ACLU ‘disappointed’ with Caleb Chafee records request ruling


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

acluThe Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled today that Providence Journal reporter Amanda Milkovits “would not be granted access to public records the Rhode Island State Police made concerning an investigation of an underage drinking incident at property owned by then-Governor Lincoln Chafee that involved the governor’s son, Caleb,” reported Bill Thompson at Channel 12.

In response to this ruling, the ACLU of Rhode Island issued the following statement regarding The Providence Journal Company et al. v. The RI Dept. of Public Safety:

The ACLU is very disappointed by the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Caleb Chafee case. We believe it fails to give sufficient weight to the important public interest in monitoring police investigations of high-profile cases.
“In denying the Providence Journal access to any of the requested documents, the Court inexplicably points to the large number of records that were withheld as proof that ‘a thorough investigation was performed.’ But without being able to examine the documents, it is impossible to determine a key fact behind the records request — whether the public outcome of the investigation properly reflects what the undisclosed investigation actually uncovered.

“For decades, the ACLU has strongly supported both the individual’s right to privacy and the public’s right to know. In this instance, we believe the Court tipped the scales the wrong way. Instead, the decision highlights the need for a stronger open records law in order to allow the public more critical oversight of the state’s law enforcement agencies.”

Three governors were deposed about 38 Studios


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

2147835-38_studios___logoWhen the cache of documents related to the ongoing 38 Studios lawsuit (click here to view or download) brought by Governor Linc Chafee was released on September 24, a wealth of information was opened up. After years of curiosity, the public was able to see almost totally the chain of events that led to one of the biggest financial boondoggles in Rhode Island history.

After years of spin, lack of comment, and problematic answers, we bring you an analysis of the sworn and true answers of the three public officials to occupy the governor’s office since the deal was struck.

DONALD CARCIERI
carcieri_4After multiple days and 562 pages of deposition testimony, it is clear that former Governor Don Carcieri, the man responsible for the 38 Studios deal as chairman of the EDC, is nervous. Throughout the transcript, he peppers his answers with “you know” – a sign of anxiety.

When Carcieri took office in 2003, he touted himself as a pro-business reform candidate, campaigning on a promise to bring a ‘Big Audit’ to the convoluted state government. One of these moves included merging the Economic Policy Council and a smaller EDC into the single agency that approved the 38 Studios funding package. He says of the decision:

[I]t was a board decision. This was not my decision alone. I mean, this was a quasi-independent corporation. We went through lots of pains to restructure the whole corporation, created a whole new board, and as I said, I felt very pleased at the quality of the people we were able to attract, and I wanted to make sure that they could do their job.

Carcieri thought they had a prize in 38 Studios, a company that would spur the growth seen in the Cambridge, Massachusetts high-tech corridor on Route 128 decades earlier. At one point, Robert Stolzman, now a defendant in the lawsuit, wrote to the governor thanking him for involving him in the 38 Studios issue. With predicted earnings of $50 million by 2015, they believed they were going to be responsible for a high-tech renaissance.

They expected that they had a real winner in terms of a game and what they were doing in developing with a lot of industry expertise in this multi-player game was going to be very well received. They, you know, were supported in that, to my knowledge, by entertainment arts [Electronic Arts video game publishing] who understood the industry as well.

But there were warning signs from the outset that Carcieri refused to heed. One board member at the EDC, Karl Wadensten, voiced concern about the total monies being dedicated towards the project. Rosemary Gallogly, a seasoned adviser with years of experience regarding government accounting, raised multiple red flags that the governor blew off as infrastructural issues, part of the ‘big government’ he had vowed to fight.

-I don’t recall reading the whole [Strategy Analytics] report [regarding risks and possibilities]. Often they have executive summaries is what I would read, then I would skim, possibly, through, but what I’m saying to you is this is not my recollection of what was presented to the board meeting. That there was a slide dec. like all — PowerPoint or something that, you know — the sum and substance was, on balance, positive that’s my recollection, Tom.
-You’re saying your recollection on balance was positive?
-Yeah.
-Of the Strategy Analytics report was positive?
-Yes.
-Now, but you don’t know if you actually read the entire report or not, do you?

Two things become abundantly clear from Carcieri’s testimony.

First, despite boasting about his business savvy, he remained woefully out of touch with the industry he was trying to get involved in and remained so last year when deposed. Throughout the transcript, he consistently confuses the name of EA Games, the third-largest video game firm on earth, calling them ‘Entertainment Arts’ instead of Electronic Arts. When discussing the second title 38 Studios was working on at the time of their bankruptcy, a massive multi-player online game akin to the popular WORLDS OF WARCRAFT, he is hazy on the terms used in distribution, calling the industry-standard subscription-based servicing of those titles a “lease.”

That is a sign of bad business management. The Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, has been very open with how he made his fortune, explaining that, if he cannot understand a prospective investment and how the company works when he sits down at his kitchen table with the spreadsheets, he passes on the investment. Buffett does not have access to the secret formula for Coca-Cola or understand how Dairy Queen produces all their dessert items, but he does understand how to drink soda and take his grandchildren out for ice cream. The trick with smart investment is understanding exactly why a product or service will have success, not due to innovation as much as appeal. In the case of 38 Studios, Curt Schilling could and probably should have done what most sports players do in retirement when they get involved with video games, release a title based on his name recognition and sports career. It may not have been as exciting as the roll-playing fantasies he hoped to develop with sci-fi author RA Salvatore, but no one has seen John Madden crying on the way to the bank. Carcieri and Schilling were both clueless about everything from basic game programming to distribution models. The former Governor was so out of touch he did not even realize that the board he was chair of had not hired IBM and Wells Fargo as consultants! That he did not know he was not the first to talk with Schilling about the venture is merely the pinnacle of his lack of connection, regardless of whether politicians like William Murphy, Gordon Fox, and others lied to him.

Carcieri also seems to have let his ideology get in the way of basic economic logic regarding recovery from a recession. Even though they portrayed themselves as conservatives, Schilling and Carcieri bear all the markings of classical English liberals in the economic sense, fiercely opposed to unions and praising the virtues of so-called ‘free markets’ and supply-side economics. They wanted to create a business boom in the tech sector, which is non-union.

Besides the aforementioned lack of industry literacy, Carcieri and other Rhode Island officials fatally misjudged why the Massachusetts Miracle happened in the first place. In that instance, technology firms since the 1960s had been creating a diverse set of products that reaped millions. And while they did see a particular boom in the 1980s and 1990s with computer software, the vast majority of the products created were technologies used in unionized jobs, such as municipal construction or lighting devices, industries with almost-guaranteed supply-and-demand ratios as opposed to video games, which are wildly uncertain in success based on the nature of customer satisfaction.

The reality is still as John Maynard Keynes told us 80 years ago, the way to get out of a recession is by having a government spend huge amounts on public works and infrastructure projects that create long-lasting, good-paying, unionized jobs. As the workers continue to take home good paychecks over the course of years, they in turn spend their earnings on everything from houses to cars to luxury services that they could not afford previously. That was the reason President Eisenhower, as a Republican, was pro-union and opposed the anti-labor ideologies of Joseph McCarthy and Barry Goldwater. He knew then that the middle class prosperity he oversaw was dependent on organized labor serving as a balance with the controlling powers of big capital. The fact Carcieri mistakenly thought that RISD could perform the same services as MIT and Harvard and that their wildly unpopular former President John Maeda would help foster this boom is the tragically ironic icing on the cake.

LINCOLN CHAFEE
Chafee_1-200x300When Lincoln Chafee took the governor’s office in January 2011, the state was in a complete crisis. Municipalities were on the verge of bankruptcy. The pension system was in trouble. And when, during his campaign, he had opposed the passage of the 38 Studios deal, he was blocked from speaking at an EDC meeting and “swatted aside” by a state trooper. He left office as a very unpopular man, with then-Treasurer Gina Raimondo having bad-mouthed him both in the press and during election debates.

I was apprehensive, given my very, very vocal opposition to the deal in the campaign, including going uninvited to an EDC board meeting and being barred from entering, that I could be accused of meddling, micromanaging, interfering. There were still board members that were very- had voted in favor of this deal. The executive director and I had sparred in the course of the campaign, now he was my executive director of the EDC. I was very apprehensive about, as I said, micromanaging or meddling in this. I saw my role as to be supportive and write the checks and hope that that first game was successful… We inherited an inferno.

Now comes the release of his deposition. Of all the motley crew of big-shots and political players, he comes across as not just respectable but actually the closest thing to a hero. I do not agree with all of his policy moves while in office, including the public sector pension reform he oversaw, but it is obvious he did not care about his image, he cared about Rhode Island.

-I did get a call from Providence Equity leadership who experience in this area and shared my initial thoughts and opposition and reinforcing that.
-When you say Providence Equity leadership, is there a particular individual you spoke with?
-My classmate, Jonathan Nelson… I had expressed opposition at that point to the loan, and he said I’m in the business, this business, and you’re right about your opposition.

From day one, Chafee was educating himself about the video game industry and saw a turkey. One of the many exhibits in his deposition is a packet of news articles and analyses that he had in his campaign office, representing the level of research he was doing during a busy election season about an industry he and everyone else knew nothing about.

-Yes, these documents we came upon after the request to make sure we had given everything that we had, and just in further searching, these are the documents that reflected that further search.
-Where were they found?
-Some in my campaign office, which was not my original campaign office that I had during the campaign, but a subsequent mini closet, almost, where we store a number of items, and others were in the governor’s office.
-Okay. The mini campaign office you refer to, where is that located?
-Airport Plaza, Warwick, Rhode Island…
-Did you ask any members of your campaign staff to do any research for you into any issues which may concern this type of potential relationship with a company like 38 Studios?
-I’m sure being a team effort and this being a major item in the news and being, you know, a very, very competitive campaign everybody was involved in finding out as much as they could about all the details of this type of state investment.

In both the deposition and public statements, Curt Schilling and his lawyers have tried to blame Chafee for their failures. They claim the governor’s press statements were the kind of bad publicity that drove away potential investors and ultimately caused the company’s failure. In the deposition, Schilling’s lawyer Michael Sarli repeatedly tries to pigeonhole Chafee and make him seem incompetent, a poor chair of the EDC board that was asleep at the wheel. The question, rephrased and repeated time and again, is contemptuous of the Governor’s office, to the point Max Wistow, the lawyer Chafee hired to represent the EDC and launch the current lawsuit, says “The gentleman is the governor. It is being abusive and argumentative.”

