jorge elorza – Page 5

October 2, 2014October 2, 2014

Providence Young Democrats rally today for Jorge Elorza

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

Ok, so you might be a little tired of references to the Projo/WPRI Providence mayoral poll that came out last week, but there’s one part that hasn’t gotten a ton of attention that I feel needs to be highlighted. From Ted Nesi and Tim White’s article:

“Two subgroups are currently breaking in Elorza’s favor: self-identified Democrats, where Elorza leads 39% to 33%, and 18- to 39-year-olds, where he has a slight edge of 35% to 33%.”

In other words, Young Democrats will be critical to Jorge Elorza’s success in this election. We need to show up and vote on Election Day. If we do, Jorge’s path to victory is all but assured.

Fortunately, we are more than up to the task.

I am very excited to announce the establishment of the Providence Young Democrats (#PVDYD), a new chapter of the Young Democrats of Rhode Island.

#PVDYD will focus on engaging young residents (age 18-35) of the capital city in the political process, advocating for public policy changes that benefit the needs of young people, and supporting the Democratic candidates who will stand with us at City Hall.

But our first mission will be, of course, to do our part to elect our party’s nominee for Mayor of the City of Providence, Jorge Elorza. He is the next generation leader we need to continue to move our city forward.

Whether you’re a young Democrat or a young-at-heart Democrat, we invite you to join us today at 4pm at the Broad Street entrance to Roger Williams Park for a rally and press conference to celebrate the launch of this new chapter and show our support for Jorge Elorza.

Because this election is about the future, and we won’t be dragged backwards.

September 30, 2014October 3, 2014

Cianci didn’t win debate, neither did Elorza; Harrop had best lines

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

Buddy Cianci was the biggest presence on the stage, but that doesn’t mean he won the WPRI/Providence Journal mayoral debate Tuesday night. Or picked up many undecided voters, which is probably the only definition of ‘winning’ that really matters.

Cianci stuttered at times, he misspoke – or perhaps lied? – often and raised the ire, at one point or another, of nearly everyone on the stage. He’s never been one to care much for rules, and moderator Tim White had his work cut out for him in keeping him in line.

When talking about crime, Cianci suggested there were 15 shootings in 19 hours over the weekend. In fact there was 1 stabbing and 5 shootings. He claimed community policing thrived when he was mayor, but Ian Donnis of RIPR quickly tweeted a link to a 1999 Phoenix article of his that indicates it was “marginalized.” When panelist Ted Nesi asked, “Do you agree your failure to fund the pension system” is part of Providence’s fiscal problem, Cianci stammered his way through an answer.

He seemed like an old man, quite frankly, past his prime. But like Derek Jeter, Buddy Cianci has the potential to hit a walk off in his last home at bat.

Jorge Elorza, on the other hand, was more like a young Jeter: crisp and on message. He harped often on moving the city beyond Buddy. “Let’s leave behind the corruption,” he said. Mentioning incentives to help police officers live in the city and transforming school buildings into neighborhood community centers, he said, “I want Providence to be a city of opportunity.”

Elorza certainly had fewer gaffs than Cianci, but he had fewer winners, too. When Elorza mentioned increasing exports from the waterfront, Cianci retorted, “What are you going to export, used cars?”

But if one-liners determined victory, then Republican Dan Harrop was the hands down winner. When asked if he would drop out, he spun one of the biggest unknowns of the election into a Republican talking point. “I could fall, break my hip and [the Republican chair] could appoint Bob Healey to run in my place”

Harrop also may have made the most progressive statement of the night when he said, “I think it is immoral that we are asking our children to enter these” school buildings.

Elorza said he wants “be remembered as the person who turned around these schools.” But in order to do that, he’s first going to have to be remembered as the one who beat Buddy Cianci.

September 16, 2014September 17, 2014

Cianci’s robocall peddles falsehoods and prejudice

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

How does a person who has twice embarrassed the great city of Providence by losing their job as mayor due to felony convictions convince people to give them a third chance to screw over the city? First, such a person must hold such a low opinion of the voting public that they seriously think of themselves as a viable candidate. Second, the candidate must then do everything they can to paint their opponent as something worse than someone who has twice been caught violating the public’s trust.

Vincent Cianci has attempted to solve this unique problem by branding his opponent, Jorge Elorza, as an atheist eager to impose his disbelief in God on unsuspecting children in our public schools. In a robocall delivered to those Providence area homes that still have landlines, listeners were given the following false choice:

Buddy Cianci believes that there needs to be a separation of church and state and teaching about God’s existence, or non-existence, has no place in our public schools. Who do you agree with? Press “1” if you agree with Cianci that teaching about God’s existence or non-existence, does not belong in schools. Press “2” if you agree with Jorge Elorza that it would be acceptable to teach in schools that there is no God.

