Millennials rally for repro rights and Planned Parenthood at the State 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

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 005Planned Parenthood of Southern New England held a Reproductive Freedom Lobby Day at the State House yesterday, perhaps coincidentally coinciding with the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments in Zubik v Burwell, in which various religious non-profits and colleges, including the Sisters of the Poor, are arguing that the Affordable Care Act’s birth-control mandate should not apply to them on First Amendment, religious freedom grounds.

Zubik is the reason the anti-choice group RI Right to Life took over the main rotunda, holding what was essentially a religious service in the center of the State House.

Above the Mass being conducted on the rotunda, outside the House and Senate chambers, nearly two dozen millennials in bright pink Planned Parenthood tee shirts held signs and met with their representatives to make the case for preserving their reproductive health care choices. After the House and Senate went into session they marched to Governor Gina Raimondo’s office to deliver a letter encouraging her to support a woman’s right to choose.

Let’s be clear: As the Supreme Court case shows, for those opposed to reproductive rights, the issue is not simply about abortion. It’s about controlling women’s bodies, enforcing gender stereotypes and exerting religious control over all aspects of our healthcare. After the Mass in the rotunda and the Rise of the House, Barth Bracy, director of RI Right to Life, argued in the House Health, Education and Welfare Committee against legislation that would allow terminally ill patients to make important end-of-life decisions and against a bill expanding the duties of physician’s assistants.

There is no area of our lives, no decision we can make, that RI Right to Life and the Catholic Church do not want to control for us.

Fortunately a group of fearless millennials and long time supporters of a woman’s right to choose let our representatives know that our rights are not up for discussion or debate.

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 001

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 002

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 003

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 004

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 007

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 008

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 009
Meanwhile…

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 010

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 011

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 013

2016-03-23 Planned Parenthood State House 014

 

RI Supreme Court allows accommodation for breastfeeding during Bar exam


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 has adopted a new policy that will allow women Bar applicants who are breastfeeding to easily obtain accommodations when taking the Bar exam. The policy was adopted after a number of groups encouraged the Rhode Island Board of Bar Examiners to revise its policies that offered no accommodations to individuals who were breastfeeding, leaving them at a serious disadvantage during the test.

The new policy now explicitly extends eligibility for accommodations to those who are breastfeeding, and allows breastfeeding applicants to request and obtain accommodations without unnecessary or intrusive burdens. The ACLU of Rhode Island, Rhode Island Women’s Bar Association, League of Women Voters of Rhode Island, Planned Parenthood of Southern New England, Women’s Fund of Rhode Island, and Rhode Island NOW had sent a number of letters to the Board since last July calling for these reforms.

Jenn Steinfeld, executive director of the Women’s Fund of Rhode Island, said today: “Our organization applauds the Rhode Island Supreme Court’s recognition of the importance of accommodating breast feeding applicants. This is yet another step toward professional accessibility for all. Like Rhode Island’s new state law providing workplace protections for pregnant and breastfeeding employees, this policy helps ensure that parents don’t have to choose between the health of their children and their employment or career. We are proud to see Rhode Island promote gender equality and will remain vigilant to ensure it is implemented fairly.”

In their correspondence with the Board, the groups recommended accommodations such as allowing women to bring necessary medical equipment and supplies to the test, providing additional break time to express breast milk, or other accommodations an individual may need to ensure women do not suffer any medical issues. Not allowing for such accommodations, the groups noted, forced candidates needing accommodations related to breastfeeding to choose between taking the test under conditions that could place their health at risk and postponing their test date until they were no longer breastfeeding.

Jane W. Koster, president of the League of Women Voters of RI, said: “The new policy in place for accommodations erases discrimination and prevents arbitrary decision-making, and thus offers the exam without bias or barriers against women who are breastfeeding.  In the future, I am sure we will hear success stories from women who found great convenience, comfort and ease of exam anxiety while profiting from these accommodations. I applaud the R.I. Supreme Court’s decision.”

Rhode Island now joins all other New England states and many others across the country that provide specific accommodations for women who are breastfeeding at the time of their Bar exam. The previous policy addressed only accommodations for people with disabilities.

A copy of the new policy is available here: https://www.courts.ri.gov/AttorneyResources/baradmission/PDF/Nonstandard_Testing.pdf

Why I write Hendricken ’05 on my pro-choice petitions


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

hawks_logoFollowing the terrorist actions of an anti-choice militant in Colorado on November 27, 2015, I feel compelled to offer a few reflections on this notion of ‘the sanctity of life’ and why I invoke my Bishop Hendricken High School alumnus status when I contact my congressional representatives in Washington regarding choice issues. It is worth noting here that these opinions are my own and they do not represent the opinions of the school or any association of students past or present, though I hope they one day might. I also would be remiss if I did not add that I understand and respect the feelings this might engender within those aforementioned communities, but I do not intend this as an insult to anyone in those groups.