Regardless of how one feels about Chafee, every Rhode Islander should understand that Wistow is not standing up just for one man, he is defending the integrity of the state itself, which Schilling is trying to drag through the gutter. Chafee had no ability to impact the company’s success or failure after taking office. What killed 38 Studios was inherent to Schilling’s management style, the nature of the video game industry, and the economic impact of the 2008 crash. They failed to sell enough copies of their first game because it was a mediocre title and people were tightening their belts due to the recession.

GINA RAIMONDO
raimondo_3The deposition of Gina Raimondo is a one that occupies a unique time and place, having been taken on September 11, 2014, two days after she had won the Democratic primary, but before she won the gubernatorial race and ceased her duties as treasurer. Having emerged from the private sector as a venture capitalist prior to entering politics in 2011, she had a particular level of insight on the issue when news of the 38 Studios deal first broke.

-Well, as a professional in the field of venture capital, did the idea that the state was looking to enter into some sort of an agreement with 38 Studios pique your professional interest at all?
-Yes.
-Did you do anything in follow-up to having that curiosity?
-I did. I wrote that e-mail to Keith Stokes suggesting that, in my opinion, it was a high-risk venture, and if I could — since I had expertise in investing, if I could be of any help, I was here to help.

Raimondo was in the minority of those who expressed concern about the deal after she talked about the issue with her co-workers, who had a history of financing video game firms and did some research on 38 Studios. Before the company moved to Rhode Island, it was based in an area with a high concentration of gaming developers and the venture capital firms that traditionally finance their efforts.

-Okay. So, at least at the time you had knowledge that there were people that you regarded as experts in the gaming business that had decided not to invest and had looked at 38 Studios specifically, fair?
-Yes. Yes. The nature of the way this happens in general is, you know, Monday morning, you have investment committee meetings. You sit around at a table like this, you say, Sean, what do you think — Sean was my partner, who is a… gaming expert, what do you think of this 38 Studios deal? It’s casual chitchat. And so I don’t remember doing that, but the nature of it, the conversation would have been, in the vernacular it’s called shopped, the deal has been shopped around. I don’t remember him saying it, but I’m thinking reading this, he probably said, oh, that’s been shopped all over the place, and everyone’s passed… I didn’t know anything, really, about the deal or anything other than what I read in the paper, but it’s just the general concept that he was a famous baseball player in a really hot area of gaming in the venture capital mecca of America, and if he couldn’t get venture capital money and had to come to the State of Rhode Island for money, hit the pause button. Like, I didn’t know anything just from the outside looking in, if you’re a famous guy in the hottest area of gaming in the hot venture capital market in the world, and you can’t get funded,… what does the State of Rhode Island know that the whole rest of the world doesn’t know? So it was just a general concept of hold your horses.

It is possible that Raimondo will be able to use quotes like this to her advantage in the future. She is on the public record regarding how she said from the outset that this was a bad deal. But as one reads further on in the transcripts, a troubling image emerges. It becomes absolutely clear that this is a cunning and ruthless politician that will sacrifice anyone to get ahead in a political contest. Consider her treatment of Chafee in May of 2012:

-I’m going to direct your attention to the part of this document that follows the header, “A company doesn’t run out of money overnight.” Do you see that
-Yes.
-And there’s a quote attributed to you in this document and it says… ”To me the much bigger question is what’s been happening over the past 17 months.”… ”General Treasurer Gina Raimondo said in an interview on the Dan Yorke show on Wednesday… “How has the governor and his staff in his capacity as chair of the EDC board been monitoring this investment? A company does not run out of money overnight.”… Would you expect that there would be, on a deal like this, when you talk about monitoring the deal, when you use that word, does that mean that at some point the board of EDC is given information as to how this risky loan is performing?
-I have no idea… I do not know, even as I sit here, how the governance of the EDC, I don’t know the ins and outs of how the governance of the EDC works… I don’t know what information the board is supposed to see, Governor sees, counsel sees, executive director sees, I have no idea.

Ergo, she has no idea what she is talking about but does not mind dragging Chafee through the mud to score a political point. That sort of realpolitik is sadly part and parcel of a political system that traffics in media hype rather than actual ideological standards, treating the contestants as rock stars as opposed to political thinkers. Consider Raimondo’s comments about her own education in law, a point emphasized by her political campaigns.

-Okay. If you recall back to those days at Yale when you were in Evidence class, do you remember past recollection recorded?
-I never took Evidence. Don’t you know they don’t actually teach law at Yale?
-What do they teach, networking?
-Pretty much, yeah.

How encouraging.

Raimondo’s private sector line of work is bitterly referred to as ‘vulture capitalism’ by those who have run afoul of people in her line of work. There are success stories, such as when Facebook went from a college start-up to a multi-million dollar company. But there are thousands of shattered dreams and broken lives also, far more than the successes. She has already set her Wall Street cronies loose on the public sector employee pension system. The fact she even allowed PawSox owner Larry Lucchino to entertain the idea of a taxpayer-financed stadium this summer despite economic analyses forecasting doom shows us this is a person who would not blink an eye while selling out her voters as long as she can curry favors. Carcieri may have been foolish and Chafee swamped, but Raimondo is someone who knows how to get ahead regardless of the consequences as long as she can benefit.

LESSONS LEARNED?
There are lessons to be learned from this mess. It may turn out in all probability that Superior Court Judge Michael Silverstein finds for the defendants and rules that the State was not conned by Schilling, they merely made a very bad financial decision. With the disclosure about Chafee’s friend Mr. Nelson and Raimondo’s warnings from the private sector, it seems clear that there was a reasonable level of insight about Schilling and in fact the politicians just let their egos get ahead of them.

But the type of reform really needed goes well beyond political parties and into the realm of revising our basic norms of government. 38 Studios is not an aberration, it is symptomatic of something deeply embedded in the corruption of Rhode Island’s political culture. The one who was the voice of reason and sanity ended up as a reviled one-term politician, now walking a Quixotic trail towards the Presidential primaries with little support or media hype. The majority of the culprits in this rip-off are going to probably get off scot-free. And the type of people that create these kinds of economic nightmares now have one of their own in power, biding her time and eyeing advancement to Washington DC.

Karl Marx, the prophet who told us capital is a system of contradictions leading towards deeper and wider economic disparity, famously told us “Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.” Unfortunately, the joke is on us.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

How the smallest state got the smallest uninsured rate


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

anya wallackA recent Gallup poll revealed that Rhode Island has the lowest uninsured rate in the country, at 2.7 percent, as well as one of five states that saw its uninsured rate decline by 10 points or more. But, how did that happen? Anya Wallack, director of HealthSourceRI, was able to provide some answers.

“You come to HealthSource, and right there, you can very easily sign up for coverage regardless of your income,” she said. “We’ve developed an infrastructure that’s really designed for this unified approach.”

Wallack explained Rhode Island decided to create its own exchange because it presented “significant advantages, in terms of local control and customer service.” With a state based exchange, rather than a federal one, they could better tailor their services to the needs of Rhode Islanders.

HealthSourceRI uses what she called a “one door policy,” meaning that customers could come in and not only apply for health insurance, but check to see if they were eligible for Medicaid and other benefits. This is where much of the exchange’s success comes from, since this is a policy only a few states have adopted.

Wallack said that making customers jump through hoops only serves to make things more confusing, and they miss out on important information because of it. Right now, Wallack and her team are expanding their open door policy, and making it possible for customers to begin to apply for other assistance programs like TANF or SNAP.

“When we’re done building our system, you’ll be able to sign up for those with one stop shopping,” she said.

Wallack added that there are a number of ways that customers can use this one stop shopping, that all services are provided online, over the phone, or in person. Face-to-face assistance is also provided right in the community health centers, so customers can sign up for insurance right in their hometown. HealthSourceRI also has enrollment events during the open enrollment period, which is from Nov. 1 to the end of January each year. During open enrollment, a customer can renew, reenroll, or sign up for coverage, or just change their plan. There are two other types of enrollments as well- special enrollment and Medicaid coverage. Special enrollment occurs when a customer’s circumstances change throughout the year and they need to change their plan, and Medicaid coverage happens throughout the year to see if a customer is eligible for Medicaid.

“We try to find any avenue where we can come into contact with people who may be looking for coverage,” Wallack said concerning their community accessibility.

This level of accessibility has worked for the exchange, proved not only by the Gallup poll but the hard numbers that HealthSource has collected so far for this year. In 2015, they have enrolled 32,554 individuals as of July 31. Most people who enrolled were age 55 and over, sitting at 29 percent. 53 percent of enrollees were female, while 47 percent were male. More than half of the enrollees – 59 percent – were eligible for financial assistance in the form of an advanced premium tax credit and cost-sharing reductions. These numbers show an upward trend from last year, with over 7,000 more enrollees. Small businesses are signing up through HealthSource as well, with 542 employers enrolled in 2015, compared to the 381 from 2014.

The Gallup poll found that states that set up their own exchange and expanded Medicaid saw the biggest drop in their uninsured rate, something that the Ocean State has been doing since day one. According to Wallack, as long as they continue with this, Rhode Island can serve as a model for other states and their healthcare exchanges, especially as HealthSourceRI moves forward. Within the next month, HealthSource will be releasing its own survey, which will give more accurate results than the Gallup one, because it will only look at Rhode Island. But, the national survey still shows a trend, and that Rhode Island is headed in the right direction.

“What I take from this, is that those policy decisions, as well as our decisions to take a coordinated approach, was successful for us,” Wallack said.

HealthSource’s next step is to find those last remaining uninsured individuals, and understand why they’re uninsured, as well as work with employers to make sure that they are able to retain coverage. Now, their job is to help control healthcare cost growth, provide support for small business, and provide affordable choices for everyone, especially that last 2.7 percent.

2014: The year RI jailed workers in poverty


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
Best picture 2014- Santa Brito
Santa Brito in front of the Hilton Providence, March 14.

The most poignant and politically instructive story I covered in 2014 was the shameful treatment of the Providence hotel workers who, having successfully petitioned the Providence City Council for the right to place a $15 minimum wage measure on the ballot, were frustrated in their effort by the General Assembly, under the leadership of the newly elected Speaker of the House, Nicholas Mattiello.

The situation for many hotel workers in Rhode Island is bleak. Some hotels pay wages that are close to a living wage, but many do not, most notably the Hilton Providence and the Providence Renaissance, which are mired in a labor struggle with its staff. Both hotels are managed by The Procaccianti Group (TPG) a multi-billion dollar real estate and investment company headquartered in Cranston, Rhode Island. Properties managed by TPG are notorious for extracting profits from investments by keeping wages low and treating employees as disposable commodities.

