South Kingstown biology teacher Jeff Johnson challenges Langevin


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

jeff-johnsonJeff Johnson was my high school biology teacher at South Kingstown High School. Students like me know him as the teacher who consistently dresses poorly and reads poetry out loud for fun. In many ways, he lives a life of absolutes. His desk is eternally messy; his glasses are always missing. His vocabulary and control over language are often awe-inspiring; his typing speed, not so much. He is universally loved by his students. He is fiercely intelligent and curious. But most importantly, he is so incredibly caring, not only to his students and to his family but also to our planet and to all its citizens.

Mr. Johnson has spent the past three decades fighting for the people and the issues politicians don’t care to talk about. Since the 1970s, Mr. Johnson has been engaged in the fight against climate change, and in March 2016, he helped organize a Climate March in South Kingstown. In the late 1990s, Mr. Johnson became heavily involved in the protests against the inhumanity of the American sanctions on Iraq which killed an estimated 500,000 children. Opposed to the Iraq War from the beginning, Mr. Johnson, alongside thousands of people, participated in the Iraq War demonstration in NYC on February 15, 2003. Over the years, Mr. Johnson has brought to the high school activists like Ralph Nader and the late Howard Zinn to speak on issues ranging from climate change to perpetual war.

But even with all of these things going on, Mr. Johnson always finds time to help his students. When I was at the high school, Mr. Johnson was always helping someone after school, whether it was with biology concepts, family problems, writing an essay or a science fair project. These conversations would go well into the afternoon, sometimes into the night. And it was one of these late afternoon conversations that sparked the idea for this campaign.

Today, his campaign is run by the volunteer work of a dozen of his students (current and former). We have spent countless hours working on a campaign platform (available online) that covers everything from agricultural policy to social security reform. We have been kicked out of libraries while collecting signatures outside. We have marched through torrential rain holding deteriorating cardboard box anti-war signs in our arms. We have designed a bumper stickers and yard signs, brochures and a website. We do this because we have talked to Mr. Johnson; we have gotten to know what a passionate man he is; and we really believe that he has the ability to affect change, meaningful change, where Mr. Langevin hasn’t in his decade and a half.

To Mr. Johnson, and perhaps to his campaign’s detriment, the election isn’t just about winning and a job in Congress— it is about his students. “The reason why I got into politics was because I was always talking about issues like climate change, but if all you do is talk about them, all you do is depress kids,” he told me earlier today in his classroom, “I felt like I had to do more than a hollow, academic exercise. It had to be a tangible part of my life. I was tired of feeling guilty.” This same feeling motivated Mr. Johnson to run in 1994, 1998 and then again in 2000 for statewide office. In 1994, Mr. Johnson ran for Lieutenant Governor as a Green, receiving about 6% of the vote. To date, no statewide election has matched that vote share result for a Green candidate.

Mr. Johnson is a candidate who will not represent corporate greed and war. He will never take money, as Mr. Langevin has, from defense contractors: General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrup Grumman. He will not be passive as climate change ravages our world— he will be practicing civil disobedience with the activists— he will be getting arrested on the streets so that people will pay attention. Mr. Johnson is a person who understands the plight of the “American dream” and the American worker. He was the first person in his family to graduate from college, and today, he holds four degrees. He has worked as a submarine welder, a quahogger, a farmer, a prison dishwasher, a medical technician, a Ford assembly line operator, a gas station mechanic, a painter, a landscaper, a book editor and a paperboy. Nowadays, in addition to the high school, he commutes to Providence to work in DCYF group homes on weekends. Private sector, public sector, white collar, blue collar, Mr. Johnson has seen it all. He has seen for himself the struggle and hardship Americans must face every day.

This election season, we hang on the precipice. We must think carefully about whether we want to maintain this status quo of wage stagnation and environmental degradation. We must be open to alternatives, no matter our political affiliation or views. And more than anything, we must courageously vote our conscience after we have given all candidates a fair assessment. Mr. Johnson, I believe, offers alternatives to our status quo, alternatives that will leave a healthy planet for future generations, alternatives that will heal our economic system so that it is more equitable and fair for both the American people and those abroad.

If you want to read more about our campaign and our views, please visit out website. And check out our Facebook page!

Langevin and Hamilton have surface similarities but deeper differences


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
hamilton
John Hamilton

In many ways, Congressman Jim Langevin and upstart progressive challenger John Hamilton have a lot in common even as they compete in the Democratic primary for the second congressional district seat.

For example, they both think Langevin is a strong favorite to win.

“It’s an uphill battle,” Hamilton said. “He has a lot of money and he’s the incumbent. All the advantages go to the incumbent.”

Langevin said, “I’m hopeful and optimistic about it. I feel good about the race, but never overconfident.”

And both describe themselves as being progressive.

“I’m a progressive from way back,” Hamilton said, “which used to be known as a liberal.”

Langevin said, “If you look at my voting record I think I have a very progressive voting record.”

On policy matters, too, Langevin and Hamilton agree more often than they disagree. Both cited income inequality as the biggest issue facing America.

“To my view concentrated wealth at the top is the problem,” said Hamilton.

Jim Langevin
Jim Langevin

Langevin said, “We talk about fighting for a living wage and closing the income gap and trying to create an economic system that the vast majority of American families would benefit under, as opposed to the 1 percent, I’m a pretty consistent vote on all of those things.”

It’s the subtle differences in their responses that shows why Hamilton is challenging Langevin, despite conceding that “we’re both pretty good” when asked where the two candidates find agreement.

“I’m seeking to be a change agent in this election,” said Hamilton, who was inspired to run for congress by Bernie Sanders.

Langevin, the eight-term Democrat first elected in 2000, said, “It is my job to reflect the views of my constituents, the people I represent, and I hope I’ve been doing that effectively.”

Both are voting for Hillary Clinton in November, but Langevin is an avid supporter of hers and Hamilton, who served two terms in the state legislature in the early 1980’s, more reluctantly. He says he returned to politics only because “both parties are taking a wrong direction.” For 30 years, less-than-liberal Democrats helped Republicans and corporations ruin the American middle class, according to Hamilton.

“The Democratic Party took a wrong direction in the 1990’s,” he said. “We had the golden years of economics in America … and what happened? Well, we started cutting taxes for the very wealthy – the billionaires, the millionaires and the corporations – so we had less revenue to reinvest in our country. Then we started doing these trade agreements … and then we deregulated the banks, we did away with Glass Steagall, which was an important separation of investment and regular banking. I call those the triad of middle class destruction. We had job sucking trade agreements, we had bank deregulation and we had the trickle down economics and taxation that started with Reagan and then later in the Clinton era.”

On these finer points, Langevin and Hamilton only partially agree.

Both candidates oppose trade deals, in general, and the Trans Pacific Partnership, in particular. But there is a concerted difference in their words.

“I see TPP as nothing more than a corporate takeover of America and I consider anyone who votes for TPP to be voting against the United States of America,” Hamilton said.

Langevin was more measured, saying, “I’m not a supporter of that right now. I’m waiting to see what is going to be negotiated in terms of an agreement. I have not been impressed with many of the trade agreements in the past, including NAFTA, that have worked well for other countries, it seems, and corporations but hasn’t benefited American workers or American companies as much as it has overseas companies.”

They have stronger differences on reinstating the Glass Steagall, which historically prevented lending banks from also being investment banks but was repealed in 1999. It is a favorite policy prescription of  many progressives looking to reign in Wall Street..