When I was at Hendricken, there was something called the Irish Club, a group of students and faculty that engaged in an after-school celebratory discourse about Celtic Catholic spirituality and culture. We would from time to time touch on the tremendously fraught issue that is the Irish Republican Army. The overwhelming opinion was that, even though the IRA was right in its aims, they were wrong to launch attacks in a fashion that resulted in civilian casualties. Leaving aside my own further intellectual development since I discovered the works of Frantz Fanon, the reality is that one can and should apply this logic to the murder of people at a women’s clinic.

Anything less than a full-throated rejection of an act of religiously-influenced domestic terrorism on par with the violence of 9/11, including modifying phrases that condemns the activities of the victims, is the stuff of cowardice. If a school should be involved in such acts of cowardice, their ability to be serviced by taxpayer-funded free school bussing should be revoked, as should the supply of taxpayer-funded text books in math, science, and other subjects. If we are going to have some individuals harping and howling over whether President Obama was taught in a radical Muslim madrassa in Indonesia, we are going to hold Catholic education to the same standards while remembering that Osama bin Laden was also opposed to abortion rights.

One of the lessons that I took from 9/11 that I think very few others likewise took was understanding why that event happened. Some would call this a Left position, others an anti-American position, but I call a logical and educated position. Those attacks were not random acts, they were a violent climax of events over decades involving American military force in the post-colonial world. From the bloody vistas of Vietnam to Jimmy Carter’s idiotic policies in Afghanistan and beyond, America planted hateful seeds abroad that blew back onto our shores and killed civilians.

We should be wise and apply this logic herein. This violence was not random, it was a violent and bloody culmination of years of a coordinated series of anti-choice actions that the media has refused to cover or failed to properly dissect in the name of their farcical ‘objectivity’. Clinics nationwide have been closed over the past several years with a series of Kafkaesque building codes. For months, there have been arson attacks on women’s healthcare clinics that have not been front page news on the Providence Journal (do not even get me started with their misogynist coverage of this violence). The farcical and utterly transparent videos produced by anti-choice scoundrels this summer are now confirmed to have fueled this madman’s violence and that vanguard of objectivity, Edward Achorn, printed letters and columns in his editorial pages that furthered those lies. I would not hesitate to show him as much contempt as some of his colleagues have shown for Edward Snowden or Chelsea Manning (though the fact is that they were telling the truth whereas Achorn was promoting lies). The trail of tears leads to many doorways, including his. No longer can he talk of concerns about promoting terrorism in the Arab world without having this held over his head.

Let us consider for a moment the odious Bishop Thomas Tobin, whose war against women included his Know-Nothing rally at the doors of Planned Parenthood last summer. I would respect Bishop Tobin if he was actually serious about protecting children, but considering how he continues to give soft glove treatment to Bishop Emeritus Gelineau while the man has reams of testimony against him regarding sexual abuse of minors (here, here, and here), I would trust Charles Manson to protect a youth before I trusted Bishop Tobin. What is more, he is a publicly-registered Republican and actively opposed the Affordable Care Act, a law that provides the very contraceptive care that can prevent unwanted pregnancy and therefore abortion. If the Church opposes contraception, fine, that is the realm of moral instruction of membership. But when you get into actively lobbying against public policy, that is a wholly different realm. The Providence Diocese for a long time now has ceased to be a purely religious body and become the politically lobbying Grand Old Diocese, or GOD. This is such a transparent farce that the Three Stooges would blanch in embarrassment.

But there is plenty blame left. What about our allegedly pro-choice Gov. Gina Raimondo, who threw women under the bus this year at the whims of the aforementioned Republican Diocese? Can we call this rolling over for both the opposition party and the Church that took her picture off the walls of LaSalle Academy anything but a terminal lack of backbone? Why is our democracy allowed to be controlled by a body that fails to pay taxes, shelters child abusers, and supports terrorism? Are all the women of Rhode Island worth a quickie compromise with these fools? The precedents she has created are deadly and fed into this madness.

Yet the ultimate amount of guilt lies with ourselves. We failed women. We were unable, unwilling, or uncaring enough to take these warning signs serious enough. We should have been more full-throated about this than a bickering fest about a baseball stadium. In the days before 9/11, the record shows that a select few government employees were running around Washington like their hair was on fire, begging the Bush administration for attention. Were there such figures in the Ocean State landscape I missed? Steve Ahlquist has been one, his coverage of the Raimondo legal moves have been admirable and is going to be used as primary sources by future historians. But was there a Richard Clarke on hand telling we alleged feminists to watch out? Why were we not like he was? To quote the Bard “The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars but ourselves.

After this, every reproductive healthcare center should be under the same level of protection that T.F. Green Airport is. After this, we should quit worrying about Syrian Muslim terrorism and start worrying about American Christian anti-choice terrorism. After this, we should be more vocal and saying that abortion accounts for only 3% of Planned Parenthood medical care and the rest is focused on low-cost healthcare for men and women, including contraceptive, cancer, and STI testing/treatment care, medical care that would otherwise be unavailable for many of their patients. We should vocalize that, prior to the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, the largest killer of women of child-bearing age was septic abortion, more than car accidents or cancer.

