Rhode Island needs to repeal its RFRA


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

reject_rfraRhode Island needs to repeal its version of the RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act). We need to do this because our state is the birthplace of religious liberty and freedom of conscience. We need to do this because it is integral to the very DNA of Rhode Island that we brook no persecution or privilege based on deeply held religious convictions.

And if these are not reasons enough, we need to do this for the economy.

When Governor Mike Pence signed Indiana’s version of the RFRA into law, opening the floodgates for potential discrimination against LGBTQ persons, public reaction was swift. An IndyStar headline reads, “Businesses fear costly backlash from new religious freedom law.” The NCAA, Salesforce, Angie’s List and the gaming convention Gen Con are all seriously reconsidering their business relationships with Indiana. George Takei has called for a boycott. And don’t expect Apple to be investing in Indiana anytime soon.

MattielloWhen Rhode Island Speaker Nicholas Mattiello promised to focus on “jobs and the economy” rather than social issues he presented a false dichotomy. The economy does not exist in a socially neutral vacuum. Companies interested in hiring talented people will avoid setting up shop in states with discriminatory laws and practices because social issues are economic issues, and vice versa.

Repealing Rhode Island’s RFRA in this climate makes good financial sense: Just as businesses respond negatively to discrimination and religious zealotry, businesses will respond well to a renewed commitment to equality, freedom and acceptance.

The differences between Rhode Island’s and Indiana’s RFRA laws are mostly cosmetic. We passed our version of RFRA in 1993, and it closely matches the federal law. Since RFRA was passed federally, versions of the law adopted by the states over the last 22 years have morphed from the goal of protecting the rights of religious minorities to allowing religious minorities the right to discriminate based on their beliefs. This is in keeping with the Supreme Court’s interpretation of RFRA, which depended on the law in deciding Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, which granted the chain craft store the right to ignore federal mandates that they believed went against the religious convictions of the company’s stockholders.

When the federal RFRA was passed, it was a bipartisan attempt to strengthen First Amendment protections of religious liberty that the Supreme Court had undermined in Employment Division v. Smith. In that case a Seventh-Day Adventist was denied unemployment insurance by the government because she refused to work on Saturday. When the Supreme Court ruled for the government, there was a demand for greater protections for minority and mainstream religious practices.

Josh Blackman, assistant professor of law at the South Texas College of Law, analyzed the differences between the federal RFRA and Indiana’s and came to the conclusion that “Indiana, as well as Arizona’s RFRAs are very similar to the Federal RFRA.”  The federal RFRA, Indiana’s RFRA and Rhode Island’s RFRA, though different in wording and passed at different times, are not so different in the ways in which they have been analyzed and applied.

Professor Marci Hamilton, “one of the United States’ leading church/state scholars,” has a website that tracks the history of the RFRA laws, and maintains that “RFRAs do not protect First Amendment freedoms. They are extreme, statutory versions of our constitutional rights.”

Rep. Doc Corvese is the Rhode Island poster child for conservatives who run as Democrats.
Rep Arthur Corvese

To the best of my research Rhode Island’s RFRA has not been cited in any RI Supreme Court cases. That isn’t to say that the law has had no effect. Elements of the RFRA can be found in the so-called “Corvese Amendment” attached to the 2011 Civil Union Bill, now invalidated since the passage of marriage equality. The Corvese Amendment was crafted to allow discrimination against couples in civil unions, just as Indiana’s RFRA is designed to allow people in that state to discriminate against LGBTQ people.

As long as we leave the state level RFRA on the books, it will taint Rhode Island’s legislature and judiciary. Rather than protect religious freedoms and freedom of conscience, Rhode Island’s RFRA creates a situation where our laws could too easily be interpreted as a “right to discriminate.” Repealing the law will send a signal to the world that Rhode Island is once again ready to be a leader in true religious liberty. We can show that we are a state of tolerance, diversity and acceptance.

Imagine Apple CEO Tim Cook tweeting about how great Rhode Island is, or Gen Con relocating its gaming convention here. You can’t buy that kind of publicity, but the General Assembly could get it free by simply acting in the best tradition of Rhode Island history and repealing the RFRA.

Patreon

Rep. Morgan targets HealthSourceRI with weak sauce


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
Patricia Morgan
Patricia Morgan

The Rhode Island House Finance Committee met to discuss Representative Patricia Morgan’s bill to eliminate HealthSourceRI, and turn the operations of our health care exchange over to the federal government. All the sponsors of House Bill 5329 are Republicans, including Morgan, Dan Reilly, Antonio Giarusso, Justin Price, and Michael Chippendale.

Normally a bill like this wouldn’t attract much attention. It would be dismissed as a cynical statement against a successful social welfare program by right-wing ideologues. But Speaker Nicholas Mattiello, a nominal Democrat, has several times suggested that HealthSourceRI is too expensive and that turning the exchange over to the federal government, something that no state has ever done, might be an option.

