raptakis – RI Future

February 10, 2015February 11, 2015

Everyone but Raptakis is against felony conviction for highway protest

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

Even a police union official and the House sponsor of a bill to make highway protests a felony said the proposed punishment doesn’t match the crime at a House Judiciary Committee meeting last week

“I don’t necessarily agree it should be a felony,” said Anthony Capezza, state director International Brotherhood of Police Officers. He also conceded that the bill is more broadly written than need be. “I agree, it’s broadly written, where somebody just an individual standing in the street, could be charged under this.”

Rep. Ray Hull, who sponsored Raptakis’ bill that would make highway protests a felony punishable by at least a year in jail, distanced himself from the strict sentencing mandate after tough questioning from Rep. Joe Almeida during the hearing. Rep. Dennis Canario, sponsored a similar bill and testified his version was superior because it carries a misdemeanor sentencing guideline.

Of the 19 people who testified only Sen. Lou Raptakis said a felony conviction was warranted for protesting on a highway.

In spite of obvious public interest in the proposed legislation (the hearing was covered by RI Future, RIPR and the Providence Journal), legislators chose not to broadcast it on Capitol TV. For those interested, Steve Ahlquist recorded the entire meeting and what follows is video clips of all the public testimony.

Andy Horowitz, law professor Roger Williams University:

Ellen Tuzzolo, Providence resident:

Stan Tran, former Republican candidate for congress:

Malcus Mills, Direct Action for Rights and Equality:

Kristin Dart, Rhode Island Coalition for Reproductive Justice:

Steve Brown, ACLU:

Laura Ucik, Brown Medical School student:

Fred Ordonez, executive director, Direct Action for Rights and Equality:

Megan Smith, Rhode Island Homeless Advocacy Project:

Michael DiLauro, public defender:

Martha Yaeger, American Friends Service Committee:

David Fisher, rabble-rouser:

Sheila Wilhelm, Direct Action for Rights and Equality:

Barry Schiller, a transportation activists said bicyclists could be charged under the legislation:

Randall Rose, activist:

Anthony Capezza, state director International Brotherhood of Police Officers:

Rep. Ray Hull:

Rep. Dennis Canario:

Sen. Lou Raptakis:

February 5, 2015February 5, 2015

Sen Raptakis, Rep Hull talk Black Lives Matter, felonies, historical context

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

Sen. Lou Raptakis’ and Rep. Ray Hull’s bills targeting Black Lives Matter highway protests addresses the tactic of calling attention to invisible racism and institutional injustice. But Rhode Island still has significant work to do on the root causes of invisible racism and institutional injustice.

A recent report ranked Rhode Island as the third worst in the nation for Black people. There are very wide racial gaps in income, employment and education. And it was only 14 years ago that a Black Providence cop was shot and killed by a White Providence cop.

So I asked Sen. Lou Raptakis and Rep. Ray Hull, the sponsors of the bills that would make highway protests a felony, what they think of the Black Lives Matter movement, and other pointed questions about racism in Rhode Island and historical context.

February 5, 2015February 6, 2015

House sponsor Hull says Raptakis bill is too harsh

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

Even the House sponsor of Sen. Lou Raptakis’ bill that would make Black Lives Matter highway protests a felony punishable by at least a year in jail distanced himself from the overly harsh penalty during and after a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday.

“Is it a felony? I will tell you, no,” said Rep. Ray Hull, a Black police officer from Providence, sponsor of the bill that would make highway protests a felony. “Absolutely not.” Hull told me this after enduring pointed questioning in the public hearing from Rep. Joe Almeida, also a Black man from Providence.

“I don’t know what the percentage rate is, but a good portion of the people of color are going to be walking across that highway,” Almeida said to Hull. “And I can help them with a misdemeanor. My hands are tied with a felony.”

Hull seemed to tell Almeida he would rescind the bill. Steve Ahlquist has video of the exchange:

Hull and Raptakis sponsored versions of the bill that would make the highway protests a felony. Rep. Dennis Canario sponsored a similar bill that would make the protests a misdemeanor. You can read about their differences here.

Nearly every speaker systematically denounced the bills. Even the lone law enforcement lobbyist in support copped to it being overly broad. Most speakers said a felony is far too harsh a penalty for such an offense. Many said creating a new class of crime to target a nonviolent protest that is already illegal is unnecessary and/or unjust.

Former Republican congressional candidate Stan Tran likened the legislation to something Iran or China would do – and couched his comment by reminding the committee that his parents had emigrated from Vietnam. Steve Brown, executive director of the ACLU, said the felony version would implement a stiffer penalty than drunk driving – which, obviously, can also effectuate a traffic jam.