If moral absolutists are going to argue that they do not want their tax dollars funding abortion, they should be as vocal about funding our murderous, child-killing military-industrial complex and be pro-life regarding Palestinian children. Yet the only religious group I know of that does that is the generally pro-choice Quakers. Are Catholic Bishops willing to use the same condemnatory tones used towards those who help procure abortions with Catholic soldiers and threaten automatic excommunication for drone killings, especially since the revelations by The Intercept and other publications reveal the targeted assassinations program has killed so many innocent children?

NARAL Pro Choice petitions I recently received in the mail.
NARAL Pro Choice petitions I recently received in the mail.

I write Hendricken ’05 on my pro-choice petitions to our Congressional delegates because Jack Reed is a Catholic and James Langevin went to Hendricken. I write Hendricken ’05 on my pro-choice petitions because, once you void the privacy of the doctor’s office, you create a slippery slope that could void the privacy of the Catholic priest’s confessional due to the fact clergy and medical personnel are protected by the same statutory logic. I sign Hendricken ’05 because I oppose terrorism. I sign Hendricken’05 because I believe women know better than anyone else what medical care they need and that the patient is always the best advocate for their care, not priests. I sign Hendricken ’05 because I respect the female teachers at Hendricken. When I was a student, there were instances where male instructors would sometimes talk about the ‘morality’ of regarding why some of these teachers did not have a large number of children, behavior showing of a lack of respect for these women that screams Human Resources complaint. But I also sign Hendricken ’05 because I believe in sanity, secularism, feminism, and maturity and do not believe in governance by religious fundamentalism. It was John Adams who said “The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”

Finally, I sign Hendricken ’05 because all Hawks are quality one, even if they are pro-choice. By pro-choice, I do not mean I push my sexist nose into the doctor’s office to observe all the activities therein. Rather, it means I respect when that door closes and do not dare open it ever lest I have the same be done to my mother, aunt, grandmother, sister, or female friends. This is the kind of respect I also express for the Seal of the Confessional.

Those who tell you that being pro-choice automatically means being in favor of abortion are lying. It is the complete opposite. Being pro-choice means not being in favor of anything a woman chooses to do in her doctor’s office because it is none of your business, period. Being pro-choice also means opposing state-mandated abortion, such as the Chinese one-child policy, because a law like that strips a woman of her agency and intrudes on the relationship she has with her doctor. Men are not subjected to the level of regulation and scrutiny when they choose medical care that I might not agree with, ergo a woman is due that same level of respect. Refusal to grant that is defined by an SAT vocabulary word, misogyny.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

Supporters stand with Planned Parenthood in RI


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

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

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 012On the same day that Republicans in Congress were embarrassing themselves with a woefully ill-prepared and ill-considered interrogation of Planned Parenthood’s President Cecile Richards, supporters all over the country gathered in groups large and small to show their support for the women’s health organization. In Rhode Island, about 30 supporters gathered at the State House to express solidarity for both Planned Parenthood and a woman’s right to choose.

The rally was organized by Jessan Dunn Otis, who spoke about how important Planned Parenthood has been in her life. RI State Senator Gayle Goldin briefly attended.

Below you will find video of women speaking about the importance of Planned Parenthood in their lives and for women’s health, followed by some comments by James Rhodes, director of public policy & government relations at Planned Parenthood Southern New England. Lastly, I included the men who spoke at that rally.

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 001

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 023

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 002

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 003

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 004

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 005

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 006

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 007

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 008

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 009

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 010

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 011

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 013
James Rhodes

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 014

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 015

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 016

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 017

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 018

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 019

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 020
Gayle Goldin

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 025

2015-09-29 Planned Parenthood 022

Patreon

Gina Raimondo no champion of reproductive rights


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
Gina Raimondo

When Governor Gina Raimondo signed the budget on Tuesday, she officially signed into law language that stands as the most extreme anti-abortion language passed in Rhode Island in two decades. And because it was slipped into the budget as part of the language that codifies HealthSource RI, the state’s highly successful Obamacare insurance exchange, and not submitted as a bill, this new law was passed with no legislative debate and no chance for any input from the public.

Shockingly, this end run around democracy and against reproductive rights came from Rhode Island’s first woman governor, Gina Raimondo, who sailed to victory with the endorsement of Emily’s List and Planned Parenthood, and with the help of a putatively Democratic majority legislature.

How did this happen?

In Rhode Island, support for the right to abortion polls at 71 percent, surprisingly high for a state that hosts by percentage the greatest number of Catholics in the country. Former Governor Lincoln Chafee, a stalwart defender of reproductive rights, vetoed a “Choose Life” license plate bill, a bill that would have split the money for the vanity plate between the state and right wing Christian “abortion counseling” centers that offer false hope to women dealing with crisis pregnancies. Rhode Island stands as one of the few states to have defeated these license plates.