As Rep. Morgan explained her bill and her reasoning for it, she alluded to the Speaker’s interest, suggesting that the elimination of HealthSource RI might free up money for Mattiello’s pet project of eliminating the state’s social security income tax. Morgan also mentioned that her bill might find the money required to pay for all day kindergarten, a pet project of Senate President Paiva-Weed, perhaps foreshadowing the compromise that will will see both pet projects come to fruition.

As I mentioned, no state with a functioning, successful state-run health care exchange has shut theirs down. So Rhode Island, in choosing such a path, would be charting unknown and uncertain waters. When Rep Deborah Ruggiero asked Morgan, “What is the cost to the state to return [the health exchange] back to the government?” Rep Morgan seemed uncertain, then replied, “Nothing.”

Ruggiero countered that in her discussion with HealthSourceRI director Anya Rader Wallack, the cost to the state to turn over the exchange is actually “somewhere around $10 million.” In addition, said Ruggiero, “we lose control, obviously, because we no longer have the healthcare exchange in our own state,” a point to which Morgan later replied, “Control is overrated.”

Morgan was also unsure of just how many Rhode Islanders benefit from the exchange, claiming that, “on the website it says that 25,000 are actually paying for their insurance through HealthSourceRI,” but when I looked, the number is actually over 30,000.

Right now, the United States Supreme Court is in the middle of deciding King v. Burwell. If the court decides for King, federal subsidies to those states that don’t have their own health insurance exchanges will vanish. According to US News and World Reports, “The likely scenario is a partial or total market “death spiral” like those, respectively, in New York and Kentucky in the 1990s.” Jumping to the federal exchange now seems pretty stupid in light of the uncertainty regarding the Supreme Court decision, but Morgan isn’t concerned.

“In addressing that, I can tell you that the Obama administration is very confident that they will prevail,” said Morgan, “They have four justices already, they only need one more, to win.” That’s pretty weak sauce, since the other side could say exactly the same thing.

Morgan then went the full Scalia when she said, “On the other hand, if King prevails, and the subsidies are only available to the states, I know from reading, and hearing, that the Republicans in Congress are already working on a fix so that people can continue to get health insurance.”

I have to say, when Morgan made this comment, I looked around the room, wondering if anyone else thought her statement was as darkly comic as I thought it was. No one seemed to.

Compare Morgan’s statement with this exchange in the Supreme Court when oral arguments were heard in :

Justice Scalia: What about – – what about Congress? You really think Congress is just going to sit there while – – while all of these disastrous consequences ensue. I mean, how often have we come out with a decision such as the – – you know, the bankruptcy court decision? Congress adjusts, enacts a statute that – – that takes care of the problem. It happens all the time. Why is that not going to happen here?

General Verrilli: Well, this Congress, Your Honor, I – – I – –

(Laughter.)

At least people had the decency to laugh out loud at Scalia’s naiveté. Morgan was actually taken seriously.

Meanwhile, House Finance Chair, Raymond Gallison, promises that there will be full hearings along with full fact finding inquiries conducted before any decision is made on the future of HealthSourceRI.

Patreon

How the community can take control of the police


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
Glen Ford
Glen Ford

“Any movement that seeks to establish community control of the police must begin by challenging the legitimacy of the police,” said Glen Ford, journalist and executive editor of the Black Agenda Report and former member of the Black Panthers, “With Ferguson we saw a burgeoning movement that challenged the legitimacy of the system itself.”

Ford was speaking at New Urban Arts in Providence as part of a panel sponsored by End Police Brutality PVD entitled The Struggle for Community Control Past and Present: From the Black Panther Party to Providence Today.  Also on the panel were Monay McNeil, a student at Rhode Island College, Steve Roberts and Servio G., protesters awaiting trial for allegedly blocking the highway during a Black Lives Matter protest last November, Suzette Cook, whose son was allegedly assaulted by members of the Providence Police Department in 2013, Justice, founder of the “Original Men” and Ashanti Alston, black anarchist and former Black Panther.

Monay McNeil
Monay McNeil

Over 100 community members were in attendance. My only quibble with the excellent discussion was that the number of panelists meant that some speakers were not afforded the time needed to fully expand upon their ideas. Still, this was a fascinating discussion in which the new movement is seeking to learn from civil rights movements of the past.

Moderator Andrea Sterling loosely set the parameters of the discussion as being about “Black Autonomy” and “Community Liberation.” The panel was concerned with the classic problem all nascent social movements must confront: “Where do we go from here?” The description of the event asserts that “activists must choose whether to challenge the foundations of the system that made Black lives immaterial in the first place, or be sucked into the morass of patchwork reforms that enfeeble the movement while failing to alter relationships of power.”