Fred Ordonez, executive director of DARE, dismissed the idea that the potential for emergency vehicle delay warrants a stiff penalty pointing out that ambulances are delayed by traffic issues all the time caused by celebrations, sporting events and unforeseen accidents. He wondered if it was the nature of the message rather than the nature of the protest that inspired legislators to take action.

We’ll have more video from this hearing later today.

February 2, 2015February 3, 2015

House Judiciary considers highway blocking bills Wednesday

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

The House Judiciary Committee this week is scheduled to consider two bills that target the Black Lives Matter activists’ tactic of shutting down highways. Both bills are slated to be heard Wednesday afternoon at the State House.

Felony version

One of the bills (H5 192) is a House version of the controversial legislation Coventry Sen. Lou Raptakis submitted in the Senate that was met with heated a criticism from racial and economic justice activist who said it was an insult to the legacy of Martin Luther King (a version of this RI Future post was used on the ProJo op/ed page today) as well as defenders of civil liberties and the homeless, who warned of unintended consequences.

This bill would elevate the punishment for interfering with highway traffic during a protest from disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor punishable by “not more than six (6) months” in jail, to a felony that “upon conviction” would mandate “a term of imprisonment of not less than one year nor more than three (3) years at the adult correctional institution.” It would create a new crime called “Unlawful interference with traffic” that would apply to “any federal or state highway.”

Delaying an emergency vehicle that results in a death would carry a sentence of five to 30 years in prison.

The lead sponsor is Rep. Ray Hull, a Providence police officer who is also Black and a Democrat. It’s co-signed by Republican Mike Chippendale, Foster, and Democrats Cale Kaeble, Burrillville, Pat Serpa, West Warwick, and Stephen Casey, of Woonsocket.

Misdemeanor version

The other bill (H5 193) would keep the crime a misdemeanor, but it would still increase the punishment from up to six months in jail to “not more than one year ” in jail. Its prime sponsor is Re. Dennis Canario, who represents Portsmouth and Tiverton, and is also co-signed by Hull, Rep. John Edwards, of Tiverton, Rep Joe Almeida, of Providence and Rep. Joe Sherkachi, of Warwick.

It’s punishment may be less Draconian, but it may apply to more roads in Rhode Island that the other bill. H5 193 says:

“For the purposes of this section, ‘freeway’ means a way especially designed for through traffic over which abutters have no easement or right of light, air, or access by reason of the fact that their property abuts upon the way, and shall include, without limitation, all roads designated as part of the interstate highway system.”

H5 192 refers only to “federal or state highways.” This would seem to exempt town roads while the previous language seems to include all roads in the state.

January 23, 2015January 24, 2015

Homeless, civil liberty defenders decry anti-highway blocking bill

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

Supporters of civil liberties and marginalized people are criticizing Coventry Sen. Lou Raptakis’ bill that would make it a felony, punishable by at least a year in jail, to block a highway.

Raptakis, a conservative who owns a pizza place in Coventry, submitted the controversial bill yesterday. It is a direct response, he has said, to the highway protests, in Providence and across the country, led by Black Lives Matter activists, who organized to counter racial injustice and police violence against Black people in America.

The bill says: “A person commits the crime of unlawful interference with traffic if he or she intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly: (1) Stands, sits, kneels, or otherwise loiters on any federal or state highway under such circumstances that said conduct could reasonably be construed as interfering with the lawful movement of traffic.” It was co-signed by Senators Frank Lombardo, of Johnston, Frank Lombardi, of Crnaston, Michael McCaffrey, of Warwick, and Paul Jabour, of Providence.

Raptakis’ bill has drawn a sharp rebuke from civil libertarians, homelessness advocates as well as groups promoting an end to racism.

The Rhode Island Homeless Advocacy Project and the RI ACLU released a joint statement yesterday.

“Legislation introduced by Senator Raptakis today, ostensibly to deal with protesters creating a public safety hazard by blocking roadways, is both short-sighted and unnecessary. The bill, S-129, would make it a felony to cause the ‘interruption, obstruction, distraction, or delay of any motorist,’ punishable by between one and three years in prison for a first offense. On its face, this legislation is unnecessary because there are already statutes under which individuals can be charged for this conduct, as happened to several protesters involved in the I-95 demonstration in November.

Apparently feeling that the punishment isn’t severe enough, the Senator would like to give these mostly young people a felony record, potentially impacting severely their future employment, housing and other opportunities for the rest of their lives. The introduction of the bill this week is particularly ironic, considering that we just celebrated the life of Martin Luther King, Jr., whose historic Selma-to-Montgomery march had to have been one of the country’s greatest “obstruction, distraction or delay” of motorists ever. Do we really want to reserve a prison cell for three years to hold his successor?

