I Endorse Rhode Island


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
Political polemical cartoon in support of the imprisoned Thomas Dorr

I feel unjustified endorsing any particular candidate. But I will endorse a set of principles.

I endorse the principle that the primary notion of government is to carry out tasks that people cannot accomplish on their own. That government success should be measured by the number of people it assists to success (whatever that may be for a specific individual), not the number of people it prevents from participating in its services. The candidates who should be elected to office should be committed to government success, not invested in hampering its effectiveness.

I endorse the principle that holding hostage legislation which would improve the lives of countless thousands to enforce votes on unrelated issues is an ill and a reprehensible evil; not merely hardball parliamentary tactics. As the great Dr. King said, “the time is always right to do what’s right.”

The candidates who should be elected to office should be committed to the abolition of demonstrations of power that endanger our citizens’ well-being and the economic health of our state, and committed instead to the swift legislation of what is right.

Lyndon Johnson Signs Civil Rights Act. July 2, 1964

I endorse the principle that there can be no liberty without equality, and no equality without liberty. They are inextricably linked, in the battle cries of revolutions across the centuries, from those long past to our own to those of the present day. To deny the one is to deny the other. The candidates who should be elected should be committed to improving both, together, not choosing to anoint one over the other.

I endorse the principle that just because we cannot achieve perfection does not mean we should not try. Our government should always strive to be more open, more participatory, more ethical. The General Assembly may never please everyone, but they will not please anyone if what happens inside the State House’s halls remains clouded and cloaked in rumor.

I endorse the principle that every eligible citizen should be able to be elected to government, regardless of their station in life. Government officials should be paid enough to take care of themselves and their families in a prudent manner and they should be undivided in their attention to the work of governing. Likewise all candidates should not fear economic ruin for taking up the civic duty of contesting elections. The health of our democracy is directly related to its openness to all without care of circumstance. Stifle the ability to participate, and you stifle democracy itself.

I endorse the principle that those who make decisions should be held held accountable for the consequences of their actions. If you believe that the resignation of almost all of the Economic Development Council members, the financial ruin of Curt Schilling, and the layoffs of the workers of 38 Studios has rendered all those responsible for the 38 Studios debacle accountable, then so be it. But if you believe there are those who as of yet have not suffered consequences for the results of their actions, then do everything in your power to hold them accountable. We should elect candidates who not only hold our leaders accountable, but also themselves accountable. When they realize they’ve done wrong, politicians should find the fortitude and strength to publicly admit to it and apologize.

Political polemical cartoon in support of the imprisoned Thomas Dorr

I endorse the principle that Rhode Island’s best days are not yet behind it. I endorse the principle that those who take pleasure in our state’s failing are committed to its failure. Those who have no faith in the people of Rhode Island’s collective abilities to succeed are dead weight preventing the rest of us from succeeding. I endorse throwing aside the opinions of such fair-weather residents to unburden the strength of our dedicated citizenry. We are better than the worst of us.

I endorse the principle that no policy or program is sacred or cannot be criticized. All that we do should be reviewed and measured and debated about to ensure we are doing what we intend to do, and not merely living with the status quo because we don’t know if it’s working or not. I endorse electing candidates that value introspection and constructive criticism, especially that of themselves.

I endorse the principle that political participation is a privilege that took centuries to be won for all. It does not end on November 7th. Your phone does not stop working, email does not stop being sent, you do not lose your voice. Politics is not a bloodsport for a few spectators who understand the rules, it is a struggle that encompasses everyone regardless of their comprehension of its tactics or their willingness to participate. You may not be a “happy warrior”, you may be weary of the fight, but your weariness does not make the fight less important. To try and fail is better than never having tried at all.

Battle of Bunker Hill, John Trumbull

Virtually everyone who reads this was born with feet. They can be used to bring you face to face with you problems, to apply swift kicks to asses, and to march and demonstrate when all else fails. Never forget, when you get enough feet in a single place, you can move mountains. This, to me, is the spirit of Rhode Island. Relentless optimism in the face of despair, bravery when one should cower in fear, and hope when all is hopeless. I endorse that.

What’s at Stake Nov. 6: The General Assembly, RIPTA

It’s time to take a look as some of our General Assembly candidates. Rhode Island’s universal support for the environment keeps it out of the ProJo and off the 11 o’clock news during campaign season. That doesn’t mean the voters should forget our November 6th choices will chart Rhode Island’s path for the next two years.

Lately, the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority has been a political hot potato. One freshman legislator, however, comes to mind as having the spine to fight for the fiscal health of RIPTA despite the risk—Representative Jay O’Grady (HD 46 Lincoln, Cumberland) sponsored legislation in both 2011 and 2012 to get RIPTA off of its failing gas-tax funding and create a more sustainable source of funds for public transit in our state.

Rep. O’Grady is one of the many that know that a reliable, extensive transit system is a win-win-win.  Keeping cars off the road and carbon out of the atmosphere is a key step for the environment.  It is also a key piece of our economy.  Businesses like to go where their workers like to live, and reliable, accessible, affordable transit service is high on the list of things skilled workers want in their communities.  At a much more basic level, transit availability makes it possible for lower income people to have jobs at all. Most Rhode Islanders live within a quarter-mile of a RIPTA stop, and it is sure a lot cheaper than $4/gallon fuel.
Rhode Islanders understand that the metaphorical “business climate” is supported by protecting the literal, actual climate.  And it is becoming increasingly difficult for climate change deniers in this state to make their case.  Never mind what the IPCC says or the latest scientific models—here in the Ocean State we can directly see the impacts of climate change in a very real and tangible way—particularly when it comes to sea level rise.
The residents of State House District 36 probably know this better than most, stretching across much of RI’s southern coast.  Donna Walsh has served her constituents well since 2007.  As vice chair of the House Committee on Environment and Natural Resources, she sets the standard for pro-environment legislators. While representing “the land of small business,” she continues to connect the environment and our economic strength.

The slate of candidates endorsed by Clean Water Action this election are, as always, smart legislators who understand how to act at the nexus of environmental, public health, economic and social policy—whether it’s Representative Handy working to protect children from lead poisoning; Representative Tomasso pushing for renewable energy projects in Coventry; or Representative Tanzi fighting for transportation choices in South County.  These candidates understand that protecting the environment isn’t at odds with or secondary to economic development. It is instead the foundation of it.