“Not that I’m opposed to reinstalling the provisions of Glass-Steagall,” Langevin said, “but the Consumer Protection Division that we just created, I do want to give that a chance to work to see if that could be more effective.”

Both said gun safety and gender equality are important areas for Congress to act on next session. Hamilton is solidly pro choice and Langevin more pro life when it comes to abortion, but it’s hard to imagine legislation that would divide them as Langevin often votes against anti-abortion bills sponsored by Republicans. Langevin voted with Republicans last session on a bill that would have made it more difficult for Syrian refugees to come to the United States and Hamilton criticized him for it. But, for the most part, if Republicans control the House of Representatives again, which Langevin said seems likely, he and Hamilton would probably often vote the same way.

But there are big differences between Langevin’s style and Hamilton’s – and nowhere is that difference more acute than in their approaches to the proposed Burrillville power plant.

“That plant is not needed in Burrillville,” Hamilton said. “If there is any politician who hasn’t come out against it and stood with them against this power plant, they need to send that message that they are never getting their vote again.”

Langevin isn’t taking a position on the issue.

“I think everyone recognizes that we have to do more to meet our state’s energy needs and help bring down the cost of energy and some feel that the Burrillville power plant is something that will help in that area but we also have to mindful of the environmental impacts,” he said. “That’s why I support the whole process and fact finding that’s happening right now. Although it’s not a federal issue, it’s local and state, I’m certainly monitoring the issue very closely.”

Hamilton, whose first political awakening came when protesting against a proposed nuclear power plant in Charlestown in the 1970’s, called Langevin’s hands-off approach “unacceptable.” Remembering how they stopped the proposed nuclear power plant from being developed where Ninigret National Wildlife Refuge is today, he said, “John Chafee and Claiborne Pell did not remain neutral on the Charlestown nuclear power plant.”

Cicilline, Langevin join ‘sit-in’ on House floor to force vote on guns


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

cicilline sitinRhode Island’s congressmen David Cicilline and  Jim Langevin joined John Lewis and other Democrats in a sit-in on the floor of the House of Representatives to force Republicans to hold a vote on preventing gun sales to suspected terrorists and expanded background checks for potential gun owners.

“We are resolved and committed to speaking out for victims, survivors, and families at home who deserve a vote,” said a letter signed by Cicilline and 16 other Democrats to House Speaker Paul Ryan. “We are prepared to continue standing on the House floor whenever the House is in session to assist you in bringing these bills to a vote.”

sitin

According to Politico, “more than 40 Democrats walked into the chamber just before noon and pledged to ‘occupy’ the House floor until GOP leadership allowed a vote.”

Cicilline, in a speech on the House floor just prior to the sit-in, said the incident at the Pulse nightclub in Orland should compel a legislative response to the increased mass shootings and gun violence America is facing. “This monstrous attack on the LGBT community in a place of refuge and empowerment requires us to act,” he said. “The shooter in Orland used an assault rifle that is virtually identical to the ones used by mass killers in San Bernandino, Umpqua Community College, Aurora and Sandy Hook Elementary. That’s no coincidence. Out of the eight high profile mass shootings that have taken place in the past year, seven involved the use of an assault weapon.”

langevin sitinCongressman Jim Langevin also participated in the action. In a statement, he said, “These are not radical ideas. These are commonsense proposals, and the time to take action is long overdue. As the victim of an accidental shooting, I know firsthand the devastating effects that guns can have on a life, even when being handled by experts. I was lucky. I lived. The 49 innocent people killed in Orlando – and the thousands killed by guns in our country each year – did not have that chance, and their families and friends deserve better. The vast majority of Americans support responsible gun reforms, like universal background checks, and those constituents deserve a vote.”

Here’s the full text of the letter from the 17 representatives to Speaker Ryan:

Dear Mr. Speaker:

As the worst mass shooting in our nation’s history has underscored, our country cannot afford to stand by while this Congress continues to be paralyzed by politics. We urge you to lead the House into action and work with both sides of the aisle to pass commonsense solutions to keep American children and families safe.

There is broad agreement among Americans – greater than 90 percent by some measures – that expanding background checks for firearms purchases is a reasonable measure for this Congress to pass. An overwhelming majority also agree that we should enact safety measures that keep guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists.

The question before us is, what is this Congress waiting for?

Over the last 12 years, gun-related crimes claimed more American lives than AIDS, war, and illegal drug overdoses combined. Since Newtown, tens of thousands of lives have been lost to this deadly crisis. The number of bills that have been debated and passed by this Congress to prevent such deaths is zero.

Together we represent families who are worried and frustrated – millions of Americans who are fed up with the inaction in Congress. There is no doubt that our path to solutions will be arduous, but we have to agree that inaction can no longer be a choice that this Congress makes. We cannot enact solutions for families at home if the Speaker will not even allow a debate.

Therefore, we stand with thousands of brokenhearted families who have not been served by this Congress, and millions more who are counting on us to find the moral courage to do the right thing. We stand together in our refusal to sit by while this Congress abdicates its fundamental responsibility to protect American families from harm. We urge you to keep the House in session until we have robust debate and votes on expanding background checks and banning the sale of firearms to suspected terrorists.

Until then, we are resolved and committed to speaking out for victims, survivors, and families at home who deserve a vote. We are prepared to continue standing on the House floor whenever the House is in session to assist you in bringing these bills to a vote.

Sincerely,
Rep. Katherine Clark
Rep. John Lewis
Rep. Gregory Meeks
Rep. John Larson
Rep. Robin Kelly
Rep. John Yarmuth
Rep. Chellie Pingree
Rep. Stacey Plaskett
Rep. Michael Capuano
Rep. Rosa DeLauro
Rep. David Cicilline
Rep. Kathy Castor
Rep. Bonnie Watson-Coleman
Rep. Steve Cohen
Rep. Peter Welch
Rep. Bill Pascrell
Rep. Joyce Beatty
Rep. Joseph Kennedy

Whitehouse’s DISCLOSE Act rolled into #WeThePeople legislation package


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
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at a community supper in East Greenwich.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at a community supper in East Greenwich.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s DISCLOSE Act is a central piece of a new package of legislation liberal Democrats and an independent put together to “reform government and make sure it works for all people, not just special interests,” according to a press release from the Rhode Island senator.

The DISCLOSE Act, or Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections Act, would require Super PACs, corporations and other big donors to divulge their associations with political advertisements. It was originally introduced in 2010 by Senator Charles Schumer. Whitehouse took over the legislation in 2012. That year, ThinkProgress called it one of the five most important bills blocked by congressional Republicans.

“Since the disastrous Citizens United decision in 2010, we’ve seen a tsunami of dark money and special interest influence wash over our political system and co-opt our government,” Whitehouse said in a news release. “We’ve got to shed light on the rigging of our system and return the power over government to the American people.”

Whitehouse’s contribution to the new legislation “would require organizations spending money in elections –  including super PACS and tax-exempt 501(c)(4) groups – to promptly disclose donors who have given $10,000 or more during an election cycle,” according to the news release. “The provision includes robust transfer provisions to prevent political operatives from using complex webs of entities to game the system and hide donor identities.”

Also in the package, Senator Patrick Leahy, of Vermont, has a bill that “shuts down individual-candidate Super PACs and strengthens the rules that prohibit coordination between other outside spenders and candidates and parties,” according to the release.

Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine, has a bill that “requires all candidates for federal office, including those for the U.S. Senate, to report contributions of over $1000 to the FEC within 48 hours,” the news release said.

Sen. Tom Udall, a New Mexico Democrat, has a bill that “creates a new independent agency to serve as a vigilant watchdog over our nation’s campaign finance system” that “would consist of five commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and would have greater enforcement and investigation powers than those of the gridlocked FEC.”

Sen. Michael Bennett, D- Colorado, has a bill in the package that “permanently bans both House and Senate members from lobbying either house of Congress after they retire.” Another one from Bennett “requires lobbyists to register if he or she makes two or more lobbying contacts for a client over a two-year period, regardless of whether the lobbyist spends more than 20 percent of his or her time serving the particular client.”

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, a Wisconsin Democrat “has a provision that prohibits private sector employers from offering bonuses to employees for leaving to join the government. Her bill also includes language to slow the revolving door by increasing cool down periods for those leaving government service and expanding recusal requirements for those entering.”

RIPDA rebukes Langevin’s vote on Syrian refugee bill


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

Jim LangevinThe Rhode Island Progressive Democrats vehemently opposed bill H.R. 4038, the American Security Against Foreign Enemies SAFE Act.  On November 19th this bill passed the House by a vote of 289-137, with only 47 Democrats voting in favor of it. Sadly, Representative Langevin was one of them.

This bill is a continuation of an overreach by the right wing conservative majority that has over taken the House of Representatives.  The vetting process for refugees entering this country is already more than sufficient. These additional layers of bureaucracy are completely unnecessary. They put an undue burden on our security departments, and they will unnecessarily increase the time that it takes for Syrian refugees to be admitted. And with a military budget of $600 billion we should all wonder why the implementation of effective and expedited screening isn’t already in place.

It can take years for refugees to be allowed to enter this country. With these additional redundant and unnecessary security checks it could delay the process even longer. President Obama has promised to veto the legislation and one would think that a Democratic Representative of a supposedly blue state would support the President on such an important issue.

By siding with the Republican right wing majority, Langevin sets himself apart from the compassionate and understanding legislators who know that there needs to be a balance with security and timeliness in getting refugees vetted and resettled in this country. His actions show, once again that the D next to his name means nothing. He has shamed the state, our founding father Roger Williams, and all of the great people of Rhode Island who want to do more for the people of Syria.

The people of Syria have no choice but to leave their homeland due in large part to the United States destabilizing the region in the first place. The people of Syria are not Daesh. They are civilians who want to live in peace, who want to have shelter, who want to save the lives of their children.

Langevin’s reaction to this crisis is just another reason why 2016 should be his last year in Congress.

Langevin defends voting with GOP on Syrian refugee bill


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

Jim LangevinCongressman Jim Langevin defended his support of a GOP-backed bill that would add more layers of bureaucracy to the process of accepting Syrian and Iraqi refugees.

“After reading the bill, I was convinced that it does not stop the process, it really doesn’t shut the program down, nor does it significantly slow it,” Langevin told RI Future in an interview, which you can listen to in its entirety below. “It added modest layer of new security in terms of the vetting process but nothing that would shut down or significantly slow the vetting process, and that’s ultimately why I supported it.”

He said it wasn’t difficult to vote against President Obama, who strongly urged Democrats not to support the Republican-backed bill. “All of my decisions are based on the merits. They don’t belong to a particular party or special interest.”

Langevin, who told me he didn’t see State Sen. Elaine Morgan’s comments about Islam and Muslim refugees, said he thinks the United States should accept more Syrian refugees than the 10,000 Obama has called for – and that he thinks the government should add resources to ensure the refugee process moves quicker.

“I strongly support additional resources that will expedite the process,” he said. “The best thing we can do to make sure we’re not slowing the process down is put more resources into vetting so we can speed it up.”

When asked how he thinks Rhode Islanders feel about the issue, he said, “I’ve heard from people on both sides of this issue.”

You can listen to our full 20 minute conversation on his vote in particular and the Syrian refugee crisis in general here:

House Republicans neglect justice, Tea Party even worse


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

th-5-2-400px“But woe to you Pharisees!
For you…neglect justice…”
Jesus (Luke 11:42)

The House is in crisis.

Favoring the wealthiest 0.2 percent, House Republicans would eliminate estate taxes, increasing deficits for a decade by $320 billion. Do families of megarich magnates, who own more than the bottom 90 percent, need charitable relief?

As for spending, Republicans’ 2015 House budget chops food stamps by $125 billion; cancels Pell Grants for many students; and block-grants Medicaid, cutting health care for the destitute.

Mainstream Republicans also oppose health coverage for 16 million new insureds; obstruct realistic laws reducing the annual carnage of 32,000 gun deaths; and reject crucial infrastructure repairs and jobs.

House Republicans neglect justice. They eagerly demolish both taxes and spending to benefit the uberwealthy—at everyone else’s expense.

The Tea Party believes these policies are not sufficiently strict. Jim Jordan of Ohio spearheaded the sequester’s automatic dire cutbacks—too large to execute—but enacted due to right-wing rigidity.

With a dysfunctional process, America’s AAA credit rating was downgraded, triggering historically high debt-servicing costs. Louisiana’s John Fleming contended, “If we miss the deadline it’s no big crisis. We can use it politically.”

Jordan organized some 40 iron-fisted Tea Party members into the “Freedom Caucus.” Their Dickensian proposals make establishment Republicans appear liberal.

Consider Louie Gohmert of Texas. He introduced a farm bill amendment to cut off food stamps for 47.6 million needing food—including 16 million children. Afflicting America’s most vulnerable, this survival-of-the-fittest mentality would deliver many diseases and death sentences.

Kansan Tim Huelskamp and numerous colleagues promote privatizing Medicare. This would boost premiums and co-pays considerably, eliminating coverage for millions.

Libertarian David Brat of Virginia advocates demolishing Social Security and Medicare, cutting benefits by two-thirds. He also justifies decimating education funds: “Socrates trained in Plato on a rock. How much did that cost?”

Instead of balancing national debt interest with the deficit—nearly achieved—Arizonan Matt Salmon joins many Tea Partyers who claim we must balance the budget. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says this would “kill the economy.” This requires ripping apart America’s safety net, discarding all discretionary programs, and significantly reducing Social Security and Medicare. This crushing austerity also slams the brakes on the economy, substantially increasing unemployment.

Colorado’s Ken Buck wants to privatize the VA. After criticism, he denied favoring “fully privatizing” veterans’ health care. As to Medicare, Medicaid and ‘Obamacare,’ he states, “We need to let the market work, make people responsible for their own insurance…” Such free-market fundamentalism is despicable, denying health insurance to about 100 million seniors and indigents.

Some howled when Florida Democrat Alan Grayson depicted the Republican health plan for the uninsured who get sick: “Die quickly.” Actually, about 19,000 lives are saved annually by Obamacare, yet the Tea Party pushed for more than 50 votes to expunge this essential health care. They offer no bills to replace it.

Tea Party austerity neglects justice.

In a 2013 Mother Jones exposé, “Inside the Republican Suicide Machine,” author Tim Dickinson concludes, “[Tea Party] insurgents are championed by wealthy ideologues who simply seek to tear down government.”

Mainstream Republicans inflict austerity measures, but Tea Party austerity is even worse: Slashing taxes for the wealthy is combined with plundering programs affecting disabled, jobless, working-class and middle-class Americans. This poisonous plot would delight Ebenezer Scrooge.

