First, right off the bat: anyone who uses the phrase “Democrat Party” is already showing their ignorance of the Democratic Party. You should still read their arguments, but chances are, they’re going to be off-base. And that’s what Donna Perry’s column in GoLocalProv is (the URL says Julia Steiny for some reason).

Ms. Perry tries to set up a scenario of a polarized RI Democratic Party; a “traditional apparatus” Democratic Party under the command of Chairman Ed Pacheco and another “union-social liberal” Democratic party, with NEARI’s Bob Walsh as leader (because, why not, that works). Ms. Perry’s scenario breaks down almost immediately, though she muddles through to the correct conclusion arrived at by the wrong route (that Democratic Primary results “lacking a narrative,” as WPRI’s Ted Nesi put it, are likely to continue). As Ms. Perry points out, there were a number of races where unions and marriage equality supporters worked for different candidates. If Mr. Walsh is to be the head of Ms. Perry’s fictional second Democratic Party, he seems to be doing a piss-poor job of it (no offense meant, Bob, but get your fictional party in line).

Ms. Perry points to two races for Senate; Maryellen Butke vs. Gayle Goldin and Mike McCaffrey vs. Laura Pisaturo. In the interest of space, I’ll focus solely on the former.

In Ms. Perry’s telling, Ms. Butke the marriage equality and education reform “powerhouse” is defeated by Ms. Goldin the union-chosen candidate. This faux narrative completely ignores the fact that Ms. Butke, despite gobs of cash, ran a confusing campaign that both bashed the Democratic Party and retiring Senator Rhoda Perry, and then tried proposing that Ms. Butke was the true “progressive successor” to Rhoda Perry. One mailing had Ms. Butke’s happy campaign on one side, and an attack piece on Ms. Goldin in mock Goldin colors on the other. The attack piece attempted to tie Ms. Goldin to policies she had nothing to do with, citing sources that make zero mention of Ms. Goldin; including one of Mr. Nesi’s blog posts that simply pointed out that the ultimate cost of the $75 million 38 Studios loan guarantee was closer to $112 million.

On top of this, Ms. Perry neglects to mention that Senator-elect Goldin isn’t exactly any kind of right-wing ideologue; she’s worked for an organization that wants to eliminate gender inequity and implement social justice! Oh, the horror! How could liberal Providence East Side Democratic Primary voters dare choose Ms. Goldin? In essence, there wasn’t much difference between the candidates, and Ms. Butke’s semi-negative campaigning was not effective (though she was quite energetic).

Ms. Perry has made the mistake of thinking of groups as monolithic. She’s done well in beginning to not think of the Democratic Party as monolithic. But now she’s gone and begun thinking of her fake “two Democratic Parties” as being monolithic. Or social liberal or union voters as monolithic. Just because you support marriage equality doesn’t mean you always vote for the louder marriage equality candidate. Just because you’re in a union doesn’t mean you’re going to vote the way the union tells you.

The Democratic Party in Rhode Island is not really under the control of anyone. It is a large-scale coalition of disparate groups. You can’t make blanket assumptions about any one group within that coalition. They range from various unions (unions often work against one another), environmental groups, farmers, various minority communities, LGBTQ activists, internet freedom activists, anti-poverty crusaders, pro-life activists, education reformers, corporate leaders, lawyers, neoliberals, etc., etc. Heck, even though he lost, ALEC Democrat Jon Brien is still very much part of the Democratic Party of Rhode Island.

If there is a narrative from primary night, it’s that the Democratic Party is shifting left. Unions and marriage-equality supporters didn’t really lose any ground, they only gained it, knocking off a number of their opponents. Yes, they didn’t win everything, but then, no one does. They all won under the Democratic Party banner, which should be pleasing to the Democratic Party (a displeasing result would be a large organized mass of union and/or social liberal candidate running as independents and not participating in the primary). David Cicilline absolutely crushed Anthony Gemma, which should make many Democrats smile. Going into the general election, Democrats are going to have quite an advantage, with higher turnout rates to support President Barack Obama.

So, no, Ms. Perry, as much as you, or I, might wish it, there are not three parties in Rhode Island. There’s one. It’s called the Democratic Party. It runs the state. It’s in charge. It screws up, it succeeds. How powerful is it, you might ask? Well, let’s see why I didn’t count the Republican Party as a party.

Take a look at the first television ads for Barry Hinckley and Brendan Doherty. They’re only 30 seconds each (and rather benign), so it’ll only take about a minute. Notice anything? Both candidates use the phrase “both parties” when talking about who to blame for America’s economic situation. Both fail to make use of the color red, strongly associated with Republicans, instead opting for blue (strongly associated with Democrats). And most damning of all? Neither mention their party affiliation; only Mr. Doherty shows it (barely) onscreen, I assume because of law forcing him to show that the National Republican Committee helped pay for the ad. That should tell you all you need to know about the Republican Party in Rhode Island.

Back in February, EducationWeek published this piece on how and why ALEC plans to enter debate on education policy in states across the country. But for a simpler version, watch this youTube video Diane Ravitch recently posted to her blog:

It’s worth noting that Mitt Romney is pushing an ALEC-approved platform on education reform, not at all unlike the one often defended by Maryellen Butke, a state Senate candidate and former RI-CAN lobbyist.