Check out our full slate of endorsed candidates here.

 

What’s at Stake Nov. 6: Our Shared Federal Lands


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

One of Clean Water Action’s core missions is to make democracy work. The cornerstone of this strategic focus is to hold our elected officials accountable to voters. A crucial problem underlying many pollution problems, we believe, is an imbalance of political power that distorts our political system and hampers good policy.

The protection of the environment, investment in the renewable energy economy and reduction in power of special interest takes strength in numbers. This holds true in Congress as well. For that reason, candidates must be judged in context of who they will call friends. Our Congress has few green-blooded environmentalists left.

First District, First:

Mr. Doherty:

 [The Infrastructure Jobs and Energy Independence Act] dedicates revenues from new energy exploration to slash our deficit, build clean-coal plants, clean up our air and water, increase our use of renewable energy, and rebuild our crumbling highways and bridges.

Not so bad. Though “clean-coal” is a fairy tale. There is as much clean coal in our nation as there are glaciers inFlorida. Even President Obama, endorsed by by CWA, Sierra Club and Environment America, has swallowed this pill in order to win Ohio.

 Mr. Cicilline, your rebuttal:

 …with gas close to $4 a gallon, it is time to end our addiction to foreign energy. David has been working hard to rein in excessive Wall Street oil speculation, which many experts agree is part of the rising price consumers are paying at the pump. David is also focused on the long-term energy independence of our nation. The only way to get gas prices down in the long run, while also helping improve our environment, is to support the development of renewable energy and advanced vehicle technologies.

It isn’t hard to be an environmentalist in Rhode Island. It is a single fishing trip off Point Judith, kayak tour of Narrow River, spring hike in Lincoln Woods or daring leap off the cliffs at Beavertail. Every Rhode Islander connects quality of life with the environment. Every Rhode Island Congressman goes to Washington. Folks in that town brought us the Safe Drinking Water Act and then exempted hydraulic fracturing chemicals from its oversight.

Doherty will claim to reach across the aisle if elected. Scott Brown said that too. A New England Republican might do so in support of environmental protections, see John Chafee and Mitt Romney v. 1.0.  Sen. Brown’s F on the most recent environmental report card indicates otherwise. This Congress took 297 votes to weaken public health and environmental protections. On which side of that aisle will Doherty sit? I think we can keep our support with Cicilline, he’s already spent two years supporting the environment.

Instead of canned website statements, let’s look at the 2nd District’s first debate. The environment was finally addressed with this interesting question (start at 51:00). Arlene Violet asks:

 Mr. Riley, on your website you say entitlements should be paid for by ‘revenue ideas’ not taxes to shore up the safety net. Specifically, what ‘revenue ideas’ or projects would you implement.

To which Riley responds:

 The revenue ideas I identified in the Riley plan have to do with the huge amount of federal lands that we own. As citizens we have assets, and we have liabilities. That is how you would look at the balance sheet of America…you and I, and everyone in this room, has a share in the land. Under these lands are a vast quantity of gas, oil, whatever, rare minerals, rare earth minerals, those kinds of things, which are laying fallow. We’re not using them. We’re not selling them. We’re not lending out royalty rights. Not doing leasing rights. That revenue is not coming in. That should be coming in to help pay down those areas like entitlements where we have underfunded them. Why do we always assume that we gotta to go and tax the richest guy we see? Why don’t we actually utilize our balance sheet and bring dollars in for everyone and pay down the problems?

I had to pick my jaw up off the floor. Langevin, after the question is changed to coal and fracturing, returns:

 I don’t believe there is such a thing as clean coal. Coal is a dirty fossil fuel and we have to get ourselves off our dependence on fossil fuels in general. In the short run I think we should explore and use utilize all of our energy resources… The real future of controlling our energy costs is developing alternative energy sources, whether it’s winds, solar or biofuels, and by the way, that’s a real jobs opportunity for Rhode Island. We could be the first state in the country to have a first, functioning wind farm off our coast. Those wind turbines would be built in Quonset-Davisville, in my district… If we are the first, we’ll be a hub for building these up and down the east coast and that’s real jobs for Rhode Island.

Langevin gives the best answer of the night. Clean coal is a myth! Build wind turbines at Quonset Point. Let’s get Block Island off diesel generators. Sounds better than leasing the Everglades.

 

 

What’s at Stake Nov. 6th: Remember Climate Change


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

Today through Frday I’m going to put up a couple of posts about how our environment is going to be impacted by what happens on November 6th. With all the talk about jobs and the economy, I am continually surprised that so few are connecting these topics to the invaluable strides our nation has made in protecting our rivers, drinking water, air, oceans, parks, mountains and beaches over the last half century.

The economy is more than unemployment numbers, GDP and stock prices; it is a measure of our quality of life and participation in society. Let’s start looking at some of the issues that will have a profound impact on our economy and way of life in the future.

First, let’s take a quick trip in our “Way-Back” machine. Clean Water Action hard-wired it into all of our office computers a couple years ago. It is a useful tool for providing some context for the campaign rhetoric we are forced to consume every four years.

Here is an excerpt from a May 2008 speech by The Maverick, John McCain:

We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great. The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge… In the years ahead, we are likely to see reduced water supplies…more forest fires than in previous decades…changes in crop production…more heat waves afflicting our cities and a greater intensity in storms. Each one of these consequences of climate change will require policies to protect our citizens, especially those most vulnerable to violent weather.

What a prediction! Can you imagine a Republican Presidential nominee uttering such words? But would he propose a solution to such a national issue?