Hotel employees organized by Unite Here Local 217, have been demanding fair wages, humane working conditions and a union. The hotels have responded punitively, firing high profile and vocal organizers such as Krystle Martin, Adrienne Jones and Marino Cruz.

Mirjaam Parada
Mirjaam Parada

The hotel workers worked hard last winter and spring to collect the 1,000 signatures needed to compel the City Council to consider putting a $15 minimum wage ordinance for hotel workers on the November ballot, presenting their petition on April 10. The City Council held public hearings on the measure on May 27. Though the ProJo tried to convince the public that there were dozens of speakers on both sides of this issue, in truth there were 22 speakers in support and only five hotel lobbyists speaking against the measure.

But the hotels lobbyists still have power. They have so much power that the Providence Ordinance Committee cancelled a meeting to decide on the measure under pressure from… who knows? To this date no one has explained exactly why City Councillor Seth Yurdin cancelled the meeting. Rumor has it that Mayor Angel Taveras, who was planning a run for governor, was anxious to present himself as a friend to corporate interests, but of course, the mayor has no power to compel the cancellation of city council meetings.

Yilenny Ferreras, at an empty City Hall
Yilenny Ferreras, at an empty City Hall

What is known is that nearly one hundred hotel workers, their families and supporters made huge efforts to be at the City Hall that night, arranging child care or dragging their kids with them, getting to the City Hall by bus, carpool or walking, losing out on valuable paid work or rare time off in the process. Because the meeting was cancelled at the last minute, the hotel workers ended up in an empty City Hall, with no one to hear their case.

It is thought that actions to stall the passage of the measure were used because, despite the pressure on the City Council by corporate interests, early handicapping revealed that the measure would pass if put to a vote. In addition, polling indicated that Providence voters were quite receptive to the idea of raising the minimum wage for struggling workers.

So despite the financial and political power of the forces opposed to the measure, things were going well for hotel workers in Providence.

Enter ALEC

Rep. Ray Gallison

It’s pretty well known that Mayor Taveras had mixed feelings about the hotel worker’s minimum wage bill. It seems he did not want to be known as the kind of mayor who vetoed such popular measures, but he also did not want to end a promising political career by angering monied interests.

Fortunately for his future plans, Taveras avoided having to address the issue thanks to State Representative Ray Gallison, a “Democrat” from District 69, covering Bristol/Portsmouth. Gallison introduced House Bill 8276, which would take away the power of cities and municipalities to set their own minimum wages, effectively blocking the hotel worker’s efforts. According to a House spokesperson, Gallison’s bill was a direct response to the hard work and determination of the hotel workers, who had followed the rules and used the democratic process in an attempt to enact a positive change.

Gallison’s bill was modeled on legislation pioneered by the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, what Bob Plain called “the right wing bill mill that drafts corporate-friendly legislation for state legislators.” Why would a Democrat introduce a right-wing bill that caters to corporate interests by keeping hard working people in grinding poverty? I don’t know, because Gallison refused to respond to my requests for clarification.

Gallison’s mistake, however, was putting the proposal out in the form of a bill. A bill needs to be debated in committee, which invites public commentary and media scrutiny. A bill, introduced in the House, must also be passed in the Senate. That means more public commentary and media scrutiny. A bill requires each and every legislator to vote on it and essentially declare themselves for corporate interests or struggling workers. A bill would have to be ultimately signed by the Governor. All that democracy engenders uncertainty and becomes a huge problem when a multi-billion dollar corporation is demanding that something be done to protect its bottom line.

Speaker Mattiello

So Gallison, under the direction of the Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello, removed his bill from consideration and slipped the measure into the budget. As a budget item, the measure is just one little part of a huge pile of legislation that is passed all at once as an up or down vote. Legislators can say things like, “I don’t support every part of this budget, but as a whole it strikes a compromise I can live with.”

The budget passed the House and the Senate with barely a word spoken against the measure. One notable exception was Representative Maria Cimini, a Democrat. She introduced a measure to amend the budget and undercut Gallison’s ALEC inspired end run. The measure failed. In retaliation for this and other progressive sleights, Speaker Mattiello endorsed Cimini’s opponent, Dan McKiernan, in the Democratic Primary, successfully unseating her.

On June 13, the same night the House passed the budget, the Providence City Council, under the leadership of Michael Solomon, passed a measure putting the $15 minimum wage bill on the November Ballot in what amounted to a symbolic gesture. The efforts of the City Council didn’t matter. The deed was done. On June 16 the Senate passed the budget. All that was required now was Governor Chafee’s signature.

Still, the hotel workers did not give up. Amazingly, hotel workers Santa Brito, Mirjaam Parada and Yilenny Ferreras along with Central Falls City Councilor Shelby Maldonado (now a State Representative) organized a hunger strike, camping outside on the State House Steps for days as the Governor contemplated signing the budget into law.

I visited the hunger strikers every day. I can’t speak highly enough of their determination and grace. On June 19, day three of the hunger strike, Governor Lincoln Chafee signed the budget into law, effectively ending the effort that had started months ago as hundreds of people collected thousands of signatures in order to get a bill placed on the November ballot that would have improve the lives of countless Rhode Islanders.

Since that day, economic prospects in Rhode Island have steadily worsened. Rhode Island has the highest poverty rate in New England. Despite such dour news, the idea that the General Assembly, following Mattiello’s lead, might do anything this coming session but cut assistance programs to the poor is almost laughable. Only 27% of the jobs in Rhode Island pay enough for a family with two children to survive on. The rest of Rhode Islanders are the working poor, disposable commodities for the rich to use, abuse and toss aside when broken.

When Rep Ray Gallison first introduced his ALEC inspired bill to cut off the efforts of the hotel workers to improve their lives, Santa Brito, housekeeper at the Providence Renaissance and hunger striker said, “House leadership is moving to jail us in poverty.

Who would have thought that Rhode Islanders would stand by and actually let that happen?

Patreon

The war on secularism


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

10367791_10152501605498364_3825072922283601389_nFor his last Christmas in office before handing the reigns of government over to Gina Raimondo, Governor Lincoln Chafee mostly avoided the idiotic lambasting he has received in previous years over his decision to refer to the large decorated evergreen placed in the State House rotunda as a “Holiday Tree” rather than a “Christmas Tree.” Locally speaking, the annual “War on Christmas” was relatively quiet this year, mostly, I believe, because of the election and because of the attention being given to the #BlackLivesMatter protests.

As president of the Humanists of Rhode Island, I waited until the day after the election to formally request a spot in the State House for our Roger Williams banner. This banner, placed for the first time in the State House last year, has been relegated to a spot on the second floor of the State House, in an area designated for displays by local ethnic and civic groups.

williams banner small
The idea of such an area is to allow a “free speech zone,” a place for symbols and ideas of a religious nature to be displayed on public property. In this way has the law evolved so that the separation of church and state may be violated. Here you will find all sorts of statements and displays about religion. There are mangers and baby Jesuses Jesii?, Christmas trees and icons of saints. In fact, far from being a public space free of religious endorsements, the State House has become a public space chock full of religious endorsements: Christian, Jewish, atheist and other.

This is why I don’t call the battles over such displays a “War on Christmas.” These battles should more properly be called a “War on Secularism,” and we are all losing. None of these displays belong in a public building, with the possible exception of the Humanists of Rhode Island’s exceptionally designed banner which celebrates the birth of Roger Williams and the separation of church and state, which has secular, historical and seasonal value, but no religion.

But the law is the law, and it’s unlikely to change anytime soon, so those with a secular and non-believing outlook will be compelled to at least balance the religious views on displays with their own for the foreseeable future.

There is one big problem though. Humanists, atheists and all non-Christians and non-Jews are victims of viewpoint discrimination, an illegal process where the opinions and ideas of certain religious groups are prioritized over others. Certain groups are routinely being given better placement in the State House, garnering their displays greater visibility than others, which gives these groups the appearance of favoritism.

SaintWhat I’m talking about is the placement of the Christmas Tree in the main rotunda. Governor Chafee was onto something when he called it a “Holiday Tree.” As a holiday tree, devoid of religious meaning, the tree could stand every year in the best, most visible location in the State House, and no one could make a case that their religion or non-religion was being discriminated against. But calling it a Christmas Tree means that Christian views are being prioritized by being given the favored spot, year after year.

The addition of a Hanukkah menorah, also always located in a favored spot just off the main rotunda, does little to make the situation better. Note that the menorah is never given the center spot, but is always off to the side. Note that the Christmas Tree is never moved to the side so that any other viewpoint might be displayed in its dominating place of honor.

The message the State of Rhode Island is sending is clear: Christians are #1, Jews are #2 (perhaps by virtue of the history, monotheism and holy texts they share with Christians) and all other view points are relegated to the second floor, where visitors must search them out.

This year I repeatedly asked that our banner be allowed to occupy some space on the main rotunda, either hung near the tree or displayed on a structure we would provide. My requests were ignored. When I said that I wanted a place on the main rotunda, I was told that I could have the space on the second floor or nothing.

This is wrong. The second floor is for second class citizens. First class citizens are given the main rotunda, given a state sanctioned lighting ceremony, and given the endorsement of our state government. This is a clear violation of the first amendment, and a clear message to non-Christians that this is a Christian state, run by and for Christians alone. The rest of us are simply tolerated.

Next year the Humanists of Rhode Island will once again demand placement on the main rotunda. We hope that Gina Raimondo does the right thing and allows our banner to be placed with the Christmas Tree.



Support Steve Ahlquist!




Open data and the next mayor of Providence


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
"Data: For the People

"Data: For the PeopleSome readers may recall that yours truly advised Angel Taveras’s 2010 mayoral campaign on the issues of information technology, web services and open government (known then as “government 2.0”). Later, I served on the transition committee studying these same issues and served on the Open Providence Commission for Transparency and Accountability that met throughout 2012.

The commission issued a report and recommendations in early 2013. And, much to my surprise, the Taveras administration actually tried to implement it. You could fill the library at Alexandria with the commission and consultant reports that were written and immediately shelved. (Commerce RI’s 2010 Roadmap to a Green Economy comes to mind…)

The push toward implementation shows that Taveras and his administration took these issues seriously, as they rightly should. It is a pity that he won’t be able to pick up on the good work done on this front by Governor Chafee at the state level, but I digress.

Open data and information technology are the kinds of tedious, nerdy things that nobody cares or thinks much about—much like highway bridges—until they break. Then everybody freaks the hell out. The fact is that open access to government data or the lack thereof has a profound effect on regular people.

Would you like to log in to your account with the city government and see all your stuff there on a single page? When I say “your stuff” I mean your car tax, your property tax, your parking tickets, your application for a vendors license, your building permits, your communications with public works about that dead tree that’s about to take down the utility lines, etc. Yeah, that stuff.