“The bill also has the potential to curtail the civil liberties not only of lawful protesters but also of individuals experiencing homelessness and living in poverty. The legislation’s broadly-worded and ambiguous language leaves open the possibility that individuals panhandling on sidewalks or medians – a means of survival and a legal exercise of one’s First Amendment rights – could be accused of distracting motorists and jailed under the proposed law.

“Such use of this legislation has negative consequences both for the individual charged and for our state more broadly. To charge an individual attempting to meet his or her basic needs in a legal manner with a felony is both cruel and illogical. Both the court proceedings and the subsequent incarceration of the individual are extremely costly to the state. Furthermore, because of a felony conviction’s impact on employment and housing, the charge could also lengthen bouts of homelessness, which are expensive to taxpayers.

“If Senator Raptakis’ intention is to ensure public safety, this end could better be achieved by fostering constructive dialogue between the police and marginalized communities – whether communities of color protesting unequal treatment or the homeless community securing basic needs – about collaborative solutions to the injustices they face daily. Filling the prisons even more is not the answer.”

January 23, 2015January 23, 2015

Raptakis’ highway blocking bill mars MLK’s legacy

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

The movie Selma with its vivid celebration of human courage and dignity, creates poignant and powerful imagery affirming the reason we conmemorate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. How gut-wrenching it was then, to see Dr. King’s holiday marred with a press release by Rhode Island Senator Leonidas Raptakis announcing proposed legislation to charge peaceful protestors, like those who marched along the Edmund Pettus Bridge, with felonies.

Anyone who has watched Henry Hampton’s Eyes on the Prize series, read books like J.L. Chestnut’s Black in Selma, or simply listened to their parents or grandparents tell it, knows that as powerful as the movie Selma was, it only depicts a small slice of the massive grassroots organizing work that went on in Alabama and throughout the Blackbelt. People met, planned, strategized, and analyzed. And people marched. 600 people marched on Bloody Sunday, and at least 25,000 in the final leg into Montgomery on March 24, 1965. Route 80 was merely the terrain in a people’s struggle for justice.

Fifty years later the marching continues so that Black lives will be treated as more than disposable by the system of policing in this country. While being stuck in traffic is a pain, how much greater is the pain of losing a loved one to police violence, and then seeing no repercussions whatsoever for his killer?

Senator Raptakis and other critics of protests that include blocking highways have suddenly become fervent advocates for smooth travel by emergency vehicles. Where is their concern when emergency vehicles are slowed to a crawl during sporting events, construction, or Waterfire? The response of this new cadre of traffic safety advocates is something to the effect of, “Yes, but people going to sporting events or boat shows aren’t blocking traffic on purpose,” as if thinking only of fun and games is somehow morally superior than using desperate means to draw attention to unchecked police racism and violence.

However in a string of cases dating back through the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s, courts, even those in the Deep South, made it clear that “from time time out of mind … [s]uch use of the streets and public places has … been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights, and liberties of citizens.” In 1965, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama addressed the issue of whether people could march along U.S. Highway 80 from Selma to Montgomery. Williams v.

Wallace, 240 F. Supp. 100 (N.D. AL 1965). Hardly a liberal institution, the court held, “it seems basic to our constitutional principles that the extent of the right to assemble, demonstrate and march peaceably along the highways and streets in an orderly manner should be commensurate with the enormity of the wrongs that are being protested and petitioned against.”

The rights protected in these court decisions belong to everyone; consider that disruptive, intentional protest up to and including blocking entrance ramps to Route 95 was part of a mainly white, middle class protest by Credit Union depositors in 1991, as recently reported by The Coalition talk

Fifty years after Bloody Sunday, people still march and sometimes block highways or shut down malls and train stations because Black lives do matter. And as Dr. King said, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” Yet Senator Raptakis would have us charged with felonies and jailed for up to five years for something that even courts in the segregated south in 1965 recognized as a fundamental constitutional right.

We hope he has a chance to see Selma.

This op/ed was co-signed by:

Shannah Kurland, Member, National Lawyers Guild, Rhode Island Chapter
Fred Ordoñez, Executive Director, Direct Action for Rights and Equality
Sarath Suong, Executive Director, Providence Youth Student Movement

April 14, 2014April 15, 2014

President Obama on Voter ID and voter suppression

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

On Friday afternoon President Obama was in New York City speaking at the National Action Network’s annual convention about Voter I.D. bills and Republican led efforts to restrict voting rights. Here in Rhode Island, of course, efforts to restrict voting rights with Voter I.D. laws have been lead by Democrats, and at the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting held on Thursday night, one day before Obama’s appearance in New York, state Senators Metz, Lombardi and Raptakis were quite vocal in their defense of the law, despite the steady stream of human rights groups that testified for its repeal.