Suzette Cook
Suzette Cook

In other words, does the movement seek to reform or overthrow the system? Most of the panelists seemed to think that there was a need for system change, and that such change will not come easily.

“The system is a very racist system,” said Justice, who spent 10 years in prison, “We have to acknowledge that. The relationship between African Americans and establishment power in this country has always been based on violence.”

Suzette Cook, after outlining some of the circumstances in the beating of her son, agreed, “We are literally in a state of war in our own country.”

Ashanti Alston
Ashanti Alston

“I was a soldier in the Black Liberation Army,” said former Black Panther Ashanti Alston. Things in America are no different “than in Palestine. We’ve got to fight.” Then Alston grew philosophical, “The acceptance of death allows us to live for our highest ideals.”

Servio has been involved in radical movements for a few years, starting with Occupy, but quickly became disillusioned. “I found out that the Occupy movement didn’t care about anyone who wasn’t white.” Still, he is unwavering in his commitment to system change, observing that, “This is a system of power that uses the police to keep us in our place.”

Minor reforms won’t do, in Servio’s opinion, “The change has to be way more fundamental than that.”

Patreon

Speaker Mattiello calls for an end to criticism of Speaker Mattiello


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

mattiello whiteSpeaking at a Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce luncheon, Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello held court and spoke plainly about his economic priorities for Rhode Island.

Clearly upset that Politifact ruled false his recent statement in which he denied that there have been tax cuts for the rich in Rhode Island, Mattiello pointed out that when he speaks to his “well-to-do” neighbors, they “don’t see any tax relief.” Then in a gesture more suited to Imperial Rome than to Democratic Rhode Island, Mattiello declared, “That discussion has to stop.”

Of course, the discussion isn’t stopping.

Mattiello made no secret about his economic priorities: rich people. The real question is why any business interest in Rhode Island bothers to pay lobbyists any more, given that Mattiello has basically said that businesses will get everything they want, from lower taxes to fewer regulations. Says the speaker, “We have to concentrate on the things that are important… Let the business community know that they’re important to us, know that we are going to do the types of things they need to have done.”

No longer will people be the priority in Rhode Island. “We changed the tone,” said Mattiello, “The business community knows that they have priority, they know that they’re important…”

It follows then that people not in the business community do not have priority and are unimportant.

On HealthsourceRI, one of the most successful state run health exchanges in the country, Mattiello remains unconvinced, saying, “I’m informed that it’s not as good as we think it is… There are a lot of problems with the exchange… It should be no more expensive than it would cost us to have the federal government to do it…”

I can’t be the only one who detects a massive dose of hubris when Mattiello says, “I have not made my mind up as to whether or not we’re going to keep it in the state, give it to the federal government and so forth…”

Just in case you need a preview of what to expect as the years roll by under Mattiello’s House leadership, you can rest assured it’s going to be more of the same.  “I would support [reducing or eliminating the $500 minimum corporation income tax] and I would support reducing and eliminating other taxes also. There’s a lot of taxes we could reduce or eliminate… I’m not sure that’s it going to be my priority this year, but it’s certainly something that I’m mindful of and it’s something that we ultimately have to address.”

One has to wonder when the General Assembly will get its House in order, and find new leadership.

Patreon

Minimum wage opponents warn of robots, false economic logic


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
Bob Bacon, Gregg’s Restaurants

Rep David Bennett’s bill to increase the Rhode Island minimum wage to $10.10 from its current $9 would be the fourth time in four years that the lowest earning Rhode Islanders would see an increase in their pay due to legislative action. Like always, such an increase will not come without a fight.

Last week’s meeting of the House Labor Committee saw five different business lobbying groups send representatives to speak against any increase. During the two hours of testimony, any reason that could be dredged up to oppose increasing the minimum wage was presented – including fear mongering, the citing of questionable studies and downright falsehoods.

Lenette Boisselle, representing the Rhode Island Hospitality Association, suggested that the minimum wage is merely a temporary training wage, and not much used in the state, even though Rep. Bennett just testified that there are 45,000 Rhode Islanders making minimum wage. Boisselle said that we don’t yet know what effects the recently enacted minimum wage increase will have on our state’s economy. Elizabeth Suever, of the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce, agreed with Boisselle and suggested that the state do a study to determine what the appropriate minimum wage should be.

Bob Bacon, who is the chairman of the RI Hospitality Association and runs Gregg’s Restaurants, a small chain of medium priced eateries, maintained that any increase in the minimum wage will force prices to rise, resulting in no advantage for workers. But what minimum wage advocates should really be worried about, according to Bacon, are robots.

“There’s already massive movement towards technology that will eliminate the need for labor,” said Bacon, “In many restaurants now you have touch pads. Guess what’s next? Pretty soon you’re placing your order on that thing and it’s going to take ten less people to serve you your dinner. And McDonald’s has a system now that one guy at the end of the line starts the burger process and it spits out the other end and they eliminated three people in the middle.”