Simply put, in Rhode Island, reproductive rights are only controversial among a small group of right wing activists, fronted by the Rhode Island State Right to Life Committee and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence, who use the issue to advance their narrow political objectives.

It was this small group of activists that helped concoct two lawsuits, with the help of the right wing religious advocacy group the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). Doe v Burwell  and Howe v Burwell were brought against HealthSource RI because there no plans offered on the state’s health exchange that did not cover abortion.

Doe, who chose to remain anonymous because of his HIV+ status, claimed that he was unable, due to his religious beliefs, to contribute money to any health plan that covered abortion, and that his needs as an HIV+ man meant that waiting until 2017 for the one plan that does not cover abortion mandated under Federal law was not practical. In addition to his health concerns, Doe claimed he was liable for fines fines levied against him for not selecting one of the plans currently available on the exchange.

The government’s reaction to the Doe lawsuit was swift: They completely caved. The state agreed to dismiss Doe’s fines, enroll him into a special plan that satisfied his moral objections to abortion, and require that the Rhode Island Office of Health Insurance Commissioner issue a mandate that there be a plan offered on the state’s health exchange that did not cover abortion at every tier of coverage.

In return, the ADF withdrew their lawsuit. Ten days later, on May 29, Governor Raimondo added the agreed upon language to her proposed budget as an amendment.

Under federal law, at least one plan that did not cover abortion had to be made available on all state exchanges by 2017. The settlement the state agreed to went far beyond that mandate.

In Rhode Island, adding new language through the budget process means that there will be no opportunity for public comment or meaningful public debate. The budget is submitted by the governor and re-crafted by the RI House of Representatives in a process that is conducted mostly behind the scenes. John Marion, executive director of Common Cause RI, a government accountability group, has called it “transactional politics.” When the budget comes to the House floor for a vote, specific parts can be debated by legislators, and amendments can be added, but the public gets no chance to directly comment.

The language Raimondo added is problematic for businesses. James Rhodes, director of public policy & government relations at Planned Parenthood Southern New England, asked, “How does a small employer, whether a religious organization or not, claim a religious exemption from covering abortion? Do they have a form to fill out to submit to the Office of Health Insurance Commissioner to declare their objection in order to get a new plan variation from an insurer? Is there any requirement to notify insured employees that their insurance does not cover this service, which is standard coverage in the small group market?”

The new language provided no process by which employers declared their objections and no process by which employees were to be notified of their employers decisions. This is important because a woman might think her health plan covers abortion, only to find out that her employer has decided, on personal religious grounds, not to cover the procedure without informing the employees.

“It is worth emphasizing that the federal health care law already imposes significant restrictions on abortion access through health care exchanges,” Steve Brown, executive director of the RI ACLU. “The additional burdens that passage of this budget article could impose, particularly on unwitting employees, is deeply troubling.”

As I tweeted at the time, “Gina Raimondo’s budget addition may allow a thousand Hobby Lobbies to bloom across Rhode Island.”

Mattiello 2
Nicholas Mattiello

Immediately after Raimondo’s amendment was submitted, rumors began to swirl that the language was inserted as some sort of backroom deal to save HealthSource RI at the expense of women’s reproductive rights. Indeed, Speaker of the House and right wing Democrat Nicholas Mattiello had been vocal about his desire to turn the state health exchange over to the federal government.

Language that limited women’s access to abortion was rumored to be the price paid for keeping control of the health exchange in Rhode Island. However, it has been impossible to source this rumor. Rather than being concerned with limiting women’s abortion access, Mattiello’s public statements were all about the high cost of administering the health exchange on the state level.

For instance, Mattiello said that, “he would not have signed on [to including HealthSource RI in the budget] unless HealthSource administrators had significantly reduced their cost projections to the point where the surcharge could be “at or below” the level it would be if the state handed the exchange over to the federal government…”

On the House floor, during the strangely curtailed debate on the budget, an amendment was approved that somewhat mitigated the damage done by Raimondo’s abortion language. This new language, crafted with the help of Planned Parenthood and the ACLU, required any non-religious employer, as defined by the IRS, that elects to not include abortion coverage in their employee health plan, to allow employees to opt out of the company plan, and select any other plan, paying any additional costs.

This makes Rhode Island the first state to build language into its state exchange that protects those who want a health care plan that provides abortion coverage. A minor victory, considering that this imposes additional health care costs on women. If an employer elects not to cover abortion in their health plans, women pay additional fees out of pocket.

Additionally, women may find themselves in a difficult spot when it comes to dealing with employers who choose not to cover abortion. Opting out of the employer’s health plan may serve as a signal to employers that the employee is pro-choice. This may have an effect on a woman’s ability to secure raises, promotions or other workplace benefits if an employer chooses to act on this assumption in a biased or bigoted manner.