 To lead in this effort, however, our government must strike at the source of the problem… We know that greenhouse gasses are heavily implicated as a cause of climate change. And we know that among all greenhouse gasses, the worst by far is the carbon-dioxide that results from fossil-fuel combustion… We will cap emissions according to specific goals, measuring progress by reference to past carbon emissions. By the year 2012, we will seek a return to 2005 levels of emission…by 2020, a return to 1990 levels…and so on until we have achieved at least a reduction of sixty percent below 1990 levels by the year 2050… And in pursuit of these objectives, we cannot afford to take economic growth and job creation for granted. A strong and growing economy is essential to all of our goals, and especially the goal of finding alternatives to carbon-based technology. We want to turn the American economy toward cleaner and safer energy sources

Doth my eyes deceive? Was that a plan to address carbon emissions? How would a Democrat respond to such specifics? An upstart Senator from Illinois said this:

And in the long-term, few regions [speech was in Miami] are more imperiled by the stronger storms, higher floodwaters, and devastating droughts that could come with global warming. Whole crops could disappear, putting the food supply at risk for hundreds of millions. While we share this risk, we also share the resources to do something about it. That’s why I’ll bring together the countries of the region in a new Energy Partnership for the Americas. We need to go beyond bilateral agreements. We need a regional approach. Together, we can forge a path toward sustainable growth and clean energy. Leadership must begin at home. That’s why I’ve proposed a cap and trade system to limit our carbon emissions and to invest in alternative sources of energy. We’ll allow industrial emitters to offset a portion of this cost by investing in low carbon energy projects in Latin America and the Caribbean. And we’ll increase research and development across the Americas in clean coal technology, in the next generation of sustainable biofuels not taken from food crops, and in wind and solar energy.

Perhaps I am complicit in my own deception. It appears that our two major Presidential candidates, only four years ago, ran on a shared a platform to address climate change. The halcyon days of 2008.

 

Despite my dismay that President Obama has maintained radio silence on how he will reinvigorate the debate around a cap-and-trade system and reducing carbon emissions, the President has taken action to warrant a reelection endorsement by the environmental community. A short comparison of President Obama and Governor Romney provides the following:

The President is only one piece of the puzzle. We need a U.S. Senate that is willing to take action. Addressing climate change is not just about wind turbines and solar power; it is about protecting American people and society. Weather patterns are continually more hostile for a much of American and global temperatures continue a steep rise, threatening our ocean and marine habitats. It is for a new path.

Take a minute (or 38 of them) and listen to Senator Whitehouse. I would not have said it better myself. Let us pull out a couple key points made by the Honorable Senator from Rhode Island:

Human actions have resulted in warming and acidification of the oceans and are now causing increasing hypoxia. Acidification is obvious — the ocean is becoming more acid; hypoxia means low oxygen levels. Studies of the Earth’s past indicate that these are the three symptoms . . . associated with each of the previous five mass extinctions on Earth.

When polluters were required to phase out the chemicals they were emitting that were literally burning a hole through our Earth’s atmosphere[remember CFC’s?], they warned that it would create “severe economic and social disruption” due to “shutdowns of refrigeration equipment in supermarkets, office buildings, hotels, and hospitals.” Well, in fact, the phaseout happened 4 years to 6 years faster than predicted; it cost 30 percent less than predicted; and the American refrigeration industry innovated and created new export markets for its environmentally friendly products. Anyway, the real point is we are not just in this Chamber to represent the polluters. We are supposed to be here to represent all Americans, and Americans benefit from environmental regulation big time.

A quick peak at the issues page on Hickley’s website shows specific support for increased use of fossil fuels and opposition to the, at one time, bi-partisan proposal for a cap-and-trade program that would provide the necessary economic incentives to reduce carbon emissions. We need a new path.

Of course,the Whitehouse – Hinckley race does not exist in a vacuum. If the United States is to take action on climate change there is one person who CANNOT control the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee: James M. Inhofe. Despite the 97% of all scientist which agree that climate change is happening because of human activity, Inhofe prefers to believe in a worldwide conspiracy.

Our choice in Rhode Island (and Massachusetts, Go Warren!) will impact our next steps. I do not want to support a single party in Congress, because the environment used to be a non-partisan issue, see Teddy Roosevelt and John Chafee. When the national Republican Party, however, stopped protection of open spaces, stopped preservation of the wetlands that buffer our coasts, and exempted  for hydraulic-fracking companies from disclosing what they are pumping into our groundwater, I figured it was time to take sides.

Oh, how I wish to return to the days when adults could talk about climate change without being accused of killing jobs. This is a short-sighted and narrow lens through which to view our economy. Developing a sustainable and beneficial economy for all of America requires attention to the elephant in the room: global warming. That’s right, I said it, global warming. Ever see the phrase “Rhode Island: 3% bigger at low tide”? Imagine sea level rise continuing at its current pace. “Rhode Island: 3% smaller every century

Stay tuned for tomorrow’s installment of “What’s at Stake on November 6th” where I will review some of the environmental issues facing the U.S House of Representatives in the next two years.

15 Days Left: Volunteer for Progressive Wins for RI


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

With just 15 days left until election day we need your help!

Whether you care about tax justice, marriage equality, women’s health, our environment, or all of the above one thing is certain – we need more progressive champions fighting for us up at Smith Hill. So step away from your laptop, and join Ocean State Action PAC and our coalition partners at area phonebanks 5 nights a week! (Details below.)

Races are won and lost on the ground – so roll up your sleeves and pitch in! Sign up today!

Monday Nights:

Planned Parenthood Votes RI:
5-8PM 111 Point St Providence
Sign Up Here http://bit.ly/ppvotesri 

Tuesday Nights:

Fight Back RI:
6-9PM 236 Hope St, Providence
RSVPs to Margret Margret@fightbackri.com

Clean Water Action: 
5:30-8:30PM 741 Westminster St, Providence
Sign Up Here

Wednesday Nights

Action PAC
5-8PM 99 Bald Hill Rd, Cranston
RSVP to Kate Kate@oceanstateaction.org

Planned Parenthood Votes:

5-8PM 111 Point St Providence
Sign Up Here http://bit.ly/ppvotesri 

Thursday Nights:

Action PAC
5-8PM 99 Bald Hill Rd, Cranston
RSVP to Kate Kate@oceanstateaction.org

Fight Back RI:
6-9PM 236 Hope St, Providence
RSVPs to Margret Margret@fightbackri.com

Clean Water Action:
5:30-8:30PM 741 Westminster St, Providence
Sign Up Here

Sunday Afternoon:

Clean Water Action:
12-4PM 741 Westminster St
Sign Up Here

We’ll provide the snacks, scripts and training! Just bring your dialing finger and your will to win!!