Before Josh Barro gets all worked up, I should note that this isn’t to say that Butke – or Romney, for that matter – has been secretly recruited by ALEC to clandestinely do its bidding … but sometimes it’s worth noting who ones’ allies are, if for no other reason than to shed a little light on the playing field.

Get ready for the conservative barrage that because Rhode Island ranked as the least business-friendly state we should adjust policy to appease the good editors at CNBC. But before we do, take a look at what CNBC says are the top two states in which to business – Texas and Utah – and the bottom two – Rhode Island and Hawaii. Where would you rather move your business to?

By the way, every northeastern state finished in the bottom half of this list. Conversely, Rhode Island was the only northeastern state not to finish in the top 10 for education.

Speaking of public education, RIDE’s own Jason P. Becker has a great post today filling in for Ted Nesi titled: “Woonsocket, not the state, failed to fund city schools.” He writes that because the state has increased education aid to schools there and the city has decreased funding that it’s Woonsocket’s fault it doesn’t have enough money. If only government were so simple … for at least the past three years, Woonsocket has raised property taxes very close to as much as the state allowed, and during that same period Woonsocket lost out on some $12 million it expected in state aid. I would argue the question is not did the state do more than Woonsocket, the question is did either do enough.

The Projo’s story on a Middletown group home with more than 400 at-risk kids living there that was closed due to conditions the state felt were “not suitable for the children” reads like something out of Dickens, or Annie.

Maryellen Butke’s campaign for state senator has a new advocate: Donna Perry, who is both the executive director of the Rhode Island Statewide Coalition and John DePetro’s sister. I bet she won’t be bragging about that endosement as she door knocks on the East Side.

Nice to see an op/ed by CD-2 congressional candidate Abel Collins on the Journal editorial page today. Some inspiring words: “The biggest obstacle to change is not money, it is cynicism. Did we really fight for nearly two centuries to get access to the ballot box for all just to decide now that voting doesn’t accomplish anything? How would Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony, or Thomas Dorr judge the lack of political participation that has come to characterize the U.S.?”

Awesome headline of the day: “House Republicans Spend 89 Hours Trying To Take Away Health Coverage From 30 Million Americans”

CNBC might not like Rhode Island, but Gold Digest does!

Maryellen Butke’s campaign for state Senate will raise an interesting debate about the relationship, or lack thereof, between the so-called education reform movement and the progressive movement. While in name they may sound like close cousins, in practice they are often not.

Education reformers (or deformers, if you don’t like what they do) often push for charter schools at the expense of existing public schools, and charter schools often don’t allow its teachers to bargain collectively, putting the movement at odds with organized labor and often attracting big money from union-busting corporations.

By running for state Senate – especially for legendary progressive legislator Rhoda Perry’s seat – Butke’s campaign will become ground zero for this debate in Rhode Island for the next few months.

Yesterday, in a post about Senator Rhoda Perry retiring, I mentioned that Butke is a liberal who supports charter schools. Two of RI Future’s regular contributors, who follow education issues closely, quickly took umbrage with my description.

“I think a more accurate description of Ms. Butke’s positions would be pretty politically liberal on some issues and extremely conservative on others, particularly labor and education (her primary focus), where she and her Wal-Mart and Wall Street-funded organization have championed right-wing policies that have and will do major damage to public education in RI,” wrote Aaron Regunberg.

Pat Crowley, who works for the state’s largest teachers’ union, followed suit: “Got to agree with Aaron here.  Labor issues can’t simply be shoved to the side.  Especially when so many teachers are women, and so many retirees are women, the attack on their voice on the job is part of the national war on women.  How liberal is that?”

Then, interestingly enough, Butke got a chance to respond with a guest post on Ted Nesi’s blog. She wrote:

I have never considered my views on education liberal or conservative. Though a lifelong progressive, it never occurred to me that teaching and learning in public schools was a partisan issue. At its core, education reform is about improving educational outcomes for kids. How could anyone – Democrat or Republican – disagree with that?

As it turns out, education is one of the most politicized debates we are having in this country today. But it doesn’t have to be this way. Those of us who believe in the tenets of change aren’t interested in partisan politics. We believe in accountability for the adults responsible for our children’s futures, in high-quality public school choices for parents regardless of demographics or geography, and in flexibility to let principals and teachers do whatever it takes to improve student achievement. This doesn’t mean we are anti-union and it doesn’t mean we have negative feelings towards teachers.

My feeling is that Regunberg, Crowley and Bukte somehow need to reconcile their somewhat disparate points if Rhode Island is to holistically improve the education it offers. We need to offer a better education to all students without making life any tougher for our hard-working teachers, who hold one of the most important jobs in our community. That’s the progressive solution to reforming public education.

I believe Butke when she says she isn’t anti-union per say, but some of the people that pay her salary and fund the organization she works for certainly are. That can be a tough dichotomy to reconcile.

Butke and I have long talked about getting together for a big picture discussion on how the charter school movement fits – or doesn’t – with the progressive movement. Here’s hoping that this post and her candidacy helps to make that happen … and that they can help Rhode Island to figure out how it wants to reform public education.