DSC_2172
Bernard Healey converses with Arthur Corvese on the House floor

The Planned Parenthood amendment was supported by an unlikely coalition of legislators, including long time pro-choice Representative Edie Ajello and long time abortion and LGBTQ rights foe Representative Arthur Corvese. But behind the scenes, no one was happy with the compromise. A source confided to me that Barth Bracy, executive director of RI Right to Life, Providence Catholic Diocese lobbyist Bernard Healey and conservative Democratic Representative John DeSimone, were railing against the compromise language during last minute backroom negotiations.

The amended amendment passed and the entire budget passed unanimously and in record time.

After the budget passed the House, both sides declared victory.

Bracy explained in a newsletter that the “victory” was “the fruit of six years of intense legislative, political, and legal battle.” (Bracy did not explain how the seeds of this victory were planted a year before Obamacare became law.) Bracy further explained, or rather, did not explain, that, “Due to the complexity of Obamacare, and its implementation in Rhode Island, neither the media nor our opponents at Planned Parenthood and in the pro-abortion caucus of the General Assembly, yet appear to understand the extent of our victory.”

Bracy promises to explain the completeness of his victory after the Governor signs the budget.

Meanwhile, James Rhodes of Planned Parenthood claimed partial victory, dinging Raimondo for choosing “to widely expand the number of plans that do not cover abortion beyond federal minimum standards” while doing “nothing to protect abortion access for employees of small businesses in Rhode Island.”

Rhodes went on to say, “In the wake of the Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision, we were surprised the Governor did not seek protections for employee access to comprehensive reproductive health care. It is clear that leaders in the House and Senate recognized this budget loophole. The passed budget includes an invaluable amendment that will allow employees of small businesses that claim an objection to covering abortion, to enroll in the HealthSource RI Full Employee Choice program.”

In the end, the right of some women to access reproductive health care has been eroded in favor of the fake right of employers to not provide such healthcare on religious grounds. For her part, the Governor’s office has refused repeated requests for clarification.

Given the transactional and punitive nature of RI politics, no one in the legislature seems willing to go on record about this debacle.

This new assault on women’s rights is the spawn of the odious SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision, based on the Religious Freedoms Restoration Act (RFRA), writ small a thousand times. I’ve argued before that it’s past time to repeal or at least seriously amend Rhode Island’s RFRA, and just recently the ACLU seems to have reached the same conclusion.

Meanwhile, those who supported Gina Raimondo’s bid for Governor of Rhode Island might want to seriously reconsider their support. She has revealed herself as no champion of reproductive rights.

Patreon

Raimondo’s budget addition allows employers vast discretion on abortion coverage for workers


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
Governor Raimondo

Language on abortion nestled into the 2016 Rhode Island State Budget dealing with HealthSource RI may have far reaching consequences for workers whose employers may want to claim a religious exemption from covering the procedure. As reported on RI Future yesterday, Governor Gina Raimondo inserted an 11th hour amendment into the budget that goes far beyond what Federal law mandates as regards abortion access under the Affordable Care Act. Several local organizations have now spoken out about the Governor’s actions.

James Rhodes, director of public policy & government relations at Planned Parenthood Southern New England, said, in a statement,

Planned Parenthood was surprised to see these proposals in the Governor’s budget when it was unveiled last week, and we were not consulted about the new policies contained in this article. Additionally, since there was never a hearing on this language, we have not been able to get clear guidance on the intent of these policies.

“Specifically, there is a fundamental question on which the budget article the House Finance Committee passed on Tuesday night is silent: ‘How does a small employer, whether a religious organization or not, claim a religious exemption from covering abortion?’ Do they have a form to fill out to submit to the Office of Health Insurance Commissioner to declare their objection in order to get a new plan variation from an insurer? Is there any requirement to notify insured employees that their insurance does not cover this service, which is standard coverage in the small group market?

“Fundamentally, Planned Parenthood believes that employers should not be making health decisions around abortion coverage or contraception for their employees. Rhode Island has an opportunity to protect employees by including specific language that would require, at a minimum, notification, to the Insurance Commissioner and employees, that the insurance an employer is offering does not include the full range of reproductive health options, including abortion.”

Steve Brown, executive director of the RI ACLU, also expressed concerns, saying in a statement,

We are extremely disappointed in the Governor’s introduction of polarizing abortion language into the health exchange budget article. Protecting access to abortion is an essential component of comprehensive health coverage, but Article 18 undermines that access.

“It is worth emphasizing that the federal health care law already imposes significant restrictions on abortion access through health care exchanges. The additional burdens that passage of this budget article could impose, particularly on unwitting employees, is deeply troubling.”

As a candidate, Raimondo was happy to accept campaign money from the pro-choice PAC Emily’s List and to accept the endorsement of Planned Parenthood Votes!. Raimondo once said that “women are ‘smart enough’ to make their own health care decisions without interference from government or their employer,” according to a ProJo piece by Katherine Gregg.