 

Sunday Is Deadline to Register, Update Voter Registration

Planning on voting on Election Day? Rhode Islanders have until this Sunday to register to vote. Sunday’s deadline applies voters who have moved or changed their name since the last time they voted as well as to new voters. State law requires current voters to re-register under their new name or from their new address in order to be eligible to vote again.

Although the deadline falls on a Sunday, our Elections Division at 148 West River St., Providence, will be open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. for last-minute registrations. In addition, every city and town has also made local arrangements.

Not sure whether your voter registation is up to date. Use our Voter Information Center to check.

We are also teaming up with Cardi’s Furniture to give Rhode Islanders another last-minute option. We will set up shop at Cardi’s West Warwick store on Rt. 2 Sunday from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. to register and re-register voters.

In order to register and vote on Election Day, you must be at least 18 years old by Nov. 6, a resident of Rhode Island and a U.S. citizen.

Rhode Islanders who cannot register in person by Sunday can download a voter registration form and mail the original, signed form to their local Board of Canvassers as long as it is postmarked by the postal service no later than Oct. 7.

Dems Say Doherty Fell Short on Pro-Women Bill

In light of congressional candidate Brendan Doherty’s Women for Doherty rally tonight, the Rhode Island Democratic Party today questioned Doherty for not supporting legislation that would expand and reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. Specifically, the party questions Doherty’s unwillingness to expand and strengthen protections to Native American women, members of the LGBT community and immigrants.

On April 26, the Senate passed the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (S.1925) by a vote of 68-31 that extended protections to Native Americans, undocumented immigrants and members of the LGBT community. Even though thirteen female senators, Republican and Democrat, called upon House Speaker John Boehner to pass the Senate’s legislation, the House GOP passed its own reauthorization that excluded these expanded protections. The VAWA expired without Congress reaching consensus and the Republican-led House left town without passing a strengthened, bipartisan VAWA reauthorization.

In comments published in a Sept. 16 column in the Providence Journal, Doherty would only voice his support for the Violence Against Women Act in its current version, but was unwilling to support legislation to also expand and strengthen protections for Native Americans, immigrants and members of the LGBT community. If members of Congress want to add protections for people in other walks of life, that’s fine, but submit another bill,” Doherty told the Journal.

“Brendan Doherty talks about being bipartisan and the need to compromise, but with his comments dismissing people ‘in other walks of life,’ he is siding with the Republican right, even though every Republican female senator, among several Republican senators, voted for a bipartisan compromise on this issue,” said Rhode Island Democratic Chairman Ed Pacheco. “We want to send a message to Mr. Doherty that actions speak louder than words.

“As the Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence launches their ‘No More’ campaign and given that October is National Domestic Violence Awareness month, now is a great time for Mr. Doherty to clearly explain his reservations about protecting some women, but not all women, from domestic violence,” Pacheco said. “The Democratic Party believes that protection should be extended to all women, and Senate Democrats, along with many Republicans, voted for that this spring.  Most Americans understand that domestic violence is domestic violence – period – and it’s not a less important issue for any individual.

“Voters have every reason to be concerned about Mr. Doherty’s position on this important issue,” Pacheco concluded. “Unfortunately, Mr. Doherty has chosen to stand with the House Republican leadership above the needs of victims of domestic violence.”

Rethinking the Proper Role for the State Politician


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
State House Dome from North Main Street
State House Dome from North Main Street
The State House dome from North Main Street. (Photo by Bob Plain)

There’s a “What can you do for me?” mentality about politics that I doubt anyone in Rhode Island will dispute.

People say over and over again, “The legislature stinks, but my guy is ok.” And then they vote for the incumbent.

Sitting legislators have the power of the budget to fund and disburse. Line items in the budget are a great way to fund important projects in local neighborhoods, but they’re also a great source of pork, influence and publicity.

When a politician builds a playground, what is she really doing but returning your tax money to your block? She might have shown up on groundbreaking day to hoist a shovel. And she’ll show up again for the ribbon cutting.

One voter recently told me that my opponent had regularly donated $2,000 to an organization she cared about. I asked if it came from him or from his campaign committee*, and she didn’t know. I said, no. I can’t do that, and I can’t even promise that I’ll have enough power to swing a line item. If you want business as usual, I told her, then you can vote for my opponent.

What is shocking is how inexpensively Rhode Islander’s sell their votes. A playground here, lifting a parking ban there, getting a sidewalk fixed here.

Even the pernicious practice of getting rides to the polls implies that a voter doesn’t care enough to walk or drive or arrange a ride to cast a ballot. Remember those pictures of women in Iraq with the purple fingers? They made it hundreds of miles and waited days to cast their ballots.

No politician is going to promise to raise taxes in an election cycle. And no politician is going to say, “We’re going to cut your funding.” (Well, the Democrats are saying the first about the rich, and the Republicans are saying that to the poor, but let’s set aside those quarreling minorities ;-)

So, in a time of shrinking tax bases and increasing costs, how can we solve our problems? Can a politician help?

Creating Connections

Not long ago, I met a woman who was taking care of her two grandchildren, ages 6 and 2. She’d had a good job, but had been laid off. When she did, she lost her child care, and now she couldn’t get a job because she couldn’t find someone to take care of the kids while she looked for a job. Catch 22.

I told her that I had no idea if I, as a possible State Rep could do anything to help her, but I’d see.

Half a block up the street, I met another voter who told me that Casey Family Services had a grandparents group.

The next day, I called them and learned a bit about The Rhode Island Partnership for Family Connections. 

Here was a group of grandparents helping other grandparents. I emailed the grandmother the information, and hope that she follows through.

A few days after that, I met with Ray Watson at the Mt. Hope Community Center. He said that his organization couldn’t host something like a baby-sitting group, because of insurance liability concerns. He also said that he would be happy to help or connect people any way he could.

“We try to make this organization part of the community,” he said. “We’re open most of the time. People can just stop by.”

We also brainstormed that a local FaceBook group to connect people with similar issues might be another low-cost solution. Another email went out to the Grandmother. I haven’t heard anything back yet.

Connecting the Threads

A few days later, I was at one of those unique Rhode Island meetings where twenty people spend an hour discussing the placement and economics of four or five crosswalks.