Cianci’s robocall is referencing a paper from 2010 in which Elorza speculates on the limits of secularity in public schools. In this paper, Elorza is careful to outline three different ways in which to understand God, theist, deist and memist. At the end of his paper Elorza concludes that schools could theoretically teach that the theist God does not exist, but that the deist and memist Gods would be constitutionally protected. Says Elorza,

Deism allows for individuals to search for answers to the transcendental and ultimate questions of life. And memism allows for people to live according to any particular moral code and to worship God as they see fit. The core features that give religion its special significance in people’s lives remain entirely intact.

Elorza’s paper was a philosophical and legalistic think piece, not a policy paper for the advancement of atheist ideals. Nowhere in this paper does Elorza seek to oppose the protections of the First Amendment or violate the tenet of separation of church and state. Cianci’s robocall is a crass attempt to divide people on religious grounds, playing on our prejudices and fears.

On this site, I speculated, in response to Elorza’s paper, that Elorza might be an atheist, and I chided the candidate for unfairly characterizing his paper as a defense against “angry atheists” during a debate with Michael Solomon on Channel 12. Elorza may or not be an atheist. Cianci may or may not be a Catholic. In truth, the religious beliefs of the candidates do not matter. What matters is character, and an assessment of the previous actions of the candidates as pertains to how they may perform in the future.

By this measure, Cianci is the clear loser. Twice convicted of serious crimes performed while in office, Cianci has twice demonstrated his inability to lead this city. His candidacy for a third go at the job is an insult to the voters of Providence, and his robocall demonstrates the depths of his dishonesty.

Jorge Elorza is the clear choice for mayor of Providence.

September 4, 2014September 6, 2014

Is Jorge Elorza an atheist?

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

Providence mayoral candidate Jorge Elorza was a law professor at Roger Williams University when he wrote his 2010 University of Pittsburgh Law Review article “Secularism and the Constitution: Can Government Be Too Secular?” In this legal paper Elorza claims, “science has disconfirmed the claim that the theist God has the power to violate the laws of physics” and that in a public school setting, “teaching that the theist God does not exist would not violate any of the underlying values” of the religious clause of the first amendment. In other words, it might be permissible, says Elorza, for public schools to teach that certain kinds of gods do not exist.

In his paper Elorza demonstrates a good deal of knowledge about the so-called new atheism, quoting extensively from Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, but he also mines popular works of science, such as Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene and Brian Greene’s The Elegant Universe. This is all part of an effort to “engage the literature from various scientific disciplines and reveal the extent to which religious claims have been successfully debunked by science.”

Elorza claims that there “are four views of God that cover the entire spectrum: the theist, deist, atheist, and what I call the memist view.” The deist position is that God is a creator who set the universe in motion and currently plays no active role in the universe. This means, says Elorza, that there is no “scientific” difference between being an atheist (one who denies the existence of god) and being a deist. “…the disagreement between deists and atheists is of no consequence,” say Elorza.

A theist god, however, is more problematic. “The theist believes,” says Elorza, “that God is not only the spark that gave birth to the universe but that He has also intervened in the natural world and has violated the laws of physics since the point of creation.” This is the god that Elorza maintains cannot exist, and is disproved by science.

The last kind of god Elorza discusses is “memist.” “Based on the concept of the meme,” says Elorza, “the memist God resides entirely in the minds of its adherents.” For a definition of this kind of god, Elorza turns to The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James, and James’ definition of the divine, “…the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine.” The memist god, it seems, is the god in our head, and this is the one kind of god that is unquestionable real, because it is located within our minds, as a concept. “While the existence of both the deist and theist God can be called into question, the memist God most certainly exists!” declares Elorza.

Elorza seems to be arguing for the legal status of methodological naturalism, (a term he does not use in his paper) which is a requirement when engaging with the scientific method. Methodological naturalism is the assumption that miracles will not happen when scientists engage in experimentation, because science is the study natural laws, and miracles are by their supernatural nature violations. Differentiating between a theistic and atheistic world “is possible because a world with a theist God is fundamentally different than a world without one. In particular, a world without a theist God is one where natural phenomena may be understood as a gradual process over time. However, a world with a theist God that violates the laws of physics produces a world with ‘ontological discontinuities.’”

Still, Elorza’s ultimate conclusion is that the elimination of the theist god from secular society and laws does not diminish religious protections. “While the memist God would have all of the powers to prescribe a moral code as would the theist God, religious groups might object to the memist God on the grounds that it does not have a divine source. Since it is contained entirely in the human mind, it may be believed that its stature is comparatively diminished in relation to either the deist or theist God. However, I argue that even though it does not have a divine origin, religious adherents should take solace in the fact that this should not diminish its level of constitutional protection.”