So why don’t voters choose Democrats? In 2012, they did—by 1.4 million votes. The outcome: Republicans, 234 seats; Democrats, 201. The system is rigged. With gerrymandered districts, voters don’t choose politicians; politicians choose voters. Analyst Sam Wang calculated that to control the House, Democrats needed to win by seven, not 1.2, percentage points.

Democracy is defeated. Austerity adored. Justice neglected—as the Tea Party worships the wealthy.

The House crisis is deeply rooted. It may require several election cycles but, with passionate resistance, perhaps our nation will yet overcome Tea Party tyranny.

Rev. Harry Rix is a retired pastor and mental health counselor living in Providence, RI. He has 50 articles on spirituality and ethics, stunning photos, and 1200 inspiring quotations available at www.quoflections.org.

RI delegation noncommittal on Iran deal


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

iranThe lines are drawn on a proposed nuclear containment deal with Iran. President Obama and “peace-loving” progressives are united in support while the GOP is unsurprisingly against it. Stuck in the middle are the American people and congressional Democrats.

A new poll from Monmouth State University released Monday shows 41 percent of respondents are unsure if the deal should be inked while 32 percent think lawmakers should not support it and 27 percent think they should. And according to The Hill, 35 House Democrats support the deal and 29 are undecided while 18 Senate Democrats support and 20 are undecided.

The Rhode Island congressional delegation is on the fence, too.

“Congressman Langevin continues to review the agreement and consider the options in advance of Congressional action this fall,” said his spokeswoman Meg Geoghegan. “He has not yet made a final decision on how he will vote on the issue.” Rich Luchette, a spokesman for Congressman David Cicilline said simply, “Congressman Cicilline is reviewing the proposed agreement.”

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse “hasn’t announced a position on the Iran deal yet,” according to spokesman Seth Larson. And Chip Unruh, spokesman for Senator Jack Reed, said the ranking member of the RI delegation, and a nationally-regarded foreign policy expert, “continues to thoroughly review.”

As a ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Reed has been conducting hearings on the issue with Arizona Sen. John McCain. The Hill lists Reed in the yes column but RIPR coverage from July 16 says Reed “has not decided whether he supports President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.” Unruh said The Hill “must be speculating.”

Speculation or not, The Hill lists noted progressive leaders Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders as supporting the deal.

This agreement is obviously not all that many of us would have liked but it beats the alternative – a war with Iran that could go on for years,” Sanders said, according to The Hill. And quoting her from the Boston Globe, Elizabeth Warren has said, “The question now before Congress — the only question before Congress — is whether the recently announced nuclear agreement represents our best available option for preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. I am convinced that it does.”

Progressives have largely supported the deal with Code Pink calling it “a great victory for peace-loving people around the world.” The New York Times has a 200 word summary of the deal.

Whitehouse helps to overhaul federal education law with Every Child Achieves Act


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

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

The United States Senate passed the Every Child Achieves Act Thursday, which eliminated many of the provisions set forth in former President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind law. While No Child Left Behind was criticized for pressuring educators to teach to a test, the Every Child Achieves Act encourages communities to improve schools by finding strategies that work for each student.

Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse helped to craft portions of the law as a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee.

Photo courtesy of http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72151.html
Photo courtesy of http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72151.html

“As I listened to Rhode Islanders on this issue, I heard the same things over and over again: we need to protect federal funding for local districts, give more control to teachers and local officials to design education plans, and get rid of high-stakes testing that has harmed students and teachers by placing too much emphasis on test scores,” Whitehouse said in a press release.

Under the new law, yearly testing will remain for grades three through eight, and once during high school. But, funding and improvement strategies are no longer tied just to the outcomes of these tests. Now, a number of factors will be considered, such as graduation rates, the enrollment rates for Advanced Placement classes, incidents of bullying and violence, and teachers’ working conditions.

Whitehouse penned a number of provisions in the law concerning a range of topics, such as middle school success, after school programs, support for students suffering from addiction, grants for an American History and Civics program, and support for unique, high-ability leaners.

Whitehouse also helped to author language in the bill that requires states to properly assess the needs of students when they enter a juvenile justice facility. States must make sure that students have access to education opportunities while in these facilities, and that the credits they earned while in that setting will transfer to a regular school when they return.

“Overall, these policies are intended to ensure that troubled children who enter the juvenile justice system are given an opportunity to reform their behavior and get ahead, rather than being marginalized and falling further behind in their education,” the press release said.

Another large provision that Whitehouse wrote is designed to give schools a fast-track process for schools to obtain relief from regulations that can act at barriers to school-level innovations. These schools will be able to do a number of things, including extend the school day for struggling students, own their budgeting and accounting, and manage human resources. For a school to participate in this fast-track program, they must demonstrate support from administrators, parents, and at least two thirds of the teaching staff. These schools will also be allowed to form advisory boards to get the opinions of the business community, higher education, and community groups, and use those opinions to influence school planning. These “innovation schools” will remain part of their district, but also be used as locations for experimentation, and serve as a model for other schools in the district.

Whitehouse also partnered with Senator Jack Reed (D- RI) on a third provision, which authorizes funding to provide grants to educational agencies to give students better access to modern library materials, as well as arts-related education and outreach programs.

“Our core goal is to provide all of our kids with the best possible education, and I’m confident that the changes made by this bill will result in real improvements in our schools,” Whitehouse said.

RI delegation doesn’t love fast tracking TPP deal


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

Against TPP 022President Barack Obama is aligning with Republicans and corporations while openly bickering with Sen. Elizabeth Warren and is on the opposite side of “most Congressional Democrats” over a potential Trans Pacific Partnership deal.

The president is also largely at odds with Rhode Island’s congressional delegation on fast-tracking a potential trade compact with 12 Pacific Rim nations. Of the Ocean State’s four elected officials in Congress, three have now spoken out against giving Obama fast track authority. Only Senator Jack Reed is still holding his cards close as the Senate Finance Committee considers granting the president trade promotion authority today.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said he opposes fast track authority for the TPP deal, he told RI Future exclusively today.

“It would be a mistake to provide fast-track authority for trade agreements that could further undermine American wages, manufacturing jobs, and our environment,” he said in an emailed statement. “We need the opportunity carefully review any proposed trade agreements to ensure we’re not repeating the mistakes of past free trade deals.”

In February, Whitehouse gave a speech against trade agreements in general on the Senate floor in February, saying: “I start with a state that has been on the losing end of these trade deals. People say that they are going to enforce the environmental and human rights and labor and safety requirements of these agreements. I haven’t seen it. And I gotta say I don’t like the process very much either. It is secret, we are kept out of it. Who’s in it is a lot of really big corporations and the are up to, I think, a lot of no good in a lot of the deals.”

Congressman David Cicilline is against it, too. He wrote this op/ed in the Providence Journal last month.

“Any agreement that promotes fast-track trade to advance the Trans-Pacific Partnership without thorough review and Congressional input is a bad deal for Rhode Island workers,” he told RI Future yesterday. “Congress should play an important role in making sure trade policies are fair for American workers, businesses, intellectual property holders, and consumers. The fast-track model undercuts oversight of trade agreements and makes it more difficult to protect the interests of working families. We should be working to promote American manufacturing, implement flexible workplace policies that benefit middle-class families, and finally raise the minimum wage so everyone has an opportunity to succeed.”