Laws that allow employers to make unilateral decisions about a worker’s reproductive healthcare options cut against candidate Raimondo’s claim.

Sam Bell, executive director of the Progressive Democrats of Rhode Island, said in a statement,

For folks who criticized me during the campaign season for saying that Raimondo would be less than fully committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose, this is what I was talking about.

“Restricting insurance coverage of reproductive healthcare is one of the most dangerous ways to erode a woman’s right to choose. The fact of the matter is that wealthier women will always have access to abortions. They can go to another state and pay for the procedure out of pocket. They may have the procedure delayed. They may face institutionalized shaming. But with enough money, they will always have access, no matter how restrictive Rhode Island’s laws get.

“That’s why this new policy is so damaging. It will force lower-income women to choose between carrying a child they don’t want and financial ruin.”

Patreon

Tipped minimum wage increase debated at the State 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
DSC_1833
Representative Regunberg

A large coalition to raise the tipped minimum wage was launched at the State House with a press conference and public testimony on House Bill 5364. Representative Aaron Regunberg introduced the bill that would gradually increase the the minimum wage from $2.89 to match the regular minimum wage by 2020. Senator Gayle Goldin introduced matching legislation on the Senate side. There has been no increase in the tipped minimum wage in nearly 20 years.

ROC United RI (Restaurant Opportunities Center) launched “One Fair Wage Rhode Island,” an impressive coalition of community, labor, faith business and women’s organizations that includes the Women’s Fund of Rhode Island, RI-NOW, NAACP-Providence Branch, Farm Fresh Rhode Island, the Economic Progress Institute, the Bell Street Chapel, Rhode Island AFL-CIO, the Coalition of Labor Union Women, Rhode Island Jobs with Justice, Fuerza Laboral, NEARI, United Service and Allied Workers of Rhode Island, Planned Parenthood of Southern New England and Unite Here Local 217.

DSC_1842
Senator Goldin

Many restaurant patrons are unaware that their tip is not simply a “thank you” for great service, said Senator Goldin, “It’s paying your server’s base salary, and nobody’s base salary should entirely depend on a customer’s mood.”

More than just being an issue of fairness, this is an issue of impacting “women’s economic security,” says Women’s Fund Executive Director Jenn Steinfeld. “Nearly three in four Rhode Island tipped workers are women, one-third are mothers, and more than half of these are single mothers.” Steinfeld says that eliminating the tipped minimum wage will “help address the gender pay gap.”

DSC_1784Being dependent on tips for their salary makes servers more vulnerable to sexual harassment, since telling a customer that their advances or flirting is unwelcome puts the server at risk of losing a tip. A recent report from the national ROC United found that, “Women living off tips in states with a $2.13 an hour tipped minimum wage are twice as likely to experience sexually harassment than women in states that pay the full minimum wage to all workers. In fact, all workers in $2.13 states, including men, reported higher rates of sexual harassment, indicating that the sub-minimum wage perpetuates a culture of sexual harassment.” It’s in response to this atmosphere of sexual harassment that ROC United has launched its “Not on the Menu” campaign.

DSC_1819
Mike Araujo, ROC United RI

There is also good economic sense in raising the tipped minimum wage, maintains Mike Araujo, of ROC United RI. “”Raising the subminimum wage will have an important stimulative effect for Rhode Island. When tipped workers earn more, that money goes right back into the local economy.” ROC United estimates raising the wage will pump $64 million into the state’s economy. Further, tipped workers in Rhode Island currently receive $638,325 in food stamps every month, which means that taxpayers are effectively subsidizing the restaurant industry through social welfare programs.

After the press conference there was a heaing on Regunberg’s bill in the House Labor Committee. Though over 150 people signed up to testify, on both sides of the issue, in the end only 25 people could endure the four hour hearing waiting for their turn to speak. Those speaking against raising the tipped minimum wage were mostly members of the Rhode Island Hospitality Association (RIHA), a business lobbying group that routinely opposes any legislation that might raise the minimum wage or improve the ability of workers to collect money lost to wage theft. Many  of the RIHA members wore small golden pineapple pins.

“The states that have eliminated completely their subminimum wage,” said Representative Regunberg describing the economic impact of his bill, “have as high or higher industry and  job growth rates as subminimum wage states.”

Bill Kitsilis, of Angelo’s Palace Pizza sees no reason to raise the tipped minimum wage, and said, “My tipped employees… are some of the highest paid employees in my business.” He thinks $2.89 is fine, since that’s what he predicated his business model on. Comparisons with other states are not valid, Kitsilis maintains, because other states have much, much stronger economies.

Representative Antonio Giarrusso asked about employee turnover. Kitsilis feels that turnover only happens when people aren’t making money, and he also says that there are a lot of people hiring right now, making it difficult to find workers. An odd statement, considering Rhode Island’s unemployment rate.