In other words, even though science can show where your belief in god has come from, and even though there is no good reason to believe in your god, your belief is constitutionally protected.

Now this all sounds very much like the kind of paper an atheist might write. But when confronted about this paper by Ted Nesi during a televised debate with Democratic primary challenger Michael Solomon, Elorza backtracked. (.)

Ted Nesi: You wrote in a 2010 law review article that, quote, the evidence shows that it’s overwhelmingly unlikely that the theist God exists. Therefore, you wrote, it’s Constitutional to teach in public schools that, apparently, the God of Christianity and Judaism does not exist. Why do you believe that, and would you seek to implement that in the Providence public schools?

Providence Mayoral Candidate Jorge Elorza: No, absolutely not….This is a 60 sixty page article, and it’s a special definition of what the theist God means. Effectively, I wrote this article because there are a number of quote-unquote angry atheists arguing that since evolution has proved true…God doesn’t exist. And I wrote this article to combat them and say that look, you might be right on this small slice, but everything else that God entails remains intact…I don’t seek to have this be taught in the public schools. This is a hypothetical that I laid out over 60 pages in an academic article.

TN: But you did write it’s unlikely that the theist God exists…Do you believe that yourself, or are you saying this is what those scientists believe?

JE: As narrowly defined, within that article, then yes, I believe that. But that’s a very special definition. There is so much more to what God entails.

Why did Elorza mischaracterize his paper? “I wrote this article because there are a number of quote-unquote angry atheists arguing that since evolution has proved true…God doesn’t exist.” Yet the only kind of God that Elorza allows in his piece is one that exists in human minds, one without any external reality or divinity. Bringing up the “angry atheists” comes off as a dodge, and an insult to atheists. The only people Elorza mentions as being angry in his paper are theistic parents. “…in order to teach, over the objections of angry parents, that the theist God does not exist, the issue must be a well-settled scientific principle.”

The truth is that being an atheist is seen as a career killer for politicians seeking public office. The American Humanist Association’s Maggie Ardiente claims that 24 members of Congress have privately admitted to be atheists. However, if these politicians are outed, they will deny being atheists. Pew has pointed out that atheists are near the bottom (with Muslims) of the popularity poll with voters.

With public attitudes like these, it makes sense that Elorza might want to distance himself from his paper, which is a shame, because the paper really does argue for the kinds of religious and conscience protections the first amendment guarantees.

If Elorza is elected mayor of Providence, he would be the the highest ranking openly atheist elected official in the country.

But of course, he would first have to be open about his atheism.

August 10, 2014August 11, 2014

The Frymaster endorsements

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

Political endorsements ain’t what they used to be. If Donald Trump can issue endorsements and have people take them seriously, I figured…what the heck?

Herewith, my endorsements (i.e., people for whom I will vote) for select state-wide and GA races. I also add some one-liners at the end for GA candidates in districts other than my own. Unsurprisingly, virtually all endorsements are for the Democratic primary on September 9, 2014, which everybody knows is far more important than the general election in November.

Note: These endorsements solely represent my own opinion. They in no way represent the opinion of RI Future or its owners, editors and other contributors.

Angel Taveras for Governor

Typically, that right there is empty political blather, but if you’ve been around Providence over the past four years, you know it’s 100% real.Unlike the Providence mayoral primary, there is a real upside to getting the right Democratic candidate here, and a real downside to getting the wrong one. As mayor, Angel Taveras has proven himself a strong leader who can make the hard decisions.

Taveras inherited an absolute financial disaster, far worse than anybody in the campaign expected. The $110mm structural deficit stunned everybody. But Taveras made several crucial moves that let him and the city council craft a path back to stability. Specifically, he negotiated tough pension and union contract reforms by putting himself in the position of being the first to sacrifice.

That is, HE AND HIS OFFICE were first in line for the haircuts. There was not a lot that the other departments could do except take their hats off and sit down in the barber’s chair. As a result, the deal stuck, and the city could move on to other important issues.

Gina Raimondo, by contrast, has proven a disaster as treasurer. Her pension reform, so wildly applauded by the Wall Street Journal and other business allies, has spun out of control. It was so badly constructed that multiple rounds of mediation could not stop aggrieved pensioners from litigating.

It is the height of hypocrisy to claim that Raimondo created a pension deal. THERE IS NO DEAL.

This is what happens when a person accustomed to giving orders needs to work with others as co-equals (as Taveras did). Business people—that is, BOSSES—make for poor public servants. A good executive in the private sector makes a bad executive in the public sector.