John Simmons, of the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council, did Bacon one better. “There’s been some work done, I think, by McDonald’s, as a matter of fact. In particular, on hamburger making. There is some expertise now that they’re drafting up that there will be no person making hamburgers anymore at McDonald’s. It will be all done by machine.”

That workers demanding fair pay will force industry to develop robots has been the refrain from economic conservatives for a while now. The Wall St. Journal ran a piece called “Minimum Wage Backfire” that blamed business automation on minimum wage activists, writing, “The result of their agitation will be more jobs for machines and fewer for the least skilled workers.” Conservative blogs and other media have run with the story, but there’s no truth in it.

As Patrick Thibodeau points out in Computerworld, “The elimination of jobs because of automation will happen anyway.” Some experts think that robots and computers will “replace one third of all workers by 2025.”

Bob Bacon must know this.

Gregg’s Restaurants is a pioneer in the computerization of restaurants. Most of the millions made by Bill and Ted Fuller, owners of the small chain, has come from POSitouch, “the food service industry’s most feature rich POS system.” I’ve heard rumors that the entire Gregg’s Restaurant chain is a loss leader, maintained to demonstrate the POSitouch system to interested buyers.

If robots were able to do the work needed to replace people in restaurants, POSitouch would be in a position to know. The information Bacon and Simmons presented about the hamburger machine is probably untrue, because if the technology existed to automate the burger making process, McDonald’s would already be using it. Instead, McDonald’s is investing in ordering kiosks, like ATMs in banks or the self-checkout machines at supermarkets. And it’s doubtful that these kiosks could be prevented if the employees agreed to work for less money.

How can any worker live on less than it takes to maintain an iPad?

John Simmons made the additional point that an increase in the minimum wage is basically unnecessary because, if you are on minimum wage then “you are probably getting earned income tax credits, you’re getting Medicare, you’re getting all the social programs which are allowing you to offset all the inflationary issues because you’re not paying for them anymore.”

That’s true. Low wage workers are not paying for all this government assistance. Taxpayers are. Rep Bennett testified that Walmart has nine locations in Rhode Island and pays $9 an hour. Their revenue is $476.3 billion. Rhode Island subsidizes Walmart’s labor costs through social services. Raising the minimum wage would force Walmart to pay its own labor costs, and allow more people to live without government assistance.

This could go a long way towards Speaker Nicholas Mattiello’s dream of a world without a social safety net.

Some legislators helped those speaking against the minimum wage with their testimony by lobbing out leading questions, as evidenced by this exchange between Republican Representative Antonio Giarusso and Bob Bacon:

“What is minimum wage?” asked Giarusso, “Is it a living wage, is it somebody just getting out of school, making their way, trying to learn the ropes? Not to put you on the spot, but of all your employees, how many of them are making a minimum wage or something really close to it and are the breadwinners in their households?”

“The breadwinners?” asked Bacon before answering, “Zero.” Two which Giarrusso said with satisfaction, “I thought that would be the answer.”

Penelope Kyritsis, representing RI National Organization for Women, said that approximately 60% of minimum wage workers are women, based on a a report from the National Women’s Law Center. Most of these women have children and no spouse to rely on, meaning that they are the main breadwinners in their family.

A typical minimum wage worker, according to Kyritsis, contrary to popular belief, is not a teenager. The average age of a minimum wage worker is 35, according to the United States Department of Labor, and 88% are at least 20 years old.

A full report on the benefits of raising the minimum wage in Rhode Island to $10.10 can be found here. It should be noted that a single person with no children needs to make $11.86 an hour, to not be in poverty.

If there are any doubts about the cozy relationship between our General Assembly and the business interests in Rhode Island, there’s this exchange I’ve reproduced in comics form.

Page_1

Page_2

Page_3

Right now, business owners and lobbyists have the reigns of the State House. They are pursuing an economic agenda that has only benefited those at the top and almost never those who struggle at the margins.

If low wage workers want fair treatment at the State House, they have to organize and demand it.

Patreon

Mattiello’s ‘dynamic analysis’ is long discredited economics


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

MattielloSpeaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello has been making statements demonstrating his support for “dynamic analysis,” (also known as “dynamic scoring“) a fiscally irresponsible and economically discredited accounting trick supported nationally by congressional Republicans that amounts to little more than rebranded trickle-down economics.

At Saturday’s 2015 Small Business Summit, held at Bryant University, Mattiello defended the $20 million tax break on social security income he’s proposed as a short term economic hit for long term economic gain.