Held at the Rochambeau Community Library after hours (the next time someone asks why we have libraries, aside from the wealth of knowledge, they serve as one of our key non-religious meeting points), the purpose of the meeting was to explain the future traffic calming measures near the Hope Street “business district.”

The short version was this: because the Narragansett Bay Commission was going to repave the streets, the Hope Street Merchant’s association hired a firm to design a traffic calming plan. The NBC offered to pick up the tab for the new raised sidewalks (think Kennedy Plaza not Smith Hill) and pedestrian bumpouts. The only problem was that the NBC’s mandiate stopped at the Cumberland Farms, just north of Rochambeau Avenue. In other words, the one place in the neighborhood where children cross the street most frequently—the library—was on the outside of the domain.

Fortunately, most of the players were in the room, so I asked a few questions:

  1. Was the NBC hiring a contractor to do this work?
    Yes.
  2. Since the contractor would have workers, machinery and supplies on-hand wouldn’t it be more cost-effective to build six crosswalks instead of five?
    Maybe.
  3. Why maybe?
    Building any raised crosswalk creates drainage problems. Since the NBC was redoing the sewers and rebuilding the streets, they could pre-grade the streets to handle the runoff from the five they were agreeing to do.
  4. But it’s possible to build the crosswalk, right?
    Yes. Provided someone does the study and it doesn’t cost too much to fix the drainage problem.
  5. Does the City of Providence have money for this?
    Probably. There are some federal funds and some neighborhood funds that might be available.
  6. Would the city look into this?
    Yes.
  7. What’s the deadline?
    Before Christmas. If the City conducts the study and finds the funds and informs the Narragansett Bay Commission, they can write it into the contract with their construction firm and make it happen.

On the way out of the meeting, I explained this to Councilman Jackson. The architect joked that this was the first meeting he’d ever been to where people actually wanted more construction.

There oughtn’t to be a law…

In both of these stories, both the problem and solution were in the same geography. One woman’s answer was a block away or a FaceBook group away. One sidewalk’s answer was in the same room, just missing someone to rethink the problem.

Did the “politician” solve either problem? No. Someone else will have to follow-up and make sure that the solution is implemented.

What I did was create opportunities for these problems to be solved without raising taxes, levying fines or writing legislation. No closed door meetings or back room deals either.

Not a bad few days.

———–

*Campaign bank accounts can be used to make donations to non-profits, something I’ve already promised to do with the whatever small funds are left in my account after the election.

RI Small Businesses: Beware of ALEC’s Minions


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

Jon Brien recently announced that he would be running a write-in campaign to retain his seat in Rhode Island’s House of Representatives.

At a press conference to announce the egotistical continuation of his campaign on September 20, Brien was surrounded by owners of local business including Pepin Lumber, The Burrito Company, and American Beauty Signworks. This is pretty ironic, given his involvement in the ultra-conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

ALEC is an organization that promulgates legislation written by, and to the benefit of, giant corporations, like Wal-Mart, Home Depot, and hundreds of others, the vast majority of which make no bones about the fact that the expansion of their operations inherently drives small, local businesses out-of-business.

Why these business owners would choose to support a candidate that is involved in an organization that is actively trying to decrease their market share is beyond comprehension.

Brien is much more than just a member of ALEC, he serves on its board of directors. He and Republican state Senator Francis Maher, Jr. serve as ALEC’s co-chairs in Rhode Island.

The majority of business owners and citizens in Woonsocket — whether they support Brien or the winner of the primary, Stephen Casey — would agree that our taxes are too high, but that statement invariably has an unspoken addendum, which is, “Our taxes are too high in relation to the services provided in return.

Brien can rail against the tax rate all he wants, but where and when has he ever demanded a proportionate increase in city and state services in return for those high rates? He hasn’t, and that’s because he is a small-government neo-conservative masquerading as a Democrat.

I would urge all small business owners in Rhode Island to be wary of supporting candidates that are in any way associated with ALEC. The last thing this state needs is an influx of big-box stores and corporations — or legislation that favors them over the small businesses that contribute to the character, richness, and the local economy of our great state. They may set up shop here, but the jobs they create are usually low-paying, providing few or no benefits to their employees, and their corporate profits often wind up out-of-state, and in many cases, overseas.

Clean Water Action Endorses Candidates


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
State House Dome from North Main Street
State House Dome from North Main Street
The State House dome from North Main Street. (Photo by Bob Plain)

With September 11th just around the corner, it is time for RI Primary voters to make up their mind. I’m sure you have been sitting up half the night wondering which candidate has the strongest voice for our environment. Look no further.

Clean Water Action is proud to announce that, after vetting the candidates who seek the green stamp of approval, we have a list of those that we believe to be valuable allies. Whether your concerns are about sustainable funding for public transportation, keeping the ban on incineration in place, preserving and extending the life of our landfill, investing in water infrastructure or, more simply, protecting the beauty of Narragansett Bay and our endless coastline, consider these candidates when going to the poll next week.

For next Tuesday’s Statewide Primary, Clean Water Action has endorsed the following candidates:

– David Cicilline (D) – 1st Congressional District

– Chris Blazejewski (D) – House District 2 (Providence)

– Libby Kimzey (D) – House District 8 (Providence)

– Joe Almeida (D) – House District 12 (Providence)

– Art Handy (D) – House District 18 (Cranston)

– Jay O’Grady (D) – House District 46 (Lincoln and Pawtucket)

– Stephen Casey (D) – House District 50 (Woonsocket)

– Gus Uht (D) – House District 52 (Cumberland)

– Gayle Goldin (D) – Senate District 3 (Providence)

– Adam Satchell (D) – Senate District 9 (West Warwick)

– Bob DaSilva (D) – Senate District 14 (East Providence)

– Lewis Pryeor (D) – Senate District 24 (Woonsocketand and North Smithfield)

– Gene Dyzlewski (D) – Senate District 26 (Cranston)

– Laura Pisaturo (D) – Senate District 29 (Warwick)

Clean Water is contacting its members in these districts by going door-to-door, making phone calls, and mailing letters to urge them to vote for environmental candidates. Another round of endorsements will be made for the General Election.