Contrasting the opinions of the Democratically controlled Rhode Island State Senate with those of President Obama demonstrates how out of sync Rhode Island politics have become.

Had President Obama testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee using the words he spoke in New York, the conversation might have gone something like this. (All quotes come directly from Obama’s New York speech.)

Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote. Voting is a time when we all have an equal say. Black or white, rich or poor, man or woman, doesn’t matter. In the eyes of the law and in our democracy, we’re all supposed to have that equal right to cast our ballot to help determine the direction of our society. The principle of one person, one vote is the single greatest tool we have to redress an unjust status company.

But, says Senator Raptakis, if even one person votes under false pretenses, doesn’t that undermine our electoral process? The President agrees.

Yes, we’re right to be against voter fraud. We don’t want folks voting that shouldn’t be voting. Let’s stipulate to that as the lawyers say. But there is a reason why those who argue that harsh restrictions on voting are somehow necessary to fight voter fraud are having such a hard time proving any real widespread voter fraud. So I just want to give you some statistics. One recent study found only ten cases of alleged in person voter impersonation in 12 years. Ten cases. Another analysis found that out of 197 million votes cast for federal elections between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters out of 197 million were indicted for fraud. For those of you who are math majors, as a percentage, that is 0.00002%. That’s not a lot. So let’s be clear: the real voter fraud is those that try to deny our rights by making arguments about voter fraud.

Senator Metz takes the microphone and tells the President that he has heard anecdotal evidence to the effect that voter fraud has been attempted and taken place. The President is not convinced by anecdotal evidence, because such evidence is useless in determining public policy. Obama counters the unsubstantiated claims of Senator Metz with a fresh dose of reality.

In some places women could be turned away from the poll just because they’re registered under their maiden name but their driver’s license has their married name. Senior citizens are told they cannot vote until they come up with the right I.D. About 60% of Americans don’t have a passport. Just because you don’t have the money to travel abroad doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to vote here at home.

Now the Senators are getting annoyed. They don’t want to hear logical arguments and ethics. They want to solve imaginary problems and ensure their reelections. It is suggested that repealing the Voter I.D. law will send the signal that voter fraud is somehow okay in Rhode Island. Obama looks confused, and decides to explain his position in such a way that even a Rhode Island State Senator might understand.

It is wrong, deadly wrong, to deny any of your fellow Americans the right on vote. It’s wrong to it make citizens wait for five, six hours just to vote. It’s wrong to make a senior citizen who no longer has a driver’s license jump through hoops to exercise the right she has cherished for a lifetime. Americans did not sacrifice for the right to vote only to see it denied to their kids and their grandchildren.

There are a whole bunch of folks out there who don’t vote for me, didn’t vote for me, don’t like what I do. The idea that I would prevent them from exercising their franchise makes no sense. Black or white, man or woman, urban, rural, rich, poor, Native American, disabled, gay, straight, Republican or Democrat, voters who want to vote should be able to vote.

Period. Full stop.

You can watch President Obama’s full speech below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rjGh1QK4gk

April 23, 2013

Big vote for marriage equality is today

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

Ray Sullivan, of Rhode Islanders United for Marriage, in East Providence last night.

For Rhode Island progressives, it’s the most widely-anticipated day of the 2013 legislative session. For anyone who values equal treatment under the law, it’s even bigger than that. Today is the day the Senate Judiciary Committee votes on marriage equality.

The House already passed it overwhelmingly, the governor is a big supporter too and the Senate is highly unlikely to reject it if and when it ever reaches the full chamber. On Smith Hill, issues are won or lost behind closed doors, and those outcomes become evident at the committee level. So today the Ocean State learns if, collectively, we are ready to recognize same sex marriage.

From a practical matter, there are three people who control its fate, and two whom will be casting votes today. Senate President Teresa Paiva Weed is famously opposed to marriage equality, but said she won’t weigh in.

Rookie committee members Lou Raptakis, of Coventry, and Bill Conley, of East Providence, have held their cards close and Rhode Islanders United for Marriage have zeroed in on both of them in this home stretch.

That there are two bills up for a vote today – one backed only by the most socially conservative state legislators, out-of-town hate groups and Catholic priests and another that pretty much everyone else likes – gives them some political cover: vote for them both and let the full Senate flush it out.