I certainly would, but I can’t. And it’s not like I haven’t tried. On the commission, my main job was constantly to advocate that the city provide basic web services for residents and develop an internal capability to do so instead of paying ridiculous money to third parties that provide mediocre, rapidly obsolete systems. Sensible and cost-effective as this might be, it remains just a distant possibility. Many things need to change—especially the knowledge and attitudes of city councilors, department heads and…well, everybody in government that can’t make a web page with a text document.

The ugly reality of IT in Providence city government

Your Frymaster also enjoyed a courtesy interview for the role of Chief Information Officer for the city, but I was never really in the race. Jim Silveria, who landed that job and also served on the commission, has done his best to deliver on the commission’s recommendations. This is no slight to Jim. It’s an indictment of the inertia, entrenched interests, lack of resources and lack of capability of existing resources within city government.

I would not have made the same decisions that Jim has, and that’s probably why he got the job instead of me. But at least he made decisions and moved the situation forward in a significant way.

Providence now has an open data portal, an open meetings portal, live streaming and archived video of council meetings and highly-transparent, browsable repository of all the bids to all the city’s RFPs since they started using the system earlier this year. Not for nothin’, but that’s serious progress.

Here’s the thing: all of those new services—just like the previously existing services for paying parking tickets, taxes and your water bill—are from third parties. Expansion of the city’s internal capabilities has been virtually nil. (NB: the RFP repository was developed in-house by the city of Newport, so it can be done—even in RI. Also, using Ustream and Vimeo for the video is kind of a no-brainer.)

While it’s true that outdated job descriptions and overall municipal employees union intransigence hold the city back, the primary cause is a catch-22 in which a lack of resources leads to inefficient use of the resources that are available. This problem stems from an overall lack of understanding at the highest levels (in this case, the city council, department heads and possibly even the executive administration) of the importance of investing in technology and tech-savvy people.

By no means is Providence alone in this regard. Most governments and most corporations have the same problem. This 2008 article by the internationally renowned IT pioneer JP Rangaswami sums it up pretty well. JP starts by repeating one of his favorite quotes, itself from years before:

When you turn down a request for funding an R&D [read: IT] project, you are right 90% of the time. That’s a far higher rate of decision accuracy than you get anywhere else, so you do it.

And that’s fine. Except for the 10% of the time you’re wrong. When you’re wrong, you lose the company.

~ Howard Schneiderman [editorial comment is mine]

If you go read that article, scroll down to the comments. Somebody you know might have weighed in…

“There’s two ways to do things: the right way and
the Army way”

My father used that well-trod quip anytime I tried to cut corners or get away with a half-assed effort. At its core is the recognition that institutions have a hard time changing their thinking and making the tough decision to do what’s best in the long run. Corporations have quarterly reports to shareholders; governments have elections. Doing today the same thing you did yesterday and kicking the can down the road remain the default options for almost every leader everywhere.

And more’s the pity.

In the case of the city of Providence, the combination of an inflexible union, a poorly informed city council, resistant department heads and the absence of a breakthrough leader that could change those three previous items has created the situation where you cannot do things the right way; you can only do things the Army way. Specifically, the city can’t hire a qualified IT person for $100,000 per year, but the city can pay an outsider vendor $100,000 a year to do what the qualified IT person could do in a couple of months.

Thus our tax dollars—that could be paying local people and small IT firms to do great work, as I have repeatedly advocated—go to massive, far off corporations that give us mediocre systems. Just imagine what the city pays in licensing fees just for Microsoft Office. Right?

Code Island, civic hackers and open data

In 2014, Code for America sent a cohort of fellows to work with the state of Rhode Island and created the first state-level “brigade,” Code Island. (All previous brigades worked at the municipal level.) Yours truly serves as the official brigade Storyteller, a CfA-required position for all brigades that roughly translates as communications resource. Open Providence commission chair John Marion and commissioner Nelson Rocha also play active roles. Shawn Selleck, the civic innovation consultant to the city of Providence who has helped Jim Silveria fight the good fight at City Hall, is the brigade’s official Community Organizer.

CfA and its brigades are known as “civic hackers,” computer systems developers and designers that volunteer their time and talent to produce web- and mobile-enabled software applications that let regular people see and use government data. Code Island is greatly enabled by Jim Silveria and Thom Guertin, a Woonsocket native and RI’s Chief Digital Officer.

Code Island has several development projects in process, the most ambitious being a visualization tool that will let users slice and dice the five years of state budget data recently released on the state’s transparency portal. Our tool will provide far greater detail and flexibility that the state’s visualization. Again, this is no slight to RI.gov or Thom and his team. They can only do so much, and by making the data accessible to us, they enable us to take it to the next level.

This is how civic hacking works: open data + free apps = teh awesome.

Code Island wants the candidates on the record

Last week, the brigade sent the three major candidates for mayor of Providence a questionnaire, asking them to go on the record about how they would approach the issue of open data. We focused only on the city of Providence because, despite the significant progress that the Taveras administration has made, we still rate just a D+ for spending transparency, according to RIPIRG.

It’s not like RIPIRG has an ax to grind on this. The rating is in line with the open data census that the Open Knowledge Foundation runs. We rank #41 with a score of 230 compared with New York City, the national leader, with a score over 1600.

The sad fact is that Providence is woefully behind the curve. For a place that fancies itself a geeky little IT haven, that’s fairly pathetic. Yes, IT is nerdy and hard to understand. Yes, hiring people is more complicated than paying a vendor. Yes, EVERYBODY in IT needs to be on a lifelong learning path of continuous improvement.

Yes, yes, yes to everything that is difficult and complicated and…the right thing to do. So, candidates, is any of you willing to push through the inertia so that Providence can finally stop doing IT the Army way?

So far, nobody has given us a response. Jorge Elorza, unsurprisingly, has listed continuing and accelerating implementation of the Open Providence report as part of his ethics agenda. He even specifies creation of a dashboard, which is that thing where you log in to your account and see all your stuff.

I’ve only been pushing for a dashboard for, I dunno, a decade. Can we please?

An Epic Economic Fail


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

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

The experiment to build our economy with tax breaks for the wealthy continues to be an epic failure. A healthy middle class grows the economy, not giveaways to rich and powerful.

We’re gearing up for another year at the State House to ensure all residents pay their fair share in taxes, not just you and me. Can we count on you to help?

Tell Governor Chafee Rhode Island can no longer afford unsustainable tax breaks for the wealthy.

After years of tax breaks for the wealthiest Rhode Islanders, our state’s  unemployment rate has grown to the second highest in the country, working families are paying higher property and car taxes, and deep cuts have decimated funding for education, infrastructure, transportation, and services for Rhode Island’s most vulnerable populations.

Despite significant legislative and public support Governor Chafee has blocked efforts to end the failed tax cuts to the wealthiest Rhode Islanders during his time in the Statehouse. It’s time for change!

That’s why Ocean State Action is teaming up with Rhode Islanders for Tax Equity (RITE is a coalition of labor and community groups fighting to restore tax equity) to call on the wealthiest Rhode Islanders to join the rest of us in rebuilding our economy.

CLICK HERE to Tell Chafee to end tax breaks for the wealthy in his budget this year.  

It’s time to get Rhode Island back on the right track, join us today!

Blame Gina Raimondo? Not So Fast, Progressives


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Raimondo speaks with retiree
Image courtesy New York Times

Regular readers of the blog know that Treasurer Raimondo has become a lightening-rod for criticism of the state’s recent changes to the public employee pension system.

As a tactic, I’ll admit it’s a good one, simultaneously riling up the base and drawing media attention to the union and retiree’s position. It’s also the first salvo in what’s bound to be a contentious Democratic primary for the Governor’s office. But is the General Treasurer actually at fault? Consider the duties of the office.

Duties
The General Treasurer receives and disburses all state funds, issues general obligation notes and bonds, manages the investment of state funds and oversees the retirement system for state employees, teachers and some municipal employees. She is also responsible for the management of the Unclaimed Property Division, the Crime Victim Compensation Program and the state-sponsored CollegeBoundfund.

Noticeably absent is any mention of negotiating union contracts. That’s simply not her job. What critics would have you believe is that Treasurer Raimondo should have essentially “gone rogue” and usurped the Governor’s duties and possibly those of the General Assembly. L’état, c’est Gina? I’m not convinced. This blog has even gone so far as to suggest that the General Treasurer should be more concerned with “main street” than with the state’s investments and bond rating.

I’ve been a fairly consistent Raimondo supporter, but I was also present at last year’s State House protest adding my voice to the position that the plan asked too much of the neediest pension recipients. In fact I agree, as Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Healthcare Professionals president Frank Flynn put it, that it’s “not a simple math problem as some people describe it.”  But that isn’t the job of the General Treasurer. For a treasurer, it is a math problem, and we shouldn’t expect otherwise.

And Raimondo spent an inordinate amount of time speaking with voters, union members, and retirees throughout the state before making her proposal. Oddly that’s what now seems to rile opponents. As Paul Valletta, the head of the Cranston fire fighters’ union said, “It isn’t the money, it’s the way she went about it.”

I’m not sure what else she could have done. Valletta is essentially complaining that the General Treasurer acted within the duties of the General Treasurer. That’s what we as taxpayers pay her to do! If the unions and retirees are unhappy with the absence of a formerly negotiated outcome, let’s be honest. It’s the Governor, not the General Treasurer, who’s to blame.

I’ve also been concerned that many progressives seem intent on framing the General Treasurer as some union hating, right-wing ideologue. It’s not a fair characterization given that we know little yet about what priorities Raimondo would bring to the Governor’s office, and what we do know is largely in line with progressive priorities (a social liberal who believes in marriage equality and respects the rights of immigrants). During the Carcieri years, we’d have been thrilled with a candidate with progressive credentials a fraction of hers. Yes, she has been at the forefront of a pension reform movement heralded largely by the fringe right. But to assume that makes her one of the fringe right, ignores how seriously underfunded the pensions have been here in Rhode Island. It’s quite a different thing to enact reform out of a sense of obligation than to do so because of an ideological desire to eliminate them entirely.

Ms. Raimondo also learned early on about economic forces at work in her state. When she was in sixth grade, the Bulova watch factory, where her father worked, shut its doors. He was forced to retire early, on a sharply reduced pension; he then juggled part-time jobs.

“You can’t let people think that something’s going to be there if it’s not,” Ms. Raimondo said in an interview in her office in the pillared Statehouse, atop a hill in Providence. No one should be blindsided, she said. If pensions are in trouble, it’s better to deliver the news and give people time to make other plans.