The issue of “side work” came up, that is, the work servers do for a restaurant, at $2.89 an hour, that doesn’t earn the server tips. Side work is an old way of getting work done in a restaurant on the cheap, and is completely legal. Raising the subminimum would eliminate this disparity. Kitsilis said that such work “tends to be… a small percentage of what they do, most of the time…”

Representative Teresa Tanzi has worked in the restaurant industry for 14 years. “In those 14 years I have worked at dozens of restaurants, somewhere around 45 restaurants, I would say. And in all those restaurants, one has paid me according to the law.” For fear of retaliation, she could never confront management about this. “I’m well aware that they are breaking the law, but there is nothing I can do. I am relying on my manager and the owner of that restaurant for my employment.”

The Department of Labor surveyed 9000 restaurants over two years and found that 84 percent of them violate the law.

When Chairperson Joseph Shekarchi pushed back against Tanzi’s experience, saying that he doesn’t see the connection between low wages and harassment and abuse of servers, drawing on his experience as a bartender, Tanzi stuck to her guns and pointed out that the experience of women working as servers and men working as bartenders are very different. “It does happen and it’s a daily occurrence. If someone touches you, or if you’re waiting on a table and it’s a party of ten and that’s all the money you’re going to make tonight, and they want to be fresh with you in some way shape or form… I refer to it as a ‘golf clap’ in my vernacular. Whenever someone says something that’s ‘funny,’ you’re waiting on someone and they something that isn’t funny, you have to laugh. If someone touches you inappropriately, what are you going to say? There’s very little recourse as a server that you have.”

Rep Giarrusso’s solution for “any woman or anybody getting sexually harassed” is that “they should hit somebody with a nine iron.” Maybe he’ll introduce legislation to that effect.

“The truth is, 60 percent of restaurant workers in Rhode Island are over the age of 24 and 32 percent of all of Rhode Island’s restaurant workers are parents.”

“I feel that the current wage devalues me as an employee,” says Daniel Burke. Burke explained how the days and hours he is making good money from tips are averaged with the days and hours he’s performing other tasks at the restaurant. As long as he averages minimum wage with the money provided by customers, the restaurant can get away with paying him $2.89 an hour. Of course, Representative Giarusso thinks that Burke should take this issue up with his employer because, “I would, that’s for sure.”

As a 31 year old mother explains that her bartender job requires her to perform duties that are not directly related to serving customers. Therefore no tips can be expected and the restaurant gets away with paying employees $2.89 an hour for work that any other business in the state would have to pay at least minimum wage to accomplish. Again, Representative Giarrusso misses the point, thinking that the issue of side work isn’t related to this. As long as there is a two-tiered wage system, restaurant managers and owners will have an incentive to make workers do untipped work at the lower wage, rather than pay the server properly.

ROC United RI’s Mike Araujo finally explains that “those extra tasks,” that is side work, are “built into the job.” Side work, prep and cleaning averages out to about 3 or 4 hours a day, which is “effectively unpaid labor.” This profitable industry is built on the backs of primarily underpaid women.

Araujo may have summed up the night best when he said, “This issue speaks to how we believe society should be shaped. Do we believe that our citizens deserve equal treatment and deserve full equality, or do we believe that there is a second tier that women, increasingly, belong to?”

“Moving into a restaurant that paid over the minimum wage had such a tangible benefit…”

“When we talk about this issue we can’t escape the fact that this is a women’s issue… forcing a worker to rely on tips for any portion of their base wage significantly increases their chances of experiencing sexual harassment.”

Once again, Representative Giarrausso claims that “I don’t really understand the connection to sexual harassment… If someone’s a jackass, for lack of a better word… I mean, I don’t promote sexual harassment. I think those people should be tied up and jailed and never come out.” Giarrusso claims he “can’t draw the parallel” between low pay and sexual harassment.

But Giarrusso tips his hand as he grins and asks, “Is there an acceptable level of sexual harassment depending on how much you’re getting paid?” This is simply a variation of the line, variously ascribed to George Bernard Shaw or Winston Churchill, “We know what you are, we’re just haggling over the price.”

In response to testimony quoting FDR, Rep. Giarrusso maintains that “there is data that shows that every time minimum wage goes up, so does unemployment.” The US Department of Labor dispels that myth at the top of its page on the minimum wage. Giarrusso also brings up the specter of automation, as is done now whenever minimum wage increases are discussed. I deal with the automation argument here.

Joe Fortune, speaking below, wrote about his experience speaking before the committee on his own blog here.

Notice the pineapple pin. RIHA is in the house. This man is a CPA who specializes in hospitality. I am willing to bet he makes more than $2.89 an hour plus tips.