In the nightmare scenario of a Raimondo administration, we should brace ourselves for ongoing class warfare. And because the state will remain mired in this conflict, we will not be able to address the actual issues facing us, like healing the economy and the ecology.

That connection between economy and ecology was front-and-center at Greg Gerritt‘s 60th birthday party / one-day conference last October. Somewhere around 100 practitioners, educators and activists that work in the “econo-logical industries,” if you will, convened at the Pawtucket Armory to learn and share.

Both Raimondo and Taveras dropped by, even though neither was a declared candidate. Later, I asked around about Raimondo…”Why is a venture capitalist speaking to a bunch of socialists? Does she have roots in this community?”

The answer I got was basically unanimous:

She’s laying down Astro-turf. She’s a 1-percenter. I don’t trust her.

Now she’s claiming herself to be a progressive. I ain’t buying’ it.

On Clay Pell…who is this guy? I personally find it insulting that some scion of the power class who married a minor celebrity feels he can waltz in from the federal structure and instantly be an effective governor. How about you put in a term in the GA and let people get to know you a little?

Jorge Elorza for Mayor of Providence

Where the governor’s race could have catastrophic consequences should the forces of light and goodness not prevail, the race for mayor of Providence fills me with hope for the future. Each of the three major candidates brings strong credentials and will likely make a good mayor.

I endorse Jorge Elorza for two reasons. First, I believe that more newcomers in office is exactly what Providence needs. (Although, it may prove unfortunate to lose Michael Solomon’s experience and leadership on the city council.) And while he’s new to elected office, he is not a newcomer to the city or the state. He has built a strong campaign team, attracting the kind of young leaders that can continue the work that Taveras has started.

More importantly, I endorse Elorza because his life experience better prepares him to deal with a troubling increase in violence, particularly on the South Side. Elorza grew up in a tough place going through tough times, and he prevailed where many of his peers did not. His performance at the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence candidate’s forum drove this home.

As a native of this city’s West End neighborhood who speaks fluent, near-native Spanish but also holds a law degree and has worked within the justice apparatus, Elorza is best-positioned to work with law enforcement and community groups to bring down the level of tension and violence.

Aaron Regunberg for RI House of Reps, District 4

This is my district, and it has seen some very difficult days, at least politically. The growing distrust in Gordon Fox exploded after his stunning failures in the 2010 and 2011 sessions, enabling Mark Binder to nearly beat him in 2012.

The FBI were nice enough to prove out our distrust by raiding then-Speaker Fox’s home and offices. Well, you know the story.

This race for the open seat illustrates the important choice Rhode Islanders face. Do we want true progressive reform or do we want yet more half-hearted and easily co-opted alleged liberals? Readers know my answer to that and should rightly expected this endorsement. Aaron Regunberg, it the tradition of David Segal and Chris Blazejewski, is bright, young, eager and committed.

Unlike the other two candidates, he has built strong connections with young people and communities of color. As a founder of the Providence Student Union, he has helped students at Hope High fend off the worst of the corporatist educational “reforms” touted by the other two candidates.

Miriam Ross seems a female version of Gordon Fox: a business-oriented lawyer ready to cater to the already powerful at the expense of the less-fortunate.

Heather Tow-Yick isa product of Teach for America, the epitome of wrong-headed educational reform. TfA works from the assumption that poor performance in inner-city schools comes from poorly-trained teachers and not from the OBVIOUS, GLARING INEQUITIES opportunity and support that burden the students that struggle the most.

If you’re a progressive, this one is a no-brainer.

Gayle Goldin for RI Senate, District 3

Again, my district, and again, a no-brainer. Goldin is a US immigrant, who learned English as a second language. She has worked her entire career in social service non-profits, primarily in the areas of health and wellness for children, women and the disadvantaged.

Her opponent, Chris Wall, is among the power elites. A former TV news talker, he’s worked as press secretary for a state cabinet officer and sells real estate in a major way. He’s all about the business and comes off like a jock.

I’m sure that TPV would prefer dude-bro in her chamber rather than Ms. Goldin. For that reason alone, it must be Gayle in Senate 3.

One-Line Endorsements

Each person listed below is a first-time candidate at the state level. I can’t cast a ballot for any of these folks, but if I could, I’d elect:

David Fasteson, Senate 22—Good guy and hardest-working first time candidate EVAH vs. ex-cop and political repeat offender. (Sierra Club got this one wrong!)

Jennifer Siciliano, House 22—Woonsocket city planner with genuine progressive cred vs. scion of the power elite who’s only ever worked for the GA.

Doris De los Santos, Senate 7—Latina policy wonk vs