 8, 2013

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

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

August 25, 2011January 6, 2012

Achievement First Secret #4 – Nothing Says 21st Century Education Like Segregation

Do charter schools have to teach all kids in the community equally? As they find them, as they are? This blog post from Wait, What in Connecticut, looking at the enrollment data of several charter schools, including Achievement First schools, argues no.

Perhaps most disturbing of all is the fact that despite Connecticut’s urban areas having significant numbers of students coming from non-English speaking homes, charter schools have somehow managed to create learning environments in which virtually NONE OF THE STUDENTS who come from non-English speaking households end up in their schools.

As educators and policy makers know, one of the most significant challenges to educational achievement is language barriers particularly a problem when students take their homework (which is written in English) home to non-English speaking households. Greater parental engagement in their children’s education is hard enough, but when the students are learning in a language that is not spoken at home it makes it virtually impossible to generate significant parental involvement.

In Bridgeport 40% of the students go home to a non-English speaking home. That percentage increases to 44.7% in Hartford and in New Haven the percent of students coming from non-English speaking homes is 28.6%

In Connecticut, charter schools are required to ensure equal access to their schools. Efforts must be made to recruit students from all racial and ethnic backgrounds and admission tests can’t be used. In fact, entrance decisions must include a blind lottery system. So that said, compare the percentage of students from non-English speaking homes with the numbers the charter school have reported to the State Department of Education:

School     (% students from non-English speaking homes)
Bridgeport Public Schools     (40%)
Achievement First – Bridgeport Academy (0.6%)
The Bridge Academy (14.9%)
New Beginnings     (0%)
Park City Prep     (0%)
HartfordPublic Schools     (44.7% )
Achievement First – Hartford (0%)
Jumoke     (0%)
New HavenPublic Schools     (28.6%)
Achievement First – Amistad     (0%)
Achievement First – Elm City Prep     (0%)
Common Ground School     (4.6%)
Highville Charter     (0%)

The data is certainly unsettling. If Connecticut’s publically funded charter schools are supposed to be equally accessible to all and up to 4 in 10 students from those areas come from non-English speaking households then it is pretty unbelievable and completely unconscionable that almost no charter school students come from non-English speaking households.This follows along the lines of scholarly reports that have looked at whether charter schools are recreating the conditions of segregation. As the LA Times reported:

The trend toward segregation was especially notable for African American students. Nationally, 70% of black charter students attend schools where at least 90% of students are minorities. That’s double the figure for traditional public schools. The typical black charter-school student attends a campus where nearly three in four students also are black, researchers with the Civil Rights Project at UCLA said Thursday.

The other researchers also focused on economic segregation, looking at private companies that manage schools, in most cases charters. The enrollments at most of these campuses exacerbated income extremes, they concluded. Charters tended to serve higher-income students or lower-income students. Charters also were likely to serve fewer disabled students and fewer English learners.Because nothing says Progressive like Segregationist policies!