Also yesterday, Congressman Jim Langevin reaffirmed his opposition to a TPP deal. In February he and Cicilline signed onto a letter opposing it and yesterday he emailed this statement to reporters:

“The United States has been working with TPP negotiating partners for more than three years. This agreement could greatly shift global trading patterns and accordingly deserves the highest level of scrutiny to ensure it does not displace U.S. jobs or undermine our country’s competitiveness. While I favor expanding global trade, it is important that any free trade agreement places American workers and companies on an enforceable level playing field with foreign trading partners when it comes to labor rights, environmental regulation, intellectual property protection and other critical issues. For that reason, I am opposed to passing Trade Promotion Authority legislation with respect to the TPP.

“Congress has the responsibility to set trade policy, and ‘fast track’ procedures largely circumvent this important review. There is a better way to make decisions of this magnitude that significantly impact America’s place in the global economy, and that must include robust debate and discussion from all partners, including Congress. I will continue to work to ensure that trade agreements protect American workers and consumers and do not undermine America’s ability to compete in the global market.”

Reed, on the other hand, isn’t as vocal, according to spokesman Chip Unruh, who said Rhode Island’s senior senator “will take a look at the Finance Committee’s proposal, but he wants to ensure any trade agreement benefits Rhode Island consumers, workers, and businesses.” Unruh noted Reed rejected such TPA authority in both 2002 and 2007.

According to the Washington Post “most Congressional Democrats are opposed” but Oregon Senator Ron Wyden is pushing for a deal that he says has benefits for liberals.

In March the New York Times reported the “ambitious 12-nation trade accord pushed by President Obama would allow foreign corporations to sue the United States government for actions that undermine their investment “expectations” and hurt their business, according to a classified document.” The Nation called the TPP proposal “NAFTA on steroids” in 2012.

Sheldon, progressive senators oppose free trade deals like TPP


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

tppHave you heard about the Trans Pacific Partnership yet?

If not, that’s exactly what the corporate interests – like big pharma and Wall Street – who wrote this trade deal were hoping. The TPP would be the largest such multinational pact ever and it’s been crafted entirely in secret. “It’s a trojan horse in the global race to the bottom,” said Robert Reich, “giving big corporations and Wall Street banks a way to eliminate laws that get in the way of their profits.”

Thankfully, the progressives in the US Senate are finally starting to vocally oppose it – even though it puts them at odds with President Obama, who supports it. Elizabeth Warren had this op/ed in the Washington Post this week, and 8 senators spoke on the floor yesterday to oppose such “free trade” deals.

“I start with a state that has been on the losing end of these trade deals,” said Rhode Island’s Senator Sheldon Whitehouse. “Rhode Island, not a big state, has lost more than 50,000 good paying manufacturing jobs since 1990.”

Whitehouse was joined by sens Warren and Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin and Jeff Merkley of Oregon.

“I don’t like the process very much either,” said Whitehouse on the senate floor yesterday. “It is secret, we are kept out of it and who’s is in it is some really big corporations and they are up to I think no good in a lot of these deals.”

So does Pascoag resident Chris Currie, a member of the RI Progressive Democrats who has been sounding the alarm about the TPP locally since before many in the beltway even knew it existed.

“As we have seen in the recent mid-term elections, multinational corporations have been collectively spending billions … to rig and/or otherwise determine the outcomes [of] elections, and they have succeeded in that regard in many ways,” he said in a recent email. “But they are well on the way toward achieving such objectives in the future without having to spend anywhere near that much money by financing the implementation of the so-called Trans Pacific Partnership (“treaty” and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) “treaty” which have the full support of President Obama, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and most our Republicans in Congress.   Once either of those two “treaties” are implemented, multinational corporations won’t have to worry about bribing our politicians anymore, because if our federal, state, or municipal government enact ANY KIND of legislation that impedes the “expected profitability” of multinational corporations.”

Currie has been sending warning emails about the TPP for years. Here’s an excerpt from one sent in August of 2013: “Promoting (and attempting to “fast track”) the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trans Atlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) treaties which will surrender our nation’s sovereignty to a cartel (world government?) of greedy multi-national corporations (that have no god but money) by empowering them to effectively nullify US federal, state, and local laws which “interfere with the profitability” of their corporations. It would be like surrendering our national sovereignty to greedy bastard (and deadly) corporations like Monsanto!”

Sheldon Whitehouse takes on prison reform


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

whitehouse cornynFirst he led the Senate on climate change. Then he took a high profile role in the fight for tax fairness. Now Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is leading the way on prison reform.

He and Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn, both former state attorneys general, announced yesterday the CORRECTIONS Act, or the Corrections Oversight, Recidivism Reduction, and Eliminating Costs for Taxpayers in Our National System Act. This bill the, two senators say, will reduce both the cost of prisons and recidivism for inmate all over America.

“Our bill is built on the simple premise that when inmates are better prepared to re-enter communities, they are less likely to commit crimes after they are released – and that is in all of our interests,” Whitehouse said in a press release. This bill will be formally introduced today.

And what’s even better – the bill is based on a successful program run right here in Rhode Island.

“As a former state and federal prosecutor, I recognize that there are no easy solutions to overflowing prison populations and skyrocketing corrections spending,” said Whitehouse. “But states like Rhode Island have shown that it is possible to cut prison costs while making the public safer.”

The Whitehouse/Cornyn bill would allow some inmates to earn time off their sentences for participating in programs that reduce recidivism. Whitehouse staff says the concept is based on successful programs implemented by A.T. Wall, director of the department of corrections in Rhode Island, and shared this op/ed authored by Whitehouse and this article authored by A.T. Wall.

“Rhode Island’s experience shows that debates over correctional policy need not pit public protection against the costs of incarceration,” wrote Wall in his article on how the Ocean State reduced costs and recidivism. “Although corrections is a particularly volatile component of the public domain, a careful process, I shaped by evidence and conducted among thoughtful leaders with the requisite political will, can yield a balance that respects both fiscal responsibility and public safety.”

Does Langevin represent District 2 or drone designers?


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

Jim LangevinUntil this new Congress, Rhode Island’s District 2 Congressman Jim Langevin served on the House Intelligence Committee, tasked with, among other duties, overseeing the US drone program. During his tenure on House Intelligence, Langevin also accepted tens of thousands of dollars from corporations that manufacture drones.

In fact, drone manufacturers are among Langevin’s most generous supporters, according to Open Secrets. The top 5 donors to Langevin’s 2014 campaign committee were:

1. General Dynamics  ($32,050)
2. Democratic Party of RI ($19,800)
3. Northup Grumman  ($15,200)
4. Raytheon Co.  ($13,250)
5. Sheet Metal Workers Union ($12,500)

General Dynamics, Northup Grumman and Raytheon all manufacture drones. This is not the first time I’ve brought up the issue.

“It is not surprising that Congressman Langevin’s work in Congress is of relevance to the defense industry,” said Meg Geoghegan, Langevin’s spokesperson. “General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon are key players in our local economy, with General Dynamics Electric Boat alone planning to add 3,000 more jobs at Quonset Point by 2020. In fact, the Rhode Island defense sector supports more than 32,000 jobs overall. ”

The issue isn’t the defense industry. The issue is a Congressman taking money from the industry he was exercising oversight upon. Is that how the game is often played in Washington? Of course. Does it make it right? No. Especially when lives are involved.