How much easier it would have been, how much less detrimental to her political future (at least with the progressives of the state) to simply enact some changes around the margins and kick the can down the road for someone else to address (historical the way most pols have handled the problem). Should we as progressives be critical of the Raimondo plan? Absolutely, but let’s not shoot down a potential rising star before she’s even had a chance to announce her platform.

No Shield Against the Results of Public Speech


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 the other day I received this email shortly after an article I wrote appeared in RI Future (I’ve only edited it due to some sentence breaks:

Sam;

Publishing the contents of the OP discussion list serve on -line with links at RI Future blog is a violation of our safety/security policies.

Of course, anyone is free to criticize OP, publicly or on the list itself, but exposing the discussion list to the public is not acceptable.

Unfortunately, this is seen by OP as a serious infraction.of our rules for the list. We have had to ask members of the press to leave the list for that exact reason – they wouldn’t respect OP confidentially on its’ list..

We’re requesting that you remove yourself from the OP discussion list.

solidarity;

[Name Redacted]

Well, I’m a good sport, so I fired back this:

I’m sorry, I thought Occupy was committed to a higher level of openness and communication; you know, that the 99% should be able to see the 99%’s list. I’m sorry that’s not the case. Go ahead and remove me.

Sincerely,
Sam
Which lead to this reply that I’ve since sat on:
Sam; I hope this is just a misunderstanding. When people post to the OP discussion list, they have to have a certain level of trust that their posts will not be published in the [public] media (certainly not without their prior permission). That’s just common sense. In the past, people have been targeted by the government, employers (lost jobs), and been the subject of harassment for belonging to social protest movements like Occupy. For instance: there’s currently a war on public education, a war on women, and a war on the middle class, designed, engineered and promulgated by both parties – a broad austerity and state security agenda that we’re opposed to. We have teachers, students, and working people in our movement – people who could be targeted and hurt from exposure. In case you haven’t noticed, the US is not really a ‘free’ society anymore. Publishing the contents of emails from the OP list is wrong on so many levels and has nothing to do with any perceived ‘higher openness’. That’s not the same thing as publicly criticizing OP’s tactics or ideas. The right wing does that all the time and we’re perfectly capable of publicly defending our ideas and tactics, but we draw the line at intentionally opening up our people to potential harassment, intimidation, and reprisals. We don’t really want you to leave the list, but do need your promise that you will not publish or publicly expose posts, discussions, threads, etc.from the OP list. If you will make that commitment and agree not to in the future, we’re perfectly happy to have you stay on the list and participate in OP activity. If you feel that you can’t agree to this, then we will have to agree to disagree and you will be removed.
There’s a lot to unpack in that statement. There’s a lot I agree with. I mean, honestly I didn’t need to share this list. As long as I could quote people (even if it’s anonymously) Occupy Providence benefits. The more I can see and read what they’re thinking, the more they benefit. And I’m with the writer on a number of points; austerity is the best example.
But there’s a lot I disagree with here. First, that the United States “is not really a ‘free’ society anymore.” I disagree. That’s a philosophical, personal disagreement, but I think the experience of Occupy sort of proves that. Police have not been hunting down its members. Occupy members have not been disappeared. Certainly, many were infiltrated by police, and the Department of Homeland Security was involved in coordinating crackdowns. But frankly, if police officers are competent, the police already have the names of everyone who ever signed on to Occupy Providence’s email list (enough people were getting those initial emails that it seems impossible to maintain security. Besides which, Occupy Providence ended with a negotiated decampment when the city was within its legal rights to forcibly clear it away.
The other thing is this break from the past and even from the present. This large disconnect about civil disobedience. Occupy often claims to draw inspiration from sources as varied as the Civil Rights Movement or the Arab Spring. But what it reminds me of is Take Back NYU. If you don’t remember it, or haven’t heard about it, here’s the embedded student reporter giving his thoughts after it ended. There’s also a good “7 Errors” post. From the slogans (e.g., “Occupy Everything”) to the tactics, to the organization, TBNYU is far more Occupy’s predecessor than any Arab Spring Revolution or Civil Rights Movement.
In the past, yes, social movements have been subjected to government and private harassment, intimidation, and reprisals. But you know what: they faced those down. Otherwise, this doesn’t happen. Or this. Or this (warning: contains filmed murder). See, a social movement lays down its life in pursuit of a higher goal. In fact, every time an act of intimidation happens, you protest it. If a member is fired due to their political beliefs, you go and protest their workplace and draw attention to it. If government harasses your members, you protest the department harassing them. Or you do something drastic.
You also have to be protesting the right thing. The day after 38 Studios went bankrupt and the state announced a criminal investigation, I went and visited the Occupy table to learn if they meant literal “bailout” or if they meant paying back the loans. A protestor assured me that it was a bailout situation, and that Governor Lincoln Chafee was completely behind a bailout and had indeed wanted to bring 38 Studios to Rhode Island. News, I’m sure, to the Governor, who is on record opposing both the initial deal and any potential bailout. The other “protestor” didn’t know what we were talking about.
It infuriates me. Right now, other Occupy movements are blocking the fraudulent mass foreclosures on people’s homes. American labor is marching and organizing to defend their hard-won rights. There are movements in Canada and Chile protesting in support of education (the Canadian one has really begun to focus on debt). Arab nations are or have been in full-scale civil war over the lack of democracy in their nations. And what was the most recent thing that Occupy Providence did: setup an occupation across the street from a conference of lefty bloggers (although admittedly, they did turn out to protest on behalf of the tax equity bill). I think the really ironic part of the occupation was that though it was aimed at Netroots Nation, they were sleeping next to the Providence Journal‘s building; which is seeking $5 million from the city (Netroots Nation was estimated to bring in $3.5 million to the local economy). If Occupy Providence had turned to face the other direction, they would’ve looked prescient.
If Occupy Providence wants to eject journalists from reading its listserv, alright. Privacy is fine and good. But don’t expect me to sympathize with your members who are protesting social injustice if they don’t understand they’re going to be subjected to that injustice. Every time I write for RI Future, I make a decision; is speaking my mind more important than protecting my ability to be hired or to do a job? I’ve always said “yes, it is.” I’m fortunate enough to have an employer that respects that. But there is no guarantee that in the future I won’t be applying to jobs where the people don’t respect that; where my well-broadcast opinions will become liabilities. I’ve made that decision, and I understand that there is no possibility of going back.
Every time we go out into the public square to protest, we are making a statement: my individual fate is nothing compared to the fate of my friends, family and the society in which I live, and I accept the consequences of these actions. Those who try to mitigate this statement by attempting to shield themselves from the consequences create dying movements. Those who have the integrity to embrace it embrace a better future.

Feds v. States: Who Decides Death Penalty Fight


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

Can the Feds order a state to execute a man?  This is the question that the Supreme Court may ultimately answer regarding Jason Pleau, arrested last year for killing a man during a robbery.  What appeared to be a routine case in Rhode Island, a state of one million people that averages about 30 murders per year, has turned into a legal battle about state’s rights, the 10th Amendment, and the Death Penalty.  And the question of whether a Governor can ever defy a President.

The federal death penalty is legal in every state in America.  There are over 30 federal statutes authorizing the death penalty for any American, including a generic 1st Degree Murder, and it would be difficult to imagine a case that would not qualify under federal law.  Certainly when the people of Rhode Island eliminated the death penalty, they did not consider it would be alright if a courthouse bearing the “United States” logo rather than the Rhode Island “Hope” motto, could sentence a man to die.  The same jury pool of Rhode Islanders would be drawn upon, yet anyone with an objection to the death penalty would be barred from serving on the jury.

Attorney General Eric Holder amended the Federal Death Penalty Protocol (DPP) last year, in an attempt to assist Attorneys General such as Peter Neronha (District of RI) regarding when to seek this punishment.  There is no regard as to whether a state has abolished the death penalty or not, but states that the Feds should only take the case from a state when “the Federal interest in the prosecution is more substantial than the state or local authorities.”  Here, the only factor that seems to apply is the vague “ability and willingness for the state to obtain an appropriate punishment upon conviction.”  Perhaps this is a snub at RI State Attorney General Peter Kilmartin, a career police officer who apparently never handled a felony case.

The DPP guidelines do suggest that victims’ family members be consulted, yet this is a quandry in prosecutions: whether the government stands in for a particular victim, or an entire state.  A victim’s family in Mississippi tried to stop the execution of Henry Curtis Jackson.  He was instead killed by lethal injection yesterday.

After sentencing Jason Pleau to 18 years in state prison for parole and probation violations, a federal grand jury indicted him.  The U.S. Attorney then put in a request to take him into custody under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IAD).   Governor Lincoln Chaffee (known as the Republican who opposed President Bush on the Iraq war and domestic wiretapping) denied the request under Article IV of the IAD.  The feds then tried to evade this federal Act with a second type of request.  The state asserts that once the federal government puts in a “hold” under the IAD, all future requests to produce Pleau are covered by the provisions of the IAD- no matter what you name it.  This is how it played out, and a three-judge panel of the First Circuit agreed (2 to 1) with Gov. Chaffee, who believes the only reason the federal government would want Jason Pleau is to execute him.  Particularly after Pleau agreed to serve Life Without Parole in state prison.  This is known as the Other Death Penalty.

The Obama Administration, however, asserts that their request was not covered by the IAD for two reasons: (1) the Habeas Corpus ad Prosequendum they filed is outside of the IAD procedures, and (2) the federal government reigns supreme (as laid out in the Supremacy Clause of the constitution) and a governor cannot refuse the request.  The problem with the Feds’ first issue is that the traditional method of transferring prisoners between jurisdictions has been supplanted by the IAD, and they did in fact begin IAD procedures prior to the traditional Habeas.  The title of the paperwork is irrelevant, and the First Circuit agrees.  As for the Supremacy Clause argument, it is difficult for the United States to say they do not need to obey the IAD when they are listed as a party, along with 50 states, D.C., Puerto Rico, and others.  If they have some special status, why bother writing rules that apply to the United States at all?

The First Circuit Court of Appeals, however, credits the United States with the trump card: the Supremacy Clause.  Three judges interpreted a key case to mean the U.S. is above the limitations of the IAD.  Two judges, in their scathing dissent, took the majority to task for what they feel was an “unprincipled” misreading of the key case, U.S. v. Mauro, 436 U.S. 340 (1978).  The dissenting two justices called the ruling “unwarranted and unprecedented,” and “fails the test of common sense.”  As it stands, the split opinions of five judges are the difference between putting the executioner’s hood over the heads of a Rhode Island jury.