In Search of the Cleaner Campaign Contribution


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Heavy investment in 2nd District

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

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

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

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

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

A Hope Chest, not a War Chest

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Doherty Was For Paul Ryan Before He Was Against Him


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 praising Paul Ryan

After pretty much declaring himself president of the local chapter of the Paul Ryan fan club, conservative congressional candidate Brendan Doherty is now trying to distance himself from Ryan’s plan to slash medical benefits for retirees. Democrats don’t buy it, though.

“Paul Ryan may not be a household name to everyone in Rhode Island, but if you’re a senior citizen who relies on Medicare, you should know who he is and what he stands for, because these are the types of Republicans Brendan will be standing with and voting with, if elected to Congress,” said Bill Fischer, a spokesperson for the state Democratic Party in an email today. “Mr. Doherty’s statements on Monday supporting Medicare are simply not credible after he clearly supported Congressman Ryan at a tea party gathering in May.”

In May, Doherty said told an East Bay Tea Party group the opposite: “I had a great opportunity to meet with Paul Ryan about a month ago and that’s his position and he’s digging his feet in and I applaud him for that and I support him.”

Here’s the video:

Doherty was talking about Ryan’s budget proposal, which would indeed slash Medicare benefits. So which is it Brendan? Do you stand with Rhode Island retirees and the elderly or do you stand with Paul Ryan.

This is how Washington – and politics in general for that matter – works. Whatever Brendan Doherty might say to you while he’s on the stump, you can bet he’ll be voting in lock step with the most conservative Beltway Republicans in the country just as sure as his political mentor is former governor Don Carcieri.

Your Autograph Will Be Popular

Secretary of State sealRhode Islanders should not be surprised to find politicians asking for their autograph for the next week or so.

The nearly 2,400 people who filed Declarations of Candidacy last week have until July 13 to collect the signatures of enough eligible voters to officially put them on the ballot. The thresholds range from 50 for some municipal offices to 100 for state Senate to 1,000 signatures for the U.S. Senate.

“Be prepared for people running for office to knock on your door and approach you at the market.”

Candidates will submit their signature papers to municipal boards of canvassers, which will validate the signatures of local voters before sending them on to us. We have until July 20 to certifiy that candidates collected enough signatures to officially be placed on the ballot for the Sept. 11 primary and Nov. 6 election.

Many other milestones are included in a free 24-page guide that will help voters and candidates navigate this year’s elections. “Election Calendar 2012” outlines crucial deadlines from registering to vote to requesting a mail ballot.

Progressive vs. Old School


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

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

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

So, I’ll be doing a bit of both.

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

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

Grassroots vs. Entrenched

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

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

Then they ask me, “Are you insane?”

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

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

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

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

Answering Mr. Fox on 38 Studios

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

The basic idea behind the 38 Studios deal was this wager

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

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

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

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

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

Some tax breaks benefit… Some not so much.

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

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

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

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

Update

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

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

Revamping Education vs. Power… at the 11th hour

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What did Mr. Fox do about education?

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

Will it work?

Answering Mr. Fox on Marriage Equality

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

Yaay! Whoo hoo! (About time.)

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

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

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

Anthony Gemma Should Stay In CD1 Race


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
Anthony Gemma

Anthony GemmaI’m going to go out on a limb here and argue against our editor Bob Plain’s article that Anthony Gemma should drop out of the race for Democratic nominee for Congressional District 1. Now, obviously, it’s not because I have any particular love for Mr. Gemma. It’s because I’m a radical democrat.

I believe in the application of democracy, that our ideas and politicians have to be challenged in order to strengthen them. Representative David Cicilline shouldn’t get a free ride (though, obviously, no one can really accuse him of that since Providence Mayor Angel Taveras announced a “category 5 hurricane” about the city’s finances). I think that, regardless of how much I personally feel that between Mr. Cicilline and Mr. Gemma that Mr. Cicilline is clearly the better candidate, Mr. Gemma needs to stay in the race.

This should apply to everyone. In our democracy, it’s a shame that anyone ever stands in any election unchallenged. I’m not deaf to the idea that sometimes the best candidate is already in office, but I sincerely doubt it always applies. Everyone needs to be capable of defending their ideas; those who don’t tend to get sloppy. Even worse, they can get entitled. Mr. Cicilline clearly never got the chance to feel entitled to his seat; when Mr. Taveras made his now famous remarks as to the city’s financial condition, the uphill battle began. Everyday since then has been a justification of why Mr. Cicilline should remain in office. That‘s a good thing. These telephone town halls, while pretty ubiquitous, have been a departure from Patrick Kennedy’s tenure when the representative was… someplace, talking to some people.

Mr. Gemma serves a purpose; to ask the question “can Mr. Cicilline serve as the Democratic Party’s standard-bearer for Representative in RI CD-1?” However terrible an instrument Mr. Gemma is for that purpose, we’ll know the answer on September 11th.

This principle should’ve extended to the Republican race as well. John Loughlin II dropping out was bad for Rhode Island. It denied Republicans the chance to vet their candidate. Hopefully, Michael Donahue can fill Mr. Loughlin’s shoes; although I sincerely doubt he will, with the twin issues of a dislike of lawyers & law enforcement and the Federal Reserve and a likely resources and media coverage deficit.

Today being filing day, it’s important that those who can go out and do as Rep. Teresa Tanzi (D-Narragansett, Peace Dale, Wakefield) told the audience to do at Netroots Nation: run for office. To make democracy work, we have to run, no matter how impossible the task seems.

That said, I want to lay out the problems to this. First, and foremost, it’s an incredible drain on resources; financial, physical, and emotional. People burn out, or they go bankrupt. Politics is exceedingly expensive. In a perfect world, we’d have public financing and everyone would work with similar resources. But the U.S. Supreme Court seems to be against that, so we have to deal with the fact that our elections are going to become more and more oligarchical. I don’t have the solution to that.

There’s also the grueling personal attacks. I’d love it if political campaigns were cordial affairs (what if candidates campaigned together?), but I recognize that they’re not. And the result is that they can be bitter, wounding attacks. This is because it’s far simpler to make personal attacks, because people connect more easily with emotional appeals, and because we have a news media which rewards the personal attack with coverage and a general blasé attitude. We shouldn’t deny it; the first hardcore “issues” article I read about the CD1 campaign was the Progressive Democrats presentations/questionnaires that both Mr. Cicilline and Mr. Gemma went through. And I’m jealous of our former editor Brian Hull (and the Progressive Dems) for getting it.