In the fall 2014 election, Langevin spent $782,691 against first time GOP candidate and contractor Rhue Rheis, who spent a mere $13,548, according to Open Secrets. Did the incumbent really need the extra money from defense contractors to win against a first time Republican candidate who served in no previous elected office and didn’t even raise even $50,000?

When on the House Intelligence Committee, Langevin voted against “an amendment to require that U.S. agencies involved in drone wars produce annual reports in which they account for all deaths in U.S. drone strikes overseas and identify the civilians and alleged combatants killed. The amendment already passed the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence” in 2013.

Geoghegan, Langevin’s spokesperson, said, “Campaign donations are accepted in good faith with no strings attached, and do not influence Congressman Langevin’s policy work or voting record. He remains a strong advocate for campaign finance reform and transparency, and he is beholden only to the people of Rhode Island.”

In response to the December 2014 Senate Intelligence Committee report which revealed heinous instances of torture, Langevin stood on the side of decency, arguing, “Human rights must be preserved in times of peace and war, and I sincerely hope we can learn from this dark moment in our history.”

But in response to the use of drones, Langevin’s record is more evasive. Drones are used as deadly weapons to track and kill suspected terrorists. At times civilians have been killed. Langevin served on the committee reviewing the drone program, while also receiving money from drone manufacturers.

With the new Congress, Langevin no longer serves on the House Intelligence Committee. To show he is “beholden only to the people of Rhode Island,” Langevin should return donations from the industries he exercised oversight- or give the equivalent amount to charity. His action can serve as an example to incoming members on the House Intelligence Committee.

US Senate says: ‘climate change is real and not a hoax’


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

sheldonThe United States Senate is now on record, 98 to 1, that “climate change is real and not a hoax.”

That’s the language of an amendment Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse squeezed into a bill on the Keystone Pipeline, which was overwhelmingly approved – and even co-sponsored by Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe. No small feet, considering Inhofe, an infamous climate change denier, once wrote a book called, “The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future.”

Whitehouse chalked it up as a victory. “This resolution marks a historic shift for many of my Republican colleagues,” he said in a statement. “While a number of Republicans have long acknowledged that climate change is real, including Senator Graham who spoke once again today, many others either denied the science or refused to discuss it.”

But the beltway media suggests the idea may have backfired.

“Senate Republicans head-faked Democrats on climate change Wednesday, agreeing in a floor vote that the planet’s climate was changing, but blocking language that would have blamed human activity,” wrote Politico.

Inhofe countered that there exists “Biblical evidence” of climate change and blocked a vote on whether or not humans are contributing.

“It was a nifty, if insincere, bit of politics,” . “There’s no question that a vote against a flat statement that climate change is real could have been problematic for candidates down the road — especially for those various Republican senators quietly preparing for the big election in 2016. With Inhofe’s re-framing the question, the Democrats, trying to engineer a gotcha moment, ended up empty-handed on the vote, with neither the satisfaction of nailing down opposition to scientific consensus and without a point of leverage for future discussions of addressing the warming planet.”

Whitehouse was pleased to have at least gained some consensus. “I was glad to see almost every Republican, including Senator Inhofe, acknowledge the reality of climate change today,” he said, “and I hope this means we can move on to discussing not just whether climate change is real, but what we should do about it.”

Whitehouse to introduce progressive tax trifecta


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

sheldon tax packageSenator Sheldon Whitehouse plans to introduce a trifecta of progressive tax bills this session including the Buffett Rule bill, the Offshore Prevention Act and the Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act, he told reporters at his Providence office Monday.

“I think the pressure is on to do something on tax reform,” Whitehouse said. “Now that the Republicans are in the majority they need to prove to the American people they can govern, that they are not just a bomb-throwing obstructive minority, so that changes their motivation on something like tax reform.”

Whitehouse has introduced the first two bills before. He inherits the third piece of legislation from former Michigan Senator Carl Levin the so-called “Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act” that would prevent corporations from shielding profits from tax responsibility.

“It would help us here in Rhode Island because here’s CVS, which like most of the retail industry pays the full freight, they pay the full 35 percent tax rate,” explained Whitehouse. “Meanwhile here’s Carnival Cruise Lines pays virtually zero because they pretend they exist only in offshore Caribbean destinations.”

The three bills would net more than $300 billion in ten years, Whitehouse said.

The Buffett Rule bill, or the Paying A Fair Share Act, would tax at 30 percent all annual income over $2 million and would net $70 million over ten years of missing revenue for the American people. The Offshore Prevention Act would end the corporate practice of deferring tax payments when a company moves jobs overseas and would net $20 million in 10 years. The Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act would net $220 billion over 10 years and prevents corporations from creating overseas tax shelters.

Despite the GOP’s reluctance to help level the tax-paying field, Whitehouse thinks he’s in a good position because he envisions Republicans having to make some concessions with Democrats if they hope to get tax legislation passed this year.

“I don’t think they have 60 votes for their plan and I’m sure they don’t have 67 votes for their plan so if they want to actually have something that gets signed into law by the president and actually changes the tax code they are going to have to work with Democrats,” he said.

Whitehouse handed out this one-pager to reporters to explain the three bills.

Here’s the contents:

THE PROBLEM

Right now America’s tax code is riddled with costly loopholes that benefit some of the highest earners and largest corporations. These special interest provisions have created two sets of tax rules: one for middle-class families and small businesses, and one for wealthy interests and multi-national corporations. With President Obama and Republican Leaders in Congress indicating that they plan to make tax reform a priority in the 114th Congress, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is introducing a package of bills that would make the current system fairer while also raising billions of dollars in new revenue. This revenue could provide substantial resources for investments in infrastructure and education, or could serve as a fairer way to fund new Republican initiatives than cuts to benefits that people rely on.

SHELDON’S PLAN

Implement the Buffett Rule.

  • Thanks to a number of tax loopholes, America’s top earners often pay a lower effective tax rate than middle-class workers. Billionaire investor Warren Buffett has famously lamented he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.
  • Senator Whitehouse’s Paying a Fair Share Act would require multi-million-dollar earners to pay a minimum 30 percent effective federal tax rate, regardless of the number of special credits, deduction, and rates they claim.
  • The bill would generate an estimated $71 billion over ten years.

End tax giveaway for sending jobs offshore.

  • Currently, U.S. companies that manufacture goods abroad for sale here at home are allowed to defer payment of federal income tax – waiting to pay taxes on foreign income in years that minimize their tax liability.
  • Senator Whitehouse’s Offshoring Prevention Act would require companies that send factories and jobs overseas to play by the same rules as ones supporting jobs in the U.S., removing an offshoring incentive and helping local businesses compete.
  • The bill would generate an estimated $19.5 billion in revenue over ten years.

Close loopholes that allow multi-national corporations to avoid taxes.

  • Some of America’s biggest corporations are able to dramatically reduce their taxes by funneling assets and profits through complex networks of offshore corporations.
  • The Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act, which was originally championed by former-Senator Carl Levin, closes these loopholes and requires large multinational corporations to pay a fair share in taxes.
  • The bill would generate at least $220 billion in revenue over ten years.

Torture in our name: #ReadtheReport


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

senate torture reportIt has been roughly one month since Senator Dianne Feinstein (who became Mayor of San Francisco following the assassination of George Moscone) released the Senate Intelligence Committee report detailing the violence and torture used by the CIA against individuals in the years following 9/11.

At least 119 individuals were detained by the CIA in years after the attacks, and, according to the Senate report, at least 26 were wrongly detained and had no associations with terrorism.