It was only a year ago that I, and about a dozen others, testified in the Rhode Island legislature’s bill to posthumously pardon the last man murdered by the People.  Historians testified about the malice of a vindictive crowd, and the racist furor that suspended rational judgment: someone had to pay.  In 1844 it was John Gordon, and seven years later this punishment was abolished for it.  The Public Defender spoke about the current need for best practices in eye-witness identifications and the necessity of videotaped confessions (two reforms advancing in RI).  I spoke about how a similar pair of Irish scapegoats, the Brennan brothers, were railroaded in 1984 for the murder of an Italian landlord in Providence.  They are still in prison.  Here, nobody has argued that Jason Pleau, who was once the catcher on my softball team, is innocent.  However, death penalty supporters are just as certain of guilt when a convicted person is later exonerated.

Rhode Island has filed a petition for certiorari, seeking review in the U.S. Supreme Court.  Justices may find their ideologies torn, such as Antonin Scalia who often speaks of states’ rights in the face of an overbearing federal government, yet he rarely finds a wrong when it comes to the power of the government to exert police powers, and administer the death penalty.  Some say that judges take a moral position, and then manipulate the law to reach it.  Yet as to whether the IAD applies to the federal government, it will be difficult to get around Article II, which reads “(a) ‘State’ shall mean a State of the United States; the United States of America; a territory or possession …”    It will also be difficult to affirm the First Circuit’s belief that Governor Chaffee can’t deny the federal government, where the Act reads “the Governor of the sending State may disapprove the request for temporary custody.”

To do so, the Court might have to say Congress lacked the authority to grant a Governor power over the federal government.  Yet the federal government signed onto this agreement, and now they want out.  Those who advocate for States Rights use it to define marriage, gun laws, and many other issues (it once was a code word for allowing Jim Crow laws), including the Death Penalty.  This legal battle will cost the taxpayers about a million dollars, just to see what will happen to Jason Pleau, a man that none of them likely care an iota about.  Sometimes I wonder what gets people up in the morning.

Homeless Bill of Rights Passes General Assembly


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

To applause from the gallery on both sides, the Homeless Bill of Rights passed out of the General Assembly and now heads to the Governor’s desk for signing.

Officially titled the Rhode Island Fair Housing Practices Act, it was introduced in both chambers back in January. A revised version passed the Senate on May 2nd. But the House had shown little movement, and advocates feared it being “held for further study” meant that it would not be passed. However, on June 10th it was suddenly scheduled in the House Judiciary Committee for consideration, and a new revised version passed out of that committee on Tuesday, then being added to the House Calendar.

With zero debate, it passed 60-5. That version was then submitted to the Senate, where it was also passed, in a 33-2 vote.

The Homeless Bill of Rights acts to prevent discrimination against homeless people by various state and local agencies as well as employers and medical facilities.* According to advocates, if signed by Governor Lincoln Chafee, it would be the first of its kind in the nation.

The legislation was sponsored by retiring Senator John Tassoni in the Senate and freshman Representative Chris Blazejewski in the House.

 

UPDATE: Due to reader comments about the nature of these bills, it seems prudent to expand the original article.

What the Homeless Bill of Rights does is prevent harassment or discrimination towards homeless people. This means kicking people off of park benches or out of libraries when they’re not doing anything wrong. It means that when someone applies for a job, the fact that their mailing address is listed as a shelter can’t be used as a reason to reject them. It means that a homeless person can’t have their stuff seized or searched if they’re not causing trouble. Basically, if the Governor signs this, it’s now a little bit easier for the homeless to enjoy all the little niceties of public life.

_________________________

Correction: An earlier version of this article stated “businesses” instead of “employers and medical facilities.” Thank you to our keen readers for pointing this out.

As Legislature Spends Money, Cities Feel Pinch


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
Woonsocket High School (photo courtesy of Woonsocket School District)
Woonsocket High School (photo courtesy of Woonsocket School District)
Woonsocket High School (photo courtesy of Woonsocket School District)

I see from the Providence Journal that the new state-appointed budget commission has decided that the city council and Mayor Fontaine were exactly right to request permission from the state to impose a supplemental tax increase on their citizens.

Last week, after an impassioned speech by Rep. Lisa Baldelli-Hunt, the House rejected Woonsocket’s request.  This week, the state-appointed budget commission asked that the request be reconsidered.

For some reason state legislators seem to get this idea in their heads that though they were elected on promises of fiscal responsibility, and intend to carry through on them, city council members and mayors get elected by promising to spend like drunken sailors.

This is not only bizarre, but entirely backwards.

By almost any measurement you care to make, it’s the state that has been the fiscal problem child over the past couple of decades, not the cities and towns. The difference is that the state has power over the cities and towns: they have more money, and stand uphill in a legal and constitutional sense, too.  But the General Assembly continues to resist the appeals of the duly elected leaders of our cities and towns, feeling that they know better.

This year, Governor Chafee infuriated organized labor by offering several “tools” to municipal officials to help them control pension costs.  I tend to agree with the labor folks here, that the state should stay out of these issues, and that passing state laws to trump local bargaining agreements is only a good idea in a very limited short-term sense.  But the Assembly has shown no interest in believing Mayors when they complain about financial stress, so if you don’t want more bankrupt cities, what should you do?  It seems to me that Chafee wasn’t so much sticking his thumb in Labor’s eye as making a realistic assessment of the Assembly and acting accordingly.

Or maybe not.  It appears that the Assembly leadership isn’t interested in Chafee’s suggestions, and pretty much none of them were put into the House budget.  This reminds me of the time in 2005 when the Carcieri administration came up with some personnel reforms that might have saved around $32 million.  They were the usual sort of benefit cuts, limits on vacation time and sick time and an end to “statutory status” which is a kind of state employee tenure.

Whatever you think about the wisdom of those reforms, it’s hard to praise the Assembly for what happened next.  The legislature rejected the reforms — but left the $32 million in savings in the budget.  So the administration was faced with finding $32 million in savings, but without the law changes to do it.  How, exactly was that responsible?

So now the Assembly is poised to do the exact same thing, and act to increase the pressure on cities and towns — not enough money to support their commitments, but no relief from those commitments, either.  The only difference this year from previous years is that now we have some Assembly appointees joining the Mayors in the hot seat, begging that they not be put in the same position as the Mayor and City Council of Woonsocket.  Mayor Leo Fontaine and the Council have failed to keep Woonsocket solvent, but a new budget commission won’t do any better unless the conditions change.  Right now, the only way the conditions will change is through the bankruptcy court, so mark your calendars.  I simply can’t agree with the people who imagine that dragging each of our cities into bankruptcy is a sensible strategy — in either the long or short term — for our state.

The Assembly can act here.  Sensible options are available, that take into account the actual realities facing our cities.  But will it?  So far, it does not appear likely.

Governor Chafee On RI: ‘We’ve Hit Rock Bottom’


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
Mayor Grebien Gov Chafee
Mayor Grebien Gov Chafee
Pawtucket Mayor Don Grebien pleads for the municipal aid package as Gov. Chafee listens.

In an Economist article entitled “Bankruptcy in Rhode Island“, Governor Lincoln Chafee is quoted as saying “We’ve hit rock bottom in this state”. And, frankly, I don’t know how to take it.

The article is about the municipal budget problems that are cropping up across the Rhode Island. Essentially, as we well know, Rhode Island is undergoing austerity, and in ways that of course fall mostly on those that can least afford it (as Rolling Stone‘s Matt Taibbi has pointed out, austerity only applies to regular people). The recent showings in Greece and France, where anti-austerity forces triumphed and expanded (turning Europe back towards fascism and communism as it did in the post-WW1 era), provide continued support to my thesis that austerity overthrows its own enactors. And that’s to say nothing of Italy, where in local provincial elections, an anti-austerity political party set up by a comedian thrashed the parties in government.

The problem for Gov. Chafee is that he and the General Assembly are largely responsible for Rhode Island’s austerity crisis (indeed, the General Assembly can only blame themselves). But for the small caucus of progressives in both the House and Senate, even most Democratic legislators are pro-austerity.

Rhode Island is not even blessed with an anti-austerity third party (the Moderates are pro-austerity). Certainly, that party would be hamstrung by its lack of association with a viable national political party. Since anything coming out of the right would be DOA, any such party would have to partly modeled on the Vermont Progressive Party. And let’s face it, large swathes of political players in Rhode Island are completely tied to the current model of politics as it is now; changing that threatens much of the work that’s done to understand and operate in the system that many, many organizations have built up. The work towards change is largely focused on working within the Democratic dynamic, which leaves progressives particularly open to co-optation by the demands of various party factions when they come to power.

But even that sort of wishful thinking ignores what Gov. Chafee said. Rhode Island is at rock bottom, and if the Governor is wrong, it’s only because we have further to fall. We’re completely shot through, economically, we’re devastated. And yet, the policy makers, like a man stuck at the bottom of a very deep hole, can only find ways to chew off their own hands rather then reach for ways out. If you’re not convinced, read URI economics professor Len Ladardo’s blog, which has been positing that Rhode Island is struggling to prevent a double dip recession for a while now (Mr. Ladardo is now telling RIPR’s Ian Donnis that Rhode Island needs deep structural changes). Or you could read GoLocalProv’s recent no-duh inflammatory headline. Yet the reality is that no matter whether you’re a conservative or liberal, objectivist or socialist, no one has a clear way forward out of our economic disaster. I particularly find “let the free market sort this out” arguments entirely unconvincing, because the free market got us into this mess.

What is striking to me, and maybe this is due to editing on the Economist’s part, is that there’s no sugar-coating on the Governor’s words. There isn’t even a “but Rhode Islanders have the strength to pull through.” It’s a grim statement, because the reality is very, very grim. Luckily we have Hope in this state. And we’re going to need it.

Electoral Abstinence: Choosing None of the Above


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
Expect the President's reelection campaign to be far tougher than 2008

Thousands of Rhode Islanders went to work today (or looked for work) instead of to the polls. Maybe they were going to vote, but then decided they just wanted to go home. Or maybe they didn’t like the candidates. Or maybe they just didn’t know where their local polling place was. They’ll all be counted as people who didn’t vote.

I didn’t go to my local polling place either, even though it’s a short walk (or even shorter bike ride) from where I live. It wasn’t that I don’t think that the delegate candidates don’t deserve to go Charlotte (or Tampa, if that’s your preference). It’s that I don’t want who they’re voting for. Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich; not matter who a delegate is pledged to, what’s the point?