Furthermore, more and more candidates in a single race means our first-past-the-post system reveals its inherent flaw: it doesn’t take a majority to win. You only have the win the largest plurality. Which means elections can end with a candidate the majority of people actually don’t like winning. A simple reform would be to switch to instant runoff voting, but it’ll take a sustained campaign and a real threat that the RI Democratic Party might lose its grip for that switch to happen.

But even without changes in how we organize elections and how we cover them, we need candidates to be brave enough to stand up and speak out for what they believe in. We need them to argue with whatever assumptions currently stand; with the consensus. The consensus shouldn’t get to rest on its laurels, it should constantly have to strive to prove its worth. Ideally, Rhode Island should thrive on this sort of idea.

In some places, there’s an option for “none of the above”. Voters can reject all the candidates by selecting it; and it means that a new election is called with new candidates. Perhaps that’d be a more honest way of doing this; giving voters the chance to say “all of these options are unappealing to me.” But until that comes along, that’s what Anthony Gemma will be: an alternative to “none of the above”.

Go Online to See Who Is Officially Running

Rhode Islanders can use our website to see who filed to run for local, state and federal office on the first day candidates could make it official.

The on-line Candidates Database includes the name and office of everyone who filed a formal Declaration of Candidacy on Monday.

Rhode Islanders who are thinking about running for office have until this Wednesday at 4 p.m. to file in order to be eligible to appear on this year’s ballot. We will update the database nightly so you can wake up to the previous day’s filings.

Candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate and electors for independent presidential candidates must file with our Elections Division, 148 West River St., Providence. Voters who plan to run for state or local office must file with the board of canvassers in the city or town where they are registered to vote.

The next important milestone in the election calendar occurs from July 3 through July 13, when candidates must collect the signatures of enough eligible voters to officially put them on the ballot. The thresholds range from 50 signatures for some municipal offices to 1,000 signatures for U.S. Senate.

This year there will be contests for many municipal offices, General Assembly, the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. The statewide primary is Sept. 11 and the general election is Nov. 6.

Anthony Gemma Should Drop Out of CD1 Race


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
Anthony Gemma

Anthony GemmaThe campaign to represent Rhode Island’s first congressional district in Washington DC will surely be the most interesting and scrutinized local race this year and, so far, there is only one thing that is certain: Anthony Gemma won’t win.

He could, however, potentially damage David Cicilline enough in an ugly primary to leave the incumbent vulnerable to the real challenger, Republican Brendan Doherty. But he won’t win. Not even the primary. No way. Not gonna happen. No chance.

First off, Gemma has absolutely no institutional support, which is crucial in a primary. At Friday’s annual local Democratic Convention, his nomination didn’t even garner a second, reports Will Collette in an excellent piece on the event in Progressive Charlestown. Collette writes:

When it came time for nominations, one delegate, who said she grew up as a friend of Gemma’s back in the day, stood to put his name in nomination. When Party Chair Ed Pachecho asked, not once but three times, if  any delegate would second the nomination, not one delegate among the 200+ would do so.

That leaves me to wonder how Gemma can claim to be the only electable Democrat for the First Congressional District when he can’t organize up a second to his nomination among 200+ Democrats. His supporters yelled out “democracy, democracy” when his nomination failed for lack of a second, but minutes later, they all filed out of the room.

But it’s more than just Gemma’s lack of support that makes him a bad candidate; he’s also just a bad candidate.

Last election, as a rookie, he ran as a pro-business fiscal moderate and this time he is claiming to be more progressive than his very progressive opponent – it paints the picture of a flip-flopper politically and at best an unknown variable on policy given that he’s never held office before, or even shown much interest in the process until a few years ago.

He’s also a pretty poor public speaker, a disaster at dealing with the local press pool and far less than adroit at answering questions on his feet. His latest gaffe was not taking a hardline on Nazi Germany in a recent interview with the RI Progressive Democrats.

Note to all pols: when asked about Hitler or the Nazis, it’s totally okay – if not a necessity of political survival, to throw them under the bus.

For these reasons as well as many others, we implore Anthony Gemma to drop out of the race. He cannot win; he can only do damage to the party he says he supports and, truth be told, he’s kind of embarrassing himself.

Which is too bad, because Gemma is a smart, super hard worker who is genuine and good and who wants to do right by his community. Electoral politics just doesn’t seem to be his bag.

I expect he’ll find more far more success if and when he starts some sort of local liberal think tank or online media venture – either would suit his skill set better than running for office, probably would have a greater impact on Rhode Island and could be done for a fraction of the cost. And, he’d get to be a hero rather than a spoiler.

Former Chafee Staffer Seeks State House Seat


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
Sam Lovett, at his old desk in the governor’s office.

Sam Lovett, who worked for Gov. Chafee as a communications associate and before that on David Segal’s campaign, is running for a legislative seat in the State House to represent East Providence.

He’s 24 years old and says politically he sees things from “a millennial point of view.”

What does that mean? The Democrat says the state should focus on fending off the brain drain, helping Main Streets thrive and protecting the rights of all people.

“Without the growth of vibrant communities to empower Rhode Islanders, we will continue to see the decline of our state’s strength,” he said according to his website. “I will work with the talented parties at state and local levels who are able to assist in revitalizing our communities.”

An equally important part of his platform, he said, will concern social issues.

“Being an ethical voice for social justice in Rhode Island is a major reason why I have decided to run for this state seat,” he said on his website. “Advocating on behalf of the elderly and disabled, ensuring accessibility for the blind and deaf and hard of hearing, continuing the good work of the Rhode Island Senate in supporting the homeless, as well as protecting the rights of minority groups, and the reproductive rights of women — these will be focal issues I support with my candidacy.”

Lovett specialized is social media while with the governor’s office. In April, he left for a job with GovLoop, a social network that connects government employees and officials. He said he left on good terms. He did not yet seek Chafee’s endorsement, but says he expects his former boss will support him – and Lovett says he supports his former boss.