“What I’ve been saying lately,” says Mattiello in the clip below, “is that everything we look at in state government, we look at the wrong way. We look at it from a very static point of view. ‘What is it going to cost us?’ ‘Oh, this year it’s going to cost us $20 million so forget it, we’re not going to do it. If we don’t have room in the budget to do it we’ll kick that issue out. Well, we have a structural deficit in Rhode Island, folks, so under that analysis we’re never going to do anything in Rhode Island to make our economy better. Sometimes you have to prioritize and you have to do what the economy needs to do to move forward.”

Then, in today’s GoLocalProv, Mattiello said, “I know that keeping people in Rhode Island, with more discretionary income in their pockets, will be a significant long-term gain for our economy.  This initiative comes with a short-term cost in our state budget.  But, we need to start using a more dynamic analysis that takes into consideration long-term benefits, instead of a static analysis that only looks at how much things cost.”

Mattiello has invested a lot of political capital to pass his signature tax break. And to make these tax breaks work, he’s going to cut the state budget accordingly. The cuts are most likely to be in the areas of social services, which the Speaker has repeatedly signaled his willingness to cut. But in order to pass his tax break, the Speaker needs an economic analysis friendly to his idea. Conventional, or what is known as static analysis, does not look kindly on Mattiello’s idea, but dynamic analysis does.

The economic analysis Mattiello wants to use here in Rhode Island is the same as what is being proposed nationally by the Republicans now in control of Congress, and it’s scarily reminiscent of the policies Kansas Governor Sam Brownback instituted in 2012 that eviscerated the economy of that state.

Congressman Chris Van Hollen of Maryland and Congresswoman Louise Slaughter of New York penned a piece criticizing dynamic analysis, writing that Republicans “are rigging the rules in favor of windfall tax breaks to the very wealthy and big corporations who can hire high-priced, well-funded lobbyists—once again choosing to leave behind working families. Their plan would further distort the nation’s fiscal outlook by applying this scoring model only to tax cuts—not the economic impact of investments in education, healthcare, infrastructure, and other areas. That means that the value of tax cuts to the economy would be exaggerated, and the value of investments in the middle class would be undercut.”

Shaun Donovan, Director of the Office of Management and Budget at the White House, outlines three reasons why dynamic analysis is little more than a ruse and it’s worth quoting from at length.

First, dynamic scoring requires CBO and JCT to make assumptions in areas with unusually great uncertainty. While all budget estimates are uncertain, there is substantially more disagreement among economists and experts about how policy changes affect the macroeconomy than about most other scoring issues. This helps explain why estimates from different CBO models of the long-run growth effects of a 10 percent tax cut differed by a factor of 15 – and ranged from positive to negative – when dynamic scoring was used.

“Second, and more fundamentally, dynamic scoring would require CBO and JCT to make assumptions about policies that go beyond the scope of the legislation itself. For example, when a tax cut or spending increase is deficit financed, its long-term effect on the economy depends heavily on how and when its costs are ultimately recouped – whether through higher taxes or lower spending, and after how large an increase in debt. When the legislation itself is silent on these questions, Congressional scorekeepers would have to make an assumption – potentially putting scorekeepers in the game, rather than just referees. Moreover, in standard models, these assumptions are often the difference between a positive or negative effect on the economy.

“Finally, dynamic scoring can create a bias favoring tax cuts over investments in infrastructure, education, and other priorities. While the House rule would require dynamic scoring for legislation making large changes in revenues and/or mandatory spending, and makes it permissible at the option of leadership for any such legislation (even if modest), it would not apply to discretionary spending, ignoring potential growth effects of investments in research, education, and infrastructure. More insidious, economic models that find large growth effects of tax cuts are often based on the assumption that they would be paid for entirely through reduced spending – without taking into account at all the economic consequences the reduction in government investment.”

Speaker Mattiello seems intent on implementing the kind of economic policy here in Rhode Island that has long benefited the rich and connected over the middle class and the poor. These policies have led to massive wealth acquisition by the very few amid crushing poverty for many. In doing so Mattiello has aligned himself with the Republican Party and against the Democratic Party of which he claims to be a member.

Patreon

Speaker Mattiello upfront about his economic vision


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

It’s not often you hear a high ranking Democrat from a solidly blue state say, “the focus has to be on eradicating the safety net and not bolstering the safety net.” It’s not often a conservative Republican goes that far. But that’s exactly what Rhode Island’s Speaker of the House, Rep. Nicholas Mattiello, said to an Interfaith Coalition focused on poverty this week.

Mattiello preceded his comment with his usual rhetoric of building a strong economy with good jobs as being the best route out of poverty, and that the safety net should be funded at “appropriate” levels. House spokesperson Larry Berman offered this clarification: Speaker Mattiello, “means that if we alleviate poverty, there will be not need for a safety net. He wants to improve the economy and get people working to eradicate poverty.”

However, other public comments by Mattiello leave little doubt that the Speaker’s call for the eradication of the safety net should worry progressives enormously.

