De Ramel pulled 27 percent support and Gorbea 13 percent. But with 57 percent of likely voters still undecided, anything can still happen. One thing that will happen is de Ramel will outspend Gorbea, and that will help him.

“Guillaume is running for Secretary of State to reform lobbying so something like 38 Studios never happens again, modernize the way Rhode Islanders vote to increase participation, and improve the business climate and help put Rhode Islanders back to work — and that message is resonating,” said his campaign manager David Hoffman.”

Gorbea campaign manager Rico Vota said he will be sending out a statement later tonight. (I’ll update this post if and when he does)

UPDATE: In an email this morning, Vota said the poll shows Gorbea is “well-positioned.”

He said: “Despite his unlimited ability and effort to outspend her, Ms. Gorbea’s opponent has not been able to make a compelling case to voters,” stated Gorbea campaign manager Rico Vota.  “His lack of transparency in his financial dealings raise questions.  His disregard for meeting the requirements of his own lobbying reform proposals – by accepting money for a registered lobbyist and vendor to the Secretary of State’s office, doesn’t inspire confidence in voters.”

“After extensively interviewing both candidates for Secretary of State, we voted overwhelmingly to endorse Guillaume De Ramel,” said Sam Bell, state coordinator of RIPDA. “Guillaume’s firm commitment to both in-person early voting and same-day voter registration is what we need to increase voter participation in Rhode Island.

De Ramel and Gorbea are in heated down-ballot primary battle to become the state’s chief record-keeper, the winner of which will face Republican John Carlevale in the general election.

“I’m proud that my vision for modernizing the way Rhode Islanders vote helped earn me the endorsement of the Progressive Democrats,” de Ramel said. “It’s vitally important we increase civic participation and get more Rhode Islanders to cast ballots. I look forward to meeting with more Rhode Islanders, discussing the issues and building on this momentum in the weeks ahead.”

One difference between these two Democrats is de Ramel says he is running to make it easier to do business in Rhode Island.

“I know we can’t tax our way out this rut,” he told me. “So what we need to do is grow but in order to grow we have to create a more hospitable business climate.”

He says the secretary of state can help lower unemployment by running more of the regulatory process through that office. “Being small should be our biggest competitive advantage,” he said. “The secretary of state can really help make our state government smaller, more transparent and more open.”

“Making Rhode Island state government the most open, transparent and accessible state government,” is among his highest priorities, de Ramel said. He called out the state Airport Corporation, RIPTA and the Bridge and Turnpike Authority for flouting open government laws.

“Open and transparent makes it easier to do business here in Rhode Island,” de Ramel told me. “Unfortunately for too long it’s been about who you know, not what you know.”

He speaks from experience on this matter. When we discussed what he does for a living, he told me about a project to develop 10 airplane hangars at Newport State Airport that took 13 years to bring to fruition.

Late in the project, he hired former House Speaker Gordon Fox as his business agent. I asked de Ramel why Fox, and why the project, which has been a major talking point of his campaign, took 13 years to develop.

De Ramel said he would take a lead role in repealing voter ID, and that the secretary of state should have a seat on the state board of elections.

He’d also like to extend early voting. “We have 39 cities and towns,” he said. “Why not use the facilities we have and open them up for early voting.” He added that state law already says one doesn’t need a reason to to vote early, though he said the ballot itself doesn’t make this clear.

Unlike other proposals, de Ramel would like to make it easier for lobbyists to register. It currently costs $5, and he’d waive that fee so that there were be fewer hurdles to registering. While he’s bragged that he does not accept donations from lobbyists, he has received money from the spouses of lobbyists.

On his mother’s side of the family, de Ramel is related to Roger Williams, he said. On his father’s side, he’s a descendant of the French philosopher Montesquieu, who first mused about governmental separation of powers. His great, great grandfather built the Newport water infrastructure, he said, as well as water infrastructure all over the country. His great grandmother was born in Newport and the family has been there since.

You can listen to our full 45 minute interview here.

Rhode Island’s special distinction for “limited activity” lobbyists has created A gray area in the law prone to causing confusion or even unintentional noncompliance. Anyone who lobbies state government should be registered with the secretary of state’s office, regardless of how little he or she does so.

Article I, Section 21 of the Rhode Island State Constitution (emphasis added):

Section 21. Right to assembly — Redress of grievances — Freedom of speech. — The citizens have a right in a peaceable manner to assembly for their common good, and to apply to those invested with the powers of government, for redress of grievances, or for other purposes, by petition, address, or remonstrance. No law abridging the freedom of speech shall be enacted.

Plenty of organizations make calls to action to legislators’ constituents, asking them to write or call or meet with their representatives to request action on a specific issue. By definition, that’s lobbying. Change.org has even made it as simple as simply putting your name, email, and address in a form and hitting “submit” – no more action is required from the person doing the lobbying. So, are these people supposed to register as lobbyists?

To be fair to de Ramel, even the current Secretary of State’s “Am I a Lobbyist” page is pretty unclear on such people – which of the five exemptions do they fall under? Some will probably argue that there’s a precedent for dealing with those people, and in practice they’re never going to be effected by lobbying laws. But if such a grey area exists (in practice), that highlights the problems with the current system; and what de Ramel’s proposing.

The simpler and more elegant solution that I’ve heard proposed is to simply required state officials to keep lists of everyone they meet with or are contacted by and make those public. That would probably inconvenience officials to some extent (which is probably why such a proposal has zero chance of passing the legislature), but transparency is kind of inconvenient, isn’t it? And it’s probably a bit better than hunting down constituents for requesting their legislator vote this way or that on a gun control bill.