“I would never bet against him,” Lovett said. “With him in charge Rhode Island always has a shot.”

The governor’s office could not be immediately reached for comment (I’ll update this post when I hear from them).

Lovett was raised in East Providence and attended Boston College where he studied history.

Because of redistricting the seat won’t be contested by the incumbent. Already declared for the seat are Robert Britto, according to the East Providence Reporter, and Charlie Tsonos, of East Providence Patch.

GOP Strategy for General Assembly Needs Work


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

So, according to RINPR’s Ian Donnis, RI Republican Party chairman Mark Zaccaria only plans to run 40-50 candidates for the 113-member General Assembly (about half of the number who ran in 2010 during the Tea Party Revolt). Mr. Zaccaria says that the goal is to force floor fights over every major piece of legislation, and that the focus on fewer candidates will allow for deeper distribution of resources.

I’m not buying it. First, Democrats are extremely well-equipped, monetarily, to fend off challengers (for instance, Speaker Fox alone has a quarter of a million dollars, search the filings here). Second, I’d be more inclined to believe that the RI GOP was a strong and credible organization if they actually came off that way. But go to their website and tool around for a bit. I found these problems with it:

  • The carousel only has one thing on it, leading to lots of clicking on those arrows.
  • The sole item in the carousel asks if you’ve heard their radio ad, but clicking on it just brings you back to the home page.
  • The “At The Front” blog has one article, which discusses Rhode Island Democrats and hardly mentions the Republicans.
  • There are no events on the events page.
  • The lead story in “Latest News” is the selection of Delegates for the Convention.
  • There’s a Twitter feed, but it’s used so rarely (tweets from 13 and 28 days ago) that it might as well be static.
  • RIGOPtv (their YouTube channel) shows a video from 2011 about the jobs plan put out by the U.S. House Republicans.
  • The “About” section is about Mr. Zaccaria, not the party.

Obviously, the Democrats have a much better website (they also have more money to spend on it). And obviously, you can have a crappy website and still be a really great organization. But in the 21st Century, we should note that websites are often the first impression you make on people. And RIGOP.org is not an inspiring impression, though its big candidates (Brendan Doherty & Barry Hinckley) have much stronger websites.

My main issue is with any political organization (Republican, Tea Party, Democrat, Progressive, Green, Moderate, etc.) looking to undo the establishment is that “less is more” does not seem to be an actual functioning approach. There’s just so many things you get from more candidates:

  • A Sense of Movement: When you have a lot of people standing up and declaring themselves under your banner it makes people take notice. It also means that you have more chances to win. If you can’t assist everyone with your meager resource, then focus on those you believe have a chance, and make it clear to those you can’t that you’ll help them if you gain those resources.
  • Larger Networks: Each candidate brings in a different social network. The more candidates that are running, the greater amplification of your organization’s message through their networks. Also, the people they attract to their campaigns are going to be your next generation of candidates and supporters. With fewer candidates, you’re restricting yourself.
  • Drowns Out the Wackos: Some people just have weird beliefs. And they’re often dedicated enough to act upon those beliefs. More candidates means that you’ll keep those folks from totally defining your organization. Obviously, if you’re not a political party, you can exert more control over your candidates. But since the only way to keep someone from running under your banner as a party is to primary them, more candidates means you can show such candidates to by atypical.
  • Free Experience: Training people requires work and time. While it behooves you to offer training to candidates and their staff, there’s nothing like real, on-the-job experience. Yes, inexperienced people screw up. But that’s how people learn. Your goal as a political organization should be to minimize and counteract those mistakes, making it easier for people to participate without sinking your candidates.

Those are benefits I see. Certainly, I’m no heroic field director or party organizer. I think for the Republicans to announce that they’re fielding almost half of the candidates they had in the last election makes it look like they’re contracting, rather then expanding. Which makes them look far weaker then might actually be the case. And if the emphasis is going to be on quality rather than quantity, you have to be of better quality then your opponents.

The other issue here is that perhaps the Republicans have set their sights too low. Forcing a floor debate on major bills isn’t exactly the rallying cry that inspired Tea Party activists last election cycle (“We Want Our Country Back!”). If someone promised me they were going to lose a lot while talking a lot, I’d laugh in their face. The promise needs to be big: our members are going to have control of the state. That should be the promise of any party or organized faction in the state. Republicans aren’t even promising to take one chamber of the General Assembly.

Because but no matter your goal, you’re probably not going to live up to it (unless you’re the ruling Democratic Party). And if you’re going to go down, go down kicking and screaming, because whimpering doesn’t look strong.

Organize for Equality


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

UPDATE: This training has been postponed and will be rescheduled for a later date. More information to come…

It’s getting close to crunch time in the General Assembly and we’re about to turn up the heat.

In order to continue being as effective as we can be, we need your help. And so I’m inviting you to take part in MERI’s first ever “Organizing for Equality” training on Saturday, May 5, 2012 where we’ll bring together some top notch politicos to teach you everything you need to know about how to motivate our state representatives and senators in support of the Equality Agenda.

This training is free and open to all equality supporters. No experience is necessary. All you need is an open mind and the willingness to work towards creating change. We’ll show you how to do the rest.

Here’s some of the things we’ll discuss:
Legislative briefings on our Equality Agenda: The Equal Access to Marriage Act,
The Equal Access to Family Court Act, and The Equal Religious Protection Act
Navigating the State House: Talking to your legislator about supporting marriage equality and the entire Equality Agenda
Being an effective online organizer: Using social media and how to write a winning email
The Ground Game: How to run phone bank and door knocking efforts in your neighborhood
The 2012 Elections: What you can do to support pro-equality candidates (of any party) to the General Assembly
Registration is from 8:30 to 9:00 am and we expect to wrap up around 2:00. Light breakfast fare and a box lunch will be provided. The Organizing for Equality Training will be held at the offices of SEIU Local 1199 (294 West Exchange Street, Providence, RI).

It comes down to this: we need an army of equality supporters to step up and help us do what needs to be done to win marriage equality. If you’ve ever felt frustrated by slow progress, or by Smith Hill politicians who are out of touch, and you want to do something about it, then this training is for you.


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