France held its first round of presidential elections on the weekended. U.S. media was keen to tell us how the process works. And buried in this Slate article about Socialist candidate Francois Hollande’s use of an Obama-style get-out-the-vote operation was the idea that the 30% of people who didn’t vote are termed “les abstentionnistes” which I think translates into “the abstainers.” The article makes the point that in France, not voting is constructed as a conscious choice, versus the American idea that not voting is a sign of laziness or inability or apathy.

So I abstained. I made a conscious choice. And, believe it or not, plenty of people made this choice too. When we think about why people don’t turn out, there are certainly plenty of reforms we can make to lower the bar to participation (a week long celebratory holiday for voting was suggested by a teacher once and is my favorite idea). But we also need to focus on why should I turn out for Candidate X. And that’s on Candidate X.

In this case, it’s on President Obama. I voted for President Obama twice, once against Hillary Clinton and once again against John McCain. In 2008, there were a lot of reasons to go to the polls and vote. Sarah Palin as vice president, the traditional idea of Democrats as the solution to economic depressions, the worst stock market crash since 1929, etc. September 2008 had unleashed the idea that Democrats would attempt a second New Deal in many people my age. We had hope, and we voted for change. And we really thought things were going to change.

This woman could've become Vice President.

The President betrayed that hope, and he didn’t bring change. He expanded the scope of the War on Terror to include American citizens, doubled down on the War on Drugs, continues to issue signing statements, failed to push for a strong enough stimulus, fails to forcefully push for LGBT rights; and surrounds himself with Wall Street hacks largely responsible for the crisis (Larry Summers isn’t “change you can believe in”); Mr. Obama has proved over and over that he is a Third Way Democrat; Bill Clinton without the panache or economic rebound. Is it any wonder large portions of Mr. Obama’s voters stayed home in 2010? He hadn’t given them anything to believe in since inauguration day. And his party got shellacked for it.

Occupy Wall Street contains plenty of youth who are angry with the President. The ability of a largely disenchanted and unemployed youth to turn the nation conversation on economics away from the national debt and towards economic inequality proves just how important they are to politics. Even Republicans picked up on this.

OWS’ major flaw is their antipathy towards electoral politics, but understandable, given that their faith in Barack Obama was rewarded with the half-measures and inept political maneuvering that define his presidency. The healthcare plan enacted, while having some great upsides, is emblematic of this. One of its defenses has been “but the Heritage Foundation originated it!” This neither eases conservative anger nor does it rally progressives and liberals.

President Obama should be a lesson for all Democrats and anyone who uses progressives as part of their electoral coalition. David Cicilline is facing the toughest election of his political career. Turning to a populist, energized campaign based on strong, deliverable ideological issues would move the campaign beyond Providence’s finances. It would also pick up dedicated support from inventing young people. Allowing his campaign to become a referendum on the Democratic Party makes his general election prospects dim, as well as his primary ones. Both Mr. Cicilline and challenger Anthony Gemma are going to use the following phrases: “grassroots support” “protect Social Security” “failed Republican policies”. The only thing that will distinguish them are their stances on abortion, unless Mr. Gemma flips.

Governor Lincoln Chafee was largely elected on a progressive coalition that saw Frank Caprio and John Robataille as symptomatic of the Republicrat-Democan system (for more of that, see our editor Bob Plain’s reporting on ALEC). Unfortunately, he’s largely fallen into that dynamic, and has essentially abandoned his progressive followers. If he runs in a three-way race again in 2014 (assuming he doesn’t change parties once again), energizing those progressives will be important.

So, given that candidates are well-versed in not delivering anything, is it any wonder so many people abstained rather than vote for a delegate to go “aye” for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?

Budgeting for Disaster VI: DMV Manages for Success


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
FY2013 budget

FY2013 budget

One part of the Department of Administration that gets a lot of press is the Department of Motor Vehicles, which is actually a unit of the Department of Revenue. DMV, of course, gets press because people don’t like it, and the lines are long, and it’s in an inconvenient place, and so on and on.

Over last spring and summer, the agency saw a turnaround. Spurred on by stories of multiple-hour wait times, Governor Chafee appointed a new director, who made some management changes, shuffled people around, re-engineered the lines, put “greeters” out front to explain things, closed some satellite branches, and generally shook things up. Lo and behold, the wait times plummeted. An inspiring tale of how good management can make all the difference? A story of re-inventing government to do more with less in the 21st century? Well sort of, but not quite.

Watching the ticking clock in line at DMV has been a part of life for all of us in Rhode Island for a long time, but it’s not right to say that it’s been a neglected problem. Lincoln Almond suggested adding $300,000 per year to expand their hours, and Don Carcieri made a point of “fixing” it, too. He even listed new efficiencies and reduced wait times as one of his accomplishments in a 2004 interview.

But time went on and service decayed until it took hours just for routine business to happen. I waited there with my daughter for three excruciating hours one fine day in 2010, along with about three hundred good friends. By the time Lincoln Chafee took office, DMV was a joke, a travesty of government service. Chafee brought in a new interim director, Lisa Holley, to troubleshoot the agency, and — what do you know? — she got results. Wait times shrank dramatically and while it’s still hard to describe a visit to the DMV as a pleasure, the last time I was in one, last August, I was in and out in 25 minutes.

So what happened? What management magic did Holley bring to the agency? What lessons can we learn? Mostly just that it takes people to do the work.

In the dark days of 2004, when Don Carcieri was taking credit for improving wait times, he was adding employees, and adding satellite locations. You can see the progress in the graph to the right, which counts customer service representatives in the department. Service got better with the new workers, and a little worse with the satellite offices. But then around 2006, Carcieri decided it was ok to let the service decay a little bit. He said the state had too many employees, and he started to enforce the statewide hiring freeze on DMV. And then the retirement fiasco of 2009 came, and a bunch of people left, and so in 2010 you had all the satellite locations, and 22% fewer people to stand behind all those desks.

And that’s the crazy thing about management by attrition: you don’t get to plan for the loss of people. Carcieri simply said we’re not hiring any new people and we’re going to encourage people to retire, and that’s that. The only surprise was that people were surprised that service suffered — a lot.

So again, what management magic did Holley bring? She insisted on having more people, that’s what. Chafee asked the Assembly for 25 new workers. They balked, but they did cough up some, and so now there are almost as many people on the customer-facing staff as there were in 2006, at half as many locations. Of course there were some other improvements: line management systems, those greeters, a redivision of labor. But sometimes the big story is the simpler one: we got better service with more people.

There is another story I see lurking here. Governor Chafee saw a problem of poor service and acted to fix it, while Governor Carcieri saw the problem in terms of taxes, and acted to fix that instead, mostly by giving tax cuts to rich people. How did that work out for you?

There is one other feature to the DMV budget that should not go unremarked while we’re here. The RIMS computer system that was supposed to create a whole new class of efficiencies by getting all of DMV’s information about you in a single database is quite a bit behind schedule and over budget. This is pretty much SOP in the database development world, public and private. That is, it’s a shame and a waste of state dollars, but it’s not exactly unprecedented. I bring it up at least in part because you can’t exactly see it in the budget presentation, but you can see it in the Capital Budget, which we’ll get to soon.

NEXT: The Quasi-Publics
Read the previous posts in this series

Chafee: State Aid Cuts Put Poor Towns in Peril


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
Governor Chafee said state aid cuts to cities and towns is a primary reason Rhode Island's poorest communities are struggling.

Governor Chafee said former Governor Don Carcieri and the General Assembly put struggling communities in peril when they cut some $195 million in state aid to cities and towns.

“It’s no wonder Providence is in trouble, it’s no wonder Pawtucket is having a trouble making payroll, it’s no wonder Central Falls went into bankruptcy,”  he said after speaking at a conference on the state’s economy at Bryant University today. “They just couldn’t sustain those kinds of cuts. There is no property tax base to transfer those kinds of cuts onto.”

Chafee said Carcieri and the General Assembly essentially balanced the state’s budget by taking money away from cities and towns – a move that he said the state’s wealthy communities could withstand but the poorer communities could not.

“I thought it was the path of least resistance,” he said. “That way they could go and say we didn’t raise taxes but at the same time they did raise taxes on the property tax payers of those communities. It was a little disingenuous to say we’re not raising taxes when you are passing it down to the property tax payers of the distressed communities.”

He said he would be unveiling a bill “later this week” that will help Rhode Island’s cities and towns. In addition to including enabling legislation that will allow cities and towns to rework annual pension increases as well as addition funding for local school districts. The additional school spending, he hopes, will be paid for by his proposed increase in the meals and beverage tax.

His bill will also include, he said, relief from state mandates for some of the state’s poorest communities, such as Providence, Pawtucket, Woonsocket and West Warwick. Other communities could be included as well, but he indicated it would not provide mandate relief for every community in the state.

He wouldn’t say which mandates would be included.

“It’s the usual suspects,” he said. “They are the ones that many of the town managers and mayors have been talking about for decades.”

Progress Report: Whitehouse fights Super PACs, Gemma on Jobs, Chafee Muni Bill, Medical Marijuana and more


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

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

Rhode Island progressives, indeed progressives across the country, should be happy Sheldon Whitehouse is a Senator. Not only has he sponsored the Buffett Rule tax code improvement that would prevent millionaires from evading paying taxes on their earnings, he’s also leading the fight against Super PACs and the Citizen United SCOTUS decision, the Projo reports this morning.

“Whitehouse leads a group of liberal Senate Democrats who hope to fashion a strategy for their party to enact legislation to blunt — or at least cast more light on — the effects of a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that has changed the campaign-finance landscape,” reports the john Mulligan, the Projo’s Washington correspondent. “The decision, known as Citizens United, has given rise to a new brand of political action committee — super PACs in campaign parlance — that are not bound by earlier limits on campaign contributions.”

…Speaking of congressional politics, Anthony Gemma, who is still considering challenging David Cicilline in the Democratic primary for the CD1 seat in Congress, pens an op-ed in the Projo today about his plan to create jobs in Rhode Island.

His plan includes making Rhode Island “the center of America’s $125 billion wellness industry; encouraging additional job growth in the rapidly expanding health-care industry,” tax credits for green construction and making a higher education more attainable for the local workforce. It all sounds good, but making it happen is another story.

Here at Rhode Island’s Future, we’re still waiting with baited breath to see if David Segal will also throw his hat into the ring.

…On the state level, Ian Donnis of RINPR, reports that Gov. Chafee “is expected later this week to unveil his long-anticipated bill for aiding municipalities.” Here’s hoping that bill does more than just give mayors a tool to cut pensions, as that really isn’t the core problem for struggling cities and towns – despite the MSM constantly beating that drum.