The RI Interfaith Coalition to Reduce Poverty has held this event on the second day of the General Assembly being in session for the last seven years and traditionally the Governor, Senate President and Speaker of the House are invited to speak. Usually the assembled politicians say a few nice words about keeping the plight of the poorest Rhode Islanders in mind as they maneuver bills through the system, whatever their actual intentions towards the poor might be. But Mattiello, beginning his first full term as speaker, seems eager to chart a new course: He’s being upfront about his intentions slash social service programs to “appropriate” levels.

A staunch conservative, Mattiello has the solid backing of both the NRA and Right to Life. He has the strong backing of conservative Republicans. House GOP leader Brian Newberry says, “Philosophically, he’s just closer to us than his predecessor.” Meanwhile, Mattiello has targeted progressives within his own party. He endorsed progressive legislator Maria Cimini’s Democratic primary challenger “because she didn’t back him for speaker, didn’t apologize for that and because she doesn’t agree with him on policy.” Cimini lost her primary.

When the Providence Journal asked Mattiello where the cuts would be made this session, the Speaker answered, “Eligibility for human-service benefits and so forth. Let’s see where we are versus our neighbors …. Prioritize which ones are more important and look to cut expenses out of them.”

In his first term as speaker, Mattiello cut the corporate tax rate from 9 to 7%, now the lowest in New England, and raised the exemption on the estate tax to the first $1.5 million of wealth. He’s eager to cut funding for Healthsource RI, one of the most successful state run Obamacare programs and has even suggested closing the system down and “giving it back to the federal government.”

RI Monthly quotes Mattiello as wanting to steer the state away from being, “on the leading edge of the social agenda” but can economic policy be so readily separated from issues of social justice? Rhode Island has the highest poverty rate in New England, yet when workers organize to help themselves out of poverty, Mattiello has led the charge to slap them down.

Mattiello likes to talk about jobs and the economy, but people are more than their jobs. People have value beyond the economy. Like it or not, the government has a role in securing that there is a system, a social safety net, to prevent the most vulnerable from facing the worst life has to offer. And maybe, along the way, we can even help lift people up.

Patreon

Video from the 7th Annual RI Interfaith Coalition to Reduce Poverty Vigil


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

DSC_9483As they have for the past six years, about four dozen clergy representing a wide variety of faith traditions gathered at Gloria Dei Lutheran Church on Wednesday, put on their vestments and robes, and marched to the State House for the Rhode Island Interfaith Coalition to Reduce Poverty Vigil. The purpose of the vigil is to “ask our elected officials to govern with wisdom and compassion, state our commitment that everyone in Rhode Island must have their basic needs met and offer the support of the Interfaith Community” towards achieving the goal of cutting “Rhode Island poverty in half by 2020.”

Governor Gina Raimondo, Senate President M. Teresa Paiva-Weed and Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello accepted the traditional invitation to speak at the vigil. They were introduced by Maxine Richman, Board Member of the Jewish Council of Public Affairs and co-chair of the Interfaith Coalition. Richman was direct with the public officials in her opening remarks, asking, “How can it be that Rhode Island, with a very large service sector and struggling middle class, has only a 10% earned income tax credit while our neighbors in Massachusetts earned income tax credit is 15% and Connecticut’s is 20%? And how can it be that 1,3000 people are on a waiting list for foundational workforce programs?”

After the politicians spoke Bishop W. Nicholas Knisely of the Episcopal Diocese of Rhode Island addressed the issues confronting the poor from a Christian point of view. Knisely quoted the New Testament in which Jesus said, “the poor you will always have with you” to point out the continuing need for a robust social safety net.

The event concluded with the reading of the names of all state wide public office holders, all the members of the General Assembly and several prominent mayors. Very few elected officials attended the event.

The coalition is part of a national movement that includes the Jewish Council of Public Affairs, (JCPA) National Council of Churches, and Catholic Charities, as well as more than 40 other faith organizations.

Patreon

Speaker Mattiello seeks to eradicate the social safety net


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

mattiello2Update, Jan 8: In response to our request House spokesperson Larry Berman sent the following reply:

Speaker Mattiello, “means that if we alleviate poverty, there will be not need for a safety net. He wants to improve the economy and get people working to eradicate poverty.”


Speaker Nicholas Mattiello established himself as a cartoon super villain at the 7th annual Rhode Island Interfaith Coalition to Reduce Poverty Vigil when he told an assembled crowd of faith leaders and poverty advocates that when it comes to ending poverty, job creation and appropriate funding of the social safety net are important, but, “the focus has to be on eradicating the safety net and not bolstering the safety net.”

It’s obvious that the Speaker is no longer pretending to be a Democrat. You can hear the entirety of Mattiello’s short speech below.