One innocent man, Gul Rahman, spent a month in solitary confinement because he had the same name as a suspected terrorist. Two CIA informants spent “approximately 24 hours shackled in the standing sleep deprivation position” before it was confirmed they were mistakenly being detained. These examples are surely some of the more benign experiences of prisoners in CIA detention facilities.

In the foreword to the report, Senator Feinstein wrote:

“It is worth remembering the pervasive fear in late 2001 and how immediate the threat felt. Just a week after the September 11 attacks, powdered anthrax was sent to various news organizations and to two U.S. Senators. The American public was shocked by news of new terrorist plots and elevations of the color-coded threat level of the Homeland Security Advisory System. We expected further attacks against the nation.

I have attempted throughout to remember the impact on the nation and to the CIA workforce from the attacks of September 11, 2001. I can understand the CIA’s impulse to consider the use of every possible tool to gather intelligence and remove terrorists from the battlefield, and CIA was encouraged by political leaders and the public to do whatever it could to prevent another attack. The Intelligence Committee as well often pushes intelligence agencies to act quickly in response to threats and world events.

Nevertheless, such pressure, fear, and expectation of further terrorist plots do not justify, temper, or excuse improper actions taken by individuals or organizations in the name of national security.

The major lesson of this report is that regardless of the pressures and the need to act, the Intelligence Community’s actions must always reflect who we are as a nation, and adhere to our laws and standards.

It is precisely at these times of national crisis that our government must be guided by the lessons of our history and subject decisions to internal and external review. Instead, CIA personnel, aided by two outside contractors, decided to initiate a program of indefinite secret detention and the use of brutal interrogation techniques in violation of U.S. law, treaty obligations, and our values.”

After many years, and despite CIA interference, the report has been made public. We should know what is done in our name.

You can read the full report here.

RI congressional delegation on CIA torture report


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

cia“We are a nation of laws and principles,” said Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed about the now-declassified CIA torture practices made public yesterday in a Senate Intelligence Committee report. “This report highlights a systemic failure to uphold those laws and principles. It is troubling and difficult to digest, but it’s important to have all the facts to prevent a repeat of these mistakes.”

The Senate report, more than five years in the making, details how CIA agents tortured suspects in the so-called war on terror to little or no avail and systematically lied to Congress and the American public about the efficacy of such techniques.

Reed, a senior member of the Armed Services Committee who is often on the short list for a high-level position in the Pentagon, said in a statement: “The use of torture is abhorrent and stands in stark contrast to our constitution and values.  It is not an effective tool to obtain reliable intelligence. As we continue to confront the threat of terrorism at home and abroad, we are reminded that we are stronger as a nation when we remain true to our democratic principles.”

Senator Sheldon Whithouse was a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee in the early stages of developing the report. He’s taken an active role in opposing torture, such as chairing a 2009 Judiciary Committee hearing on torture during the Bush Administration.

Whitehouse said of the report in a statement sent out yesterday, “After years of effort and millions of documents reviewed, the Senate report at last lays out in painstaking detail how the CIA under President Bush and Vice President Cheney turned down the dark path to torture, and then to cover its tracks misled Congress and executive officials about the efficacy of the torture program.  These are hard facts to face as Americans, but it’s important that the facts be known.  Chairman Feinstein and our Intelligence Committee staff deserve our country’s deep appreciation for their extraordinary efforts.”

Congressman David Cicilline, a member of the House Foreign Intelligence Committee, said in a statement: “The Senate Intelligence Committee’s report is deeply disturbing. Among the many findings, this report reveals that the CIA employed more brutal interrogation techniques than had been previously detailed publicly, deliberately misled Congress and the White House about the program’s effectiveness, and damaged the United States’ reputation around the world. These abuses are a violation of basic human rights and are in stark contrast to our values as a nation, and this report provides further confirmation that these techniques simply fail to provide results that strengthen our national security. I applaud the members of the Senate Intelligence Committee for their efforts to provide the American people with an account of the actions carried out in their name. It is now our duty as elected officials, and American citizens who believe in the values upon which our nation was founded, to ensure serious violations such as this never occur again.”

And said Congressman Jim Langevin in a statement: “I am deeply concerned by the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The tactics detailed in the report are contrary to American values, and these programs have been rightly ended. Human rights must be preserved in times of peace and war, and I sincerely hope we can learn from this dark moment in our history.”

Cicilline fought racial profiling as congressman, mayor and lawyer


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

cicilline“Like many Rhode Islanders,” Congressman David Cicilline said in an email to RI Future, “I’m saddened by the recent loss of life in Ferguson and New York City, and understand the frustration felt by so many Americans. We know that effective policing requires the trust and respect of the community and these events have undermined the confidence many people have in law enforcement’s ability to treat everyone equally under the law. We have a responsibility to find a solution to this problem.”

For decades, Cicilline has been working on a solution.

As a congressman, as mayor of Providence and as a lawyer in private practice, Cicillne has throughout his career been ahead of the curve on rooting out racial profiling.

“Racial profiling is wrong and creates more problems than it solves,” he said in an email to RI Future. “When individuals are targeted because of their race, the most important crime-fighting tool police officers have, the trust of the community, is damaged.”

Cicilline, D-RI, is one of 60 co-sponsors of Congressman John Conyers’ 2013 End Racial Profiling Act. The bill is similar to the new federal rules announced Monday by the Justice Department with the very notable exception that an act of Congress would apply to state and local law enforcement agencies. The new Justice Department guidelines apply only to federal law enforcement officers.

“I welcome Attorney General Eric Holder’s update of racial profiling guidance for federal law enforcement agencies,” Cicilline told me. “This is a step in the right direction, but we must go further and end racial profiling wherever it may occur. The End Racial Profiling Act will address the root cause of racial profiling, protect individuals’ civil liberties and educate law enforcement on the differences between a suspect description and discriminatory profiling.”

The bill, according to this summary, defines racial profiling as: “the practice of a law enforcement agent or agency relying, to any degree, on race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, or religion in selecting which individual to subject to routine or spontaneous investigatory activities, or in deciding upon the scope and substance of law enforcement activity following the initial investigatory activity, except when there is trustworthy information relevant to the locality and timeframe that links a person of a particular race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, or religion to an identified criminal incident or scheme.”

It would require police departments to develop policies aimed at eliminating racial profiling and would create federal guidelines for collecting data.

As mayor of Providence, Cicilline put together “a plan for tackling racial profiling, a practice that the city’s police have been charged with engaging in,” according to Rhode Island Lawyer’s Weekly.

The plan was critiqued by the ACLU but won praise by the Police Assessment Resource Center. The group said the action plan contained “several recommendations, such as more police/community interaction, data collection and analysis, and mandatory diversity training for officers every two years. Under the plan, officers found to have engaged in racial profiling would be required to attend counseling and training sessions, and could face reprimands or dismissal.”

Cicilline campaigned for mayor, in part, on reforming the police department. He won some praise from the late Providence Phoenix, and even Steve Brown of the ACLU. Wrote Wrote Ian Donnis in 2003:

“It will take time to change public perceptions, particularly in the poorer Providence neighborhoods where police-community relations are most in need of improvement, but many observers are optimistic about the outlook. As put by Steve Brown, executive director of the Rhode Island chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, ‘Things can only go up. I think that’s a fair statement and I have no reason to doubt that they will. The mayor has certainly demonstrated in his other roles a strong concern about this issue. I would be very surprised if we didn’t see some significant changes in police-community relations.'”