…Providence Business News has a great comprehensive look at the fits and starts of Rhode Island’s proposed medical marijuana compassion centers. TurnTo10.com, on the other hand, has a story about a patient in the program who was robbed of two ounces of medicine. It’s worth noting that if patients could get their prescriptions filled at a dispensary, it would make it much harder for them to being targeted by the criminal elements associated with cannabis.

…Congrats go out this morning to two RI Future contributors. The first is Paula Hodges, who heads up the Rhode Island offices for Planned Parenthood. GoLocalProv gives her their power player treatment this morning. The other goes to Samuel Howard, one of our most prolific writers, who got a nice compliment from Ted Nesi, WPRI’s blogger-in-chief, in a recent post.

Rep. Lima to Introduce Voter ID Repeal Legislation


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

Watch for Rep. Charlene Lima to introduce legislation today to repeal the Voter ID bill that passed last session and was signed by Governor Chafee.  She has been circulating the legislation in the House and has about 15 co-sponsors.  It will likely be coming today in tandem with her press statement which was not completed yesterday.

While I’m a big fan of clean elections, I do not support Voter ID because it doesn’t actually fix any of the problems that its advocates seemingly imagine are rampant.  Clearly, Voter ID will prevent the impersonation of another individual at a polling station.  I will not be able to cast a ballot in South Providence this year claiming to be Sen. Harold Metts, and that is a good thing.  But in a state that went to such great lengths to restore the vote of the formerly incarcerated, it is unfortunate that Rhode Island enacted this legislation to correct a problem that doesn’t actually exist in any meaningful way.  The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law puts it like this:

Such photo ID laws are effective only in preventing individuals from impersonating other voters at the polls — an occurrence more rare than getting struck by lightning.

Voter ID merely takes a snapshot in time (quite literally) of individual voters and freezes it.  Once the IDs are issued, there is no follow up to determine residence in future elections.  Voter ID doesn’t prevent people from moving from one district to another and vote in the former district, or double voting, which are what I image fraudulent voting to be.  However, the marginal benefit of voting in one district over another is exactly one vote, out of hundred, thousands, or tens of thousands (depending on the election), which is exactly why it so rarely happens.  When was the last time an election was decided by a single vote?  What Voter ID also ignores is election fraud, which is much more significant an issue, but does not involve voters at all.  To quote Scott MacKay on this point:

In recent memory, Rhode Island political chicanery has not involved imposter voters. From Almeida to Zambarano, Cianci to Celona, Martineau to Maselli, it’s been the politicians, not the voters, who have been guilty of corruption.

Here are some clear examples of what Voter ID doesn’t do:

  • Case 1: I am a college student living in Providence and register to vote upon arrival.  After my first year I move out of the dorms into another district, but continue to vote in my original district using my Student ID.  Voter ID does not prevent this.
  • Case 2: I am a business owner living in Smithfield, but operating a business in Johnston.  I use the utility bill for my business, addressed to me, as proof of my residence.  I vote in Johnston, rather than Smithfield.  Voter ID does not prevent this.
  • Case 3: I use a piece of mail delivered to my house, but addressed to the previous resident, as proof of my residence.  I register to vote using this different name and vote twice using two different identities.  Voter ID does not prevent this.
  • Case 4: Provisional ballots, which are valid once the signature on the ballot is verified as matching the signature on the original voter registration form, will be used for everyone who did not bring an ID to the polling booth.  I forge my address on the voter registration form, never bring an ID to vote, and cast provisional ballots at every election in a district where I do not reside.  Voter ID does not prevent this.
  • Case 5:  There is another person named Brian Hull who lives in the same neighborhood in Providence (he was also born in the same year I was).  He never registered to vote, but votes at our local precinct, before I do.  My name gets crossed off as having voted when I did not actually vote.  When I appear at the polling place, I am unable to vote because the other Brian Hull already voted.  Voter ID does not prevent this.
  • Case 6: There are about 1,400 registered voters on Block Island, a community which has a voting age population of just 825?  Voter ID does not prevent this.

To its credit, the Secretary of State’s office understands the legitimate concerns voters have regarding the use of photo IDs to cast a ballots and it began issuing free Voter ID cards earlier this month, albeit during working hours of 8:30-4:30, Monday through Friday (I suppose if you are lucky enough to have a job, good luck getting a Voter ID if you need one).  For the period of time between January 3rd (when the Secretary of State first began issuing IDs) and close of business on January 18th, a total of 17 IDs were created and will be mailed out soon.  To increase the issuance rate, Mollis’ office will be going to Senior Centers and community groups to provide Voter IDs (you just have to contact the Secretary of State’s office to arrange this).  While this will be helpful, it does not actually address the problems likely to be caused by implementation of Voter ID: transient, homeless, elderly, and other population groups that already suffer from underrepresentation will be denied the right to cast a non-provisional ballot when they go to vote for lack of the proper Voter ID.

Here is the press release from Rep. Lima:

Representative Lima announced today that she plans to introduce legislation that will repeal the ill-advised and unneeded Voter ID legislation signed into law last year.

Calling it nothing more than “Jim Crow” disguised as election reform, Representative Lima said that the only reason that the Voter ID bill passed was complacency.  No-one believed Rhode Island founded by Roger Williams with a history as a sanctuary for individual rights, free thinkers and religious tolerance since the 17th century would pass such a backward leaning and anti-democratic piece of legislation whose only purpose is to rob our senior citizens, our economically disadvantaged and our growing minority population of their equality at the voting booth under the guise of make- believe voting fraud.  The proponents of voting equality were caught off guard and the bill passed.

In 1841 Thomas Dorr led a People’s Convention in RI to give suffrage to many landless and voteless working citizens.  Rhode Island voters overwhelmingly supported the voting reforms and on May 19, 1842 in Providence Thomas Dorr and his militia led an unsuccessful attack against the opponents of voting reform and then fled to Chepachet where they hoped to reconvene the People’s Convention.  Later Dorr was imprisoned and spent several years in prison before being pardoned in 1845.

However because of the Dorr War and the People’s Convention the Rhode Island Legislature passed some of the most meaningful voting reforms ever seen in November of 1842.

By contrast in 2011 the Rhode Island Legislature took a giant and shameful leap backward in voting equality that surely caused Roger Williams and Thomas Dorr to turn over in their graves by the passage of the Voter ID law of 2011.

Twenty States in 2011 considered legislation that would have required voter ID and to the astonishment of the nation Rhode Island with its Democratic-controlled legislature and proud history of believing in the principles of the freedom and individual rights was the ONLY state with a Democratic controlled legislature to have passed a voter ID law.

Representative Lima said that the Voter ID law is anti-democratic and robs the elderly, the low income, the minorities and our of age students of their constitutional right against impediments that make their voting right more difficult to exercise.

Additionally the voter ID law will cost the State between $1.6 and $4.9 million dollars to implement properly and effectively, according to a recent study released by the Democratic National Committee and referenced in the Projo on July 6, 2011.

Representaticve Lima said, “the main reason for this law can be summed up in two words, “voter fraud”.  The only thing fraudulent about voting in Rhode Island is the proponents of Voter ID claims that voter fraud is rampant in Rhode Island.  Voter fraud in Rhode Island is nothing more than a manufactured crisis to justify the passing of the voting rights killing ID law.  The only thing rampant in Rhode Island is the new migration of the Jim Crows.

It is with some degree of hope that I see so many groups and elected officials rushing to voice their opposition to the voter ID law.  Over twenty Representatives have co-sponsored my bill so far.

Also voicing opposition are groups such as the ACLU, NAACP, Univocal Legislative Minority, Progresso Latino, RI coalition of the homeless, the Providence Youth Student movement, COMMON CAUSE, Direct Action for Rights and Equality and the RI Disability Law Project.  Our full Congressional delegation has also voiced their opposition to the Voter ID law.  With their support for the passage of my legislation and the repeal of Rhode Island’s voting equality bashing ID law I think we can undo the damage done to Rhode Island’s reputation as a protector of individual rights and freedoms.  I will be looking for their full and public support because we must work together is we are to effectuate real change to this bad law.  I look forward to their help and support.

I will be sending this release to all the groups above as well as to our full delegation in Washington seeking their public input.

Rhode Island, Humanism and the Death Penalty

Recently, Humanist and philosopher John Shook said it very simply, and I have to agree with him: Humanism cannot support the death penalty. His full article is linked and I would suggest that everybody with an interest in justice read it, but one part bears repeating here: Humanism stands for valuing the lives of all, individual human rights, justice for everyone, and governments that defend all of their people. These grounds alone are sufficient for abolishing the death penalty.

As a member of Humanists of Rhode Island, I am proud to live in a state that saw this simple truth over a century and a half ago, when, in 1852, Rhode Island became the second state (after Michigan) to abolish the death penalty. Though proponents, to our shame, re-established the death penalty in 1872 and later in 1973, in 1984 the death penalty was once more off the books. Since then proponents have made several attempts to reintroduce this penalty, but so far to no effect. The Rhode Island Secretary of State has a great little article on the history of the death penalty in Rhode Island. Rhode Island took such a forward looking because of a tragic mistake. The state executed John Gordon, an innocent man. Though there is no way to undo such a wrong, on June 6, 2011, Governor Lincoln Chafee signed a pardon that officially admitted that Rhode Island had not given John Gordon a fair trial, and probably executed an innocent man. Upon signing the pardon, Chafee said:

John Gordon was put to death after a highly questionable judicial process and based on no concrete evidence. There is no question he was not given a fair trial. Today we are trying to right that injustice. John Gordon’s wrongful execution was a major factor in Rhode Island’s abolition of and longstanding opposition to the death penalty. Today, as we pardon John Gordon, we also recognize and uphold that commitment.

In addition to Rhode Island’s proud tradition of religious and philosophical tolerance, which guarantees a persons right to freedom of and from religion, there is another Humanist current we can take justifiable pride in: Our commitment to the value of human rights. Be proud of this tradition and feel free boldly proclaim your opposition to the death penalty as both a Humanist espousing reason and compassion, and as a Rhode Islander, valuing a tradition steeped in human rights and fairness.

Pragmatic and Progressive, Driver’s Licenses for All Residents

This week the Governor made the progressive case for issuing driver’s licenses or driving permits to state residents, regardless of their immigration status:

Responding to questions about a vote by the Board of Governors for Higher Education to approve in-state rates for undocumented students, Chafee said being able to drive would help people who need transportation to go to school or work or to look for work.
He said has spoken with officials in Utah, which he said is the only state that has established a special class of driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants.

“I’m working on it,” he said. Continue reading “Pragmatic and Progressive, Driver’s Licenses for All Residents”


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