John Elkhay owns Ten Prime Steak & Sushi, Rick’s Roadhouse, XO Café, Luxe Burger Bar, and Harry’s Bar & Burger, as well as Veritas Catering. “Unlike the people who testified before me,” says Elkhay, “I actually live and work in Rhode Island.” I guess he wasn’t listening to the experiences of the four speakers who do live and work in Rhode Island. After telling the committee about how many employees he has and how much money they all make, he throws them under the bus, saying, “They don’t claim all their tips, by the way. That’s a sneaky little secret.”

“Don’t say that in this building,” says Representative Giarrusso, trying to make light of the comment.

Elkhay doesn’t blink. “Yeah, well, it’s the truth.”

“Who is here, in the industry, saying there is a problem?” asks Chris Tarro, owner of Siena Restaurant Group, answering “I don’t think there is a problem.”

“Don’t take my word for it,” he continues. Rather, he recommends going out to dinner and asking a server. But, “don’t ask if they want a raise, everyone would like one.”

Tarro thinks that the kind of retaliation employees face for stepping up to complain about their working conditions is somehow equivalent to the reaction of potential customers when they hear about the ways restaurants pay their employees and the ways in which many restaurants exploit their employees. “When I testified last time here,” says Tarro, “I got emails, I was on progressive blogs… there’s a penalty to us coming here.”

“I would like to give a nice big golf clap to Representative Tanzi and to anyone else who is trying to distract you from the issue at hand…” is as much as this sarcastic restaurant owner could say before being stopped by Chairperson Shekarchi, who advised not going after those who previously testified.

“I don’t want character assassination,” said Shekarchi, “It doesn’t help your cause.”

“I would suggest to you that twenty years… twenty years without a raise… I don’t think there’s anybody in this room that’s going to work for anybody for twenty years without a raise.”

Kristin Dart, speaking for Planned Parenthood, said that when women are paid more, they are better able to pay for essential medical care.”If I have to choose between food on my table and my annual health exam, I’m going to put food on the table.”

Speaking of her own experience as a server, she said that she was regularly told by her bosses that sexual harassment was “part of the job. If you want to make tips, then you have to be ‘nice’ to customers.”

Amy Barclay owns Simpatico in Jamestown. She’s worked her way up from being a server, pregnant with twins making $4500 a week to owning her own place.  She says, “This isn’t a gender issue. This isn’t a Planned Parenthood issue, this is a performance issue.” Barclay says, “I was great staff. I still am.”

Barclay has 15 core employees and 60 in season. “They beg for their jobs back,” she says, “and they should.”

Having worked in California, where there is no tipped minimum wage, and now working in Providence, Avi maintains that in California the restaurant industry is booming and that people in the restaurants out there have a greater feeling of teamwork. “It should be the employers responsibility to pay their employees, and not to pass that on to the customers.”

Ray Desmarais, of 99 Restaurants, sounded like he was blaming victims for for their harassment when he said, “For anyone to be harassed in the restaurant business, shame on them for allowing it. Leave and come work for me. Cause I’m a good guy and I’ll treat you well.”

Senator Joshua Miller says, “…there hasn’t been a minimum wage bill I didn’t love, until today, until this bill.” Miller feels this bill takes “important revenue away from some of my most valued staff.” He owns three restaurants with over 80 servers. Senator Miller, like Representative Giarrusso, sees no relationship between low wages and sexual harassment.

Justin Kelley said that “it’s time to raise the wage” in Rhode Island. Business models change, says Kelley, citing out the end of slavery, child labor and the eight hour day as examples. Compared to those changes, raising the subminimum wage should be easy.

“I think it’s a human rights issue,” says this restaurant worker from Olneyville, “I don’t care if your male or female, that minimum wage needs to come up.”

Bob Bacon is the owner of Gregg’s Restaurants and the president of the Rhode Island Hospitality Association. He frequently visits the State House to testify against bills that might increase a worker’s wage or strengthen a worker’s ability to not have their wages stolen. Bacon feels that the Department of Labor is doing a terrific job enforcing labor laws, and no new laws are needed. Servers make a “self-reported” average of $12.12 an hour, says Bacon.

Sam Bell, president of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats, explained President Obama‘s support for increasing the minimum wage and for increasing the tipped minimum wage. “Raising the full minimum wage and the tipped minimum wage will help reduce poverty among women and families as well as make progress towards closing the gender pay gap.”

“Considering a tipped minimum wage increase… would cost ten percent of our current sales.” This begs the question: Is the entire profitability of the restaurant industry dependent on paying servers subminimum wage? Do restaurant profits come solely from underpaying staff? How do restaurants remain profitable in California, where there is no tipped minimum wage?

She finishes the evening’s testimony with, “we’re seeing servers being replaced right now with technology all over the world.”

As I’ve said before: technology like that is coming no matter what we pay our employees. The questions we need to be asking in the face of new technologies are bigger than minimum wage increases, such questions go to the heart of our economic system, and whether it’s sustainable in the long term.

DSC_1832

DSC_1856

DSC_1862

DSC_1876

DSC_1884

DSC_1895

DSC_1901

 

Patreon