One of the ways Cicilline demonstrated his commitment to police-community relations was as the initial lawyer in the Bernie Flowers case. Flowers was a 50-year-old African American who in September of 2000 was pulled over at gunpoint by the Westerly police. He sued the Westerly police department for violating his civil rights.

“This lawsuit is intended to hold accountable the police who violated Mr. Flowers’ civil rights and to discourage others from engaging in this kind of racial profiling, which continues to be one of America’s greatest shames,” Cicilline said in an ACLU press release from 2001.

Flowers got a new lawyer when Cicilline became mayor and a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in 2004.

Cicilline, Lynch debate: long on one liners, loud voices


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

cicillinelynchCongressman David Cicilline and his Republican challenger Cormick Lynch win the prize for the most spirited debate of the 2014 election cycle.

Twice did NBC 10 News Conference host Bill Rappleye ask Congressman David Cicilline and Republican challenger Cormick Lynch not to touch each other during the shouting match, as well as one phrase (“BS”) perhaps not suitable for children (it airs at 11:30 Sunday morning).

And, oh yeah, one unicorn reference.

News, Weather and Classifieds for Southern New England

“People are sick to death of the Democrat and Republican BS.” said Lynch. Which is certainly true, but this was his response to Cicilline talking about raising the minimum wage, bringing manufacturing jobs back to Rhode Island and the United States, rebuilding roads and bridges and lowering the cost of higher education.

When asked, pretty directly, why he is opposed to raising the minimum wage, Lynch began, “It’s not the liberals aren’t intelligent….” but eventually got around to indicating Rhode Island should model its economy after North Dakota rather than raise the minimum wage. He stressed working with the state leaders to lower the corporate tax. “We need to attract businesses here.”

Cicilline: “Raising the minimum wage is going to help lead to job growth because what happens, Bill, is that when people have more money in their pocket who are minimum wage earners they spend that money.”

Lynch: “Congressman what color was the unicorn you rode in on? And what planet did it take you here from. There’s no customers coming into anyone’s business in Rhode Island. That’s why we are in the state we are in.”

All that, just in the first segment. Here’s the second:

News, Weather and Classifieds for Southern New England

I think it’s fair to label Lynch a hawk. “I think it’s not politically correct to say, stop trying to democratize countries and kill the enemy. These guys gotta go. I wouldn’t rule boots on the ground out. If you need someone to board a flight and go over there, I’d be more than happy to go over there myself.”

Based on the way he debates, ISIS should be afraid.

Rob Paquin and I discuss here:

News, Weather and Classifieds for Southern New England

RI delegation on Obama’s ISIS speech


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

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

obama isisWhile Rhode Islanders were still celebrating or commiserating their candidate’s primary performance earlier this week, President Barack Obama was addressing the nation about his plans to “destroy” ISIS without putting more troops on the ground.

Here’s his 15 minute speech:

Taking the nation’s temperature, The New York Times reports this headline: “Weary of War, but Favoring Airstrike Plan”. It could as easily apply to Rhode Island’s congressional delegation.

All four supported additional airstrikes and, for various reasons, agreed more troops on the ground would be counterproductive. Here are each of their full statements.

Senator Jack Reed (senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee):

“Tonight, the President made a clear, compelling case that denying these terrorists safe havens will require a targeted, smart, and sustained multi-national effort.

“Like many Americans, I am skeptical of deeper military involvement that could lead to an open-ended conflict.  I don’t want to see more U.S. combat troops on the ground because I think that is what ISIL wants: to try to bog us down in a bloody and costly fight that helps them recruit more terrorists.  Indigenous forces on the ground are going to have to step up.

“This President’s deliberate and thoughtful strategy ensures we will not repeat the mistakes of rushing into ground combat as we did in Iraq in 2003.  Instead, he developed a comprehensive strategy that includes our allies in the region, together with the force of our diplomatic power, intelligence capabilities, and targeted military might.”

Congressman David Cicilline (A member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Cicilline received a national security briefing from Administration officials on Thursday, before issuing this statement):

“Last night, President Obama addressed the nation and outlined a comprehensive strategy to defeat the terrorist group known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, including increased U.S. military action in the region and military and technical support for our allies. The President reaffirmed his position that our response will not include U.S. combat troops on the ground and the President made clear he has no plans to do so. I strongly support this position.

“It is clear that ISIL poses a serious threat to U.S. national security interests in the region and has expressly threatened the American homeland, and we must do everything we can to prevent another terrorist attack on American soil. We must also remain vigilant as a nation and ensure we’re fully equipped to respond to all threats against America or American personnel. The President laid out a thoughtful strategy to work with Iraqi and Kurdish forces on the ground, as well as a broader international coalition, to defeat this grave danger to U.S. national security interests and regional stability.”

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (Whitehouse visited Syria in January 2013):

“After a decade of war, I share the concerns of many Rhode Islanders about further military engagement, but I also share their alarm over the rising influence of ISIL and their horror over the brutal tactics used by these extremists.  I will continue to oppose the deployment of regular ground troops, but we must take seriously ISIL’s ruthless beheading of Americans, its threat to U.S. personnel and facilities in the region, and its ability to capture territory and resources to conduct terrorist attacks.  I believe the plan outlined by the President tonight – to build a coalition of regional partners and work with the newly formed Iraqi government to drive ISIL out of that country – is the right approach.  I also support expanding our efforts to provide military advice and airstrikes, and arming moderate rebels in Syria – a step I first called for after visiting the region early last year.  Syria and ISIL present a complex set of problems to which there are no easy answers, but I believe President Obama is pursuing the best set of options available to us at this time.

Congressman Jim Langevin (senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence):

“The threat posed by ISIS demands the world’s attention and action. They are the very definition of extremist, and their brutality knows no bounds. They have perpetrated unspeakable acts of violence against innocent people, including women, children and religious minorities who have been targeted for their refusal to adhere to an extreme and dangerous set of principles cloaked in religious sentiment.

“Intelligence officials estimate that thousands of Americans and Europeans have joined ISIS fighters, and these individuals could return home with the intent of doing harm to the United States and our allies.

“This terrorist threat, combined with existing sectarian tensions and an Iraqi government that, until now, has marginalized too many of its people, has created a complex challenge in the region, and it will take a multifaceted, collaborative effort to ultimately defeat ISIS. That approach must include a more inclusive government in Iraq, and I am encouraged by the improvements we are starting to see on that front.

“Like so many of my constituents, I do not want to see the United States embroiled in another ground war in the Middle East. We have learned over the past 13 years from our mistakes in Iraq. But on the eve of September 11, a date so deeply ingrained in the minds and hearts of Americans, we remember where we have been, and can see a clearer path forward. Evil cannot be left unchallenged. I applaud the President’s speech tonight as a first step towards addressing this threat, and I appreciate his commitment to working with Congress and keeping the American people informed. Going forward, I expect to hear further details of the timing and scope of the strategy he proposes, and I will continue to exercise rigorous oversight of the military commitment to come.

“The challenges we face are tremendous, but in the face of this adversity, the United States of America is ready to lead a broad coalition of partners in the region and worldwide to address the threat posed by ISIS. And as we face this threat, I continue to be so grateful to the brave men and women of our military. To the service members here and abroad, and to the troops that will join this effort to defeat ISIS, thank you for your tireless commitment to preserving freedom and protecting our country.”


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