Patreon

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 election over, it’s time for a $15 minimum wage


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
Mattiello
Speaker Mattiello

On Tuesday, voters in Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska and South Dakota passed measures to raise the minimum wage in their states. These states are Republican strongholds, yet minimum wage increases passed overwhelmingly: 68.6% vs 31.3% in Alaska, 65% to 35% in Arkansas, 59.2% to 40.8% in Nebraska and 54.7% to 45.3% in South Dakota. These are conservative, hard-core red states, but the measures passed because no matter where on the political spectrum Americans stand, most of us believe in the fairness and justice of earning a living wage from a forty hour a week job.

Meanwhile, in California, ultra-liberal San Francisco leap-frogged all the competition by passing a $15 minimum wage ordinance in their city, and Oakland went to $12.25.

So what’s going on in Rhode Island?

Last year, the state raised the minimum wage to $9, from $8. This happened as hotel workers were fighting in Providence for a industry-specific $15 minimum wage and in short order a line was inserted into the state’s budget, without public debate or vetting, that prevented cities and towns from setting their own minimum wage floors.

Hunger Strike Rally 007The hardworking hotel workers had successfully petitioned the city council into placing a $15 minimum wage measure onto the ballot. Citizens of Providence would have voted on that measure Tuesday, if not for the actions of the General Assembly. There is little doubt that the measure would have passed here in Providence. I mean, seriously, are voters in Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska and South Dakota more compassionate than voters in Providence?

Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello and Budget Committee Chairman Representative Raymond Gallison did everything in their power to circumvent the will of the people and democracy itself in a sickening display of cavalier corporate bootlicking. Indeed, so great is Mattiello’s obsequious desire to serve corporate interests that he specifically targeted Maria Cimini, the only representative to raise any objections to the measure, by backing her opponent in the primary. Cimini lost her bid for re-election.

Elorza 001
Jorge Elorza

Over the course of the election here in Providence, many candidates have voiced their displeasure at Mattiello and Gallison’s power grab. Mayor Elect Jorge Elorza, said that he would actively work to have the law overturned, so that Providence and other cities might set their own minimum wage floors. In the October 22 mayoral forum Elorza even hinted that he supports a $15 minimum wage. I look forward to seeing Elorza at the State House in support of whatever bill is introduced to overturn the measure. Gina Raimondo is also on record as saying that the minimum wage needs to be increased to $10.10 (though she has never committed to $15.)

The Economic Progress Institute says an adult needs at least “$11.93 an hour to afford their most basic living expenses.” That’s $3 over our minimum wage and probably still another $3 shy of a living wage.

Raising the minimum wage to a living wage will prevent more Rhode Islanders from slipping into poverty, losing their homes and postponing their educations. It will give parents, now working two and three jobs to keep an apartment, more time to be parents and keep their kids off the streets and out of trouble. It will increase the purchasing power of Rhode Islanders, driving money to local businesses. It will reduce people’s dependence on financial debt traps like payday loans, and allow people to start bank accounts to earn credit and plan their retirement or their kids college.

Raising the minimum wage to a living wage will help people live lives of meaning without the stress of grinding poverty and the hopelessness such a life inculcates. Even the more conservative states are acting in lieu of a federal increase. The more progressive cities across the country are acting in lieu of a meaningful minimum wage in any state.

For this to happen in Rhode Island, we need to pressure the General Assembly to reverse last year’s law that prevents cities and towns from helping hourly-earning residents out of poverty.

Make Mattiello ex-speaker of the House


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
No Nicholas Mattiello
No Nicholas Mattiello
Why is this man Speaker?

I didn’t vote for him. Chances are you didn’t either. He ran unopposed in his district (won with 1,145 votes). He wasn’t elected to be Speaker of the House by the people. He was elected by a frightened RI House of Representatives. You know who I’m talking about.

Nicholas Mattiello is the Speaker of the Rhode Island House of Representatives  for about five minutes. He was “elected” by the other state reps following the abrupt down-in-flames resignation of Gordon Fox. It was a battle fought for about two minutes, with some of the blame going to the Providence Journal for tweet-reporting that the “election” was sewn up before the votes were actually counted.

But Mattiello doesn’t have to be The Speaker. He can become the “Former Speaker.”

Power not derived from the people

Last time I checked, Rhode Island was still considered a democracy. We elect our representatives to serve us at the state capitol.

In the past, sometime prior to the start of the session, they gather in a back room and “elect” a new speaker. There are 75 representatives, so it only takes 38 votes to dominate the state for the next two years. Promises are made. Threats are made. And then the person who’s been called the most powerful politician in the state emerges bathed in glory.

The first order of business is the approving of the Rules of the House, and as soon as that’s done, our duly elected representatives give away all their power to The Speaker, and beg his highness for favors. Then they do what The Speaker says, or else they’re exiled.

Then The Speaker holds a fundraiser and becomes the richest legislator in the state. He controls the calendar. He controls the purse strings. He makes the Governor dance and twitch. He wants something to pass, it passes. He wants a bill to die in committee, it dies. He da man!

This is not democracy. This is an anointed dictatorship. 

Dump Mattiello

It doesn’t have to be that way. From now until the opening of the legislative session, there is a brief moment when the way things have always been can change. The rules can change. And The Speaker… can be someone else.

During the brief “race” for the current Speaker, I seem to recall Michael Marcello saying that he felt that The Speaker didn’t actually have to win every vote… GASP!

Yes, it may be comforting for a state rep. to delegate all his or her power to someone else. And yes, all the lobbyists on Smith Street know where to funnel their efforts and cash.

But does it really benefit Rhode Island to have an anointed dictator in charge?

  • 38 Studios can be directly attributed to the power of The Speaker.
  • Payday Lending? Why is that even legal? Oh, right a former Speaker is the lobbyist.
  • Sudden reversal on high stakes testing because The Speaker changes his mind. (I happen to like this outcome, but the process stinks.)
  • All those last-minute late night bills that pass can only happen when The Speaker suspends the rules.
  • And on and on…

State Reps can change the cycle of abuse

To all the state reps out there. We just elected you.

You were elected to serve the people. The power of The Speaker undermines your power as a Representative. All the plans you have, the things you want to get done… What if they could happen with out having beg and plead or to bend over and give favors in return?

Whatever promises or threats have been made to you, they’re all smoke right now. Whatever promises you’ve made, revoke them.

Fortune Favors the BoldDon’t give away your power. Don’t be intimidated by bullies. There is a moment of possibility here.

Un-Speaker Mattiello. Dump him. Make him “Former Speaker.” Elect a new speaker who will listen and work for the citizens rather than the lobbyists. Change the rules of the house.

And then govern well.

P.S. If you’re not a state rep, you can call or email your newly elected or reelected State Rep and say, tell her or him #No Mattiello

CORRECTION: A previous version of this post said “The last three speakers were either indicted, convicted or are currently under investigation.” This is incorrect and has been removed.

Progressive gut check


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

Gut-CheckRhode Island’s progressive movement is today in shambles, ripped apart by the stunning resurgence of the conservative faction of the so-called Democratic Party. It is now at the point that alleged Democrats feel perfectly comfortable reading directly from the RI GOP 2014 agenda and letting those comments be reported in the press.

And why shouldn’t they? It has become clear that nobody (that matters) is going to challenge them in public. I have done everything I can think of to get some influential progressive to call out this egregious betrayal, this shocking example of outright treason. The result so far?

[SFX: Crickets]

The unspeakable must be spoken

For the 22 years I have been politically active in Rhode Island, I have watched the progressive movement struggle to move forward in difficult conditions. In case you missed it, the road to the top of the mountain goes up quite steeply until you get to the very, very top.

The single greatest challenge from a public relations viewpoint has been the persistent fallacy that Rhode Island is already a “liberal state.” This decades-long fraud has been made possible by a state Democratic party dominated by conservatives and a progressive opposition that refuses to call it like it is. All of these fraudulent Democrats would become Republicans if Rhode Island could elect enough actual Democrats to run them out.

We’re not going to do it until we say, loudly and repeatedly, “These people are not Democrats; they are Republicans. You can tell by the fact that they say and do all the things that Republicans say and do.”

The “we” that needs to say these things is not a radical intellectual leftist, writing on a liberal blog. It is members of the Progressive Caucus speaking to reporters when they reach out because…how does this person qualify as a Democrat?

Twenty years ago, the idea that a reporter would question the liberal bona fides of a Rhode Island Democrat would have been a laugh line. But read the very first sentence of this excellent piece by Ted Nesi. To my knowledge, Ted is the first reporter to come around to what has been obvious to me since forever. These Democrats are not really Democrats.

When Mattiello spewed this Getting to 25 vomit last week, I reached out to Ted. “How can this go unchallenged? Why doesn’t someone call state party officials or progressives to get pushback?”

His response sickened me. He referred to his previous reports and expressed surprise that progressives didn’t seem to care. Certainly, writers on this blog have written about this repeatedly, so one can only assume that Ted is implying that more newsworthy sources have refused to address this issue.

This is the problem, people, not the solution.

Don’t bring a pickup truck to a tank fight

It is long past time for the progressive movement in Rhode Island—and I mean YOU, elected officials—to make it unequivocally clear that the state Democratic Party must be routed. Not reformed, routed.

It is absolutely true what the RI GOP says. The RI Democratic Party has ruined this state. What makes this hard on everybody is the lack of clarity on the simple, obvious, but counter-intuitive fact that the Democrats that ruined this state are actually Republicans.

Until we have the collective strength to make this argument in every press outlet in the state, it is unreasonable to expect any result other than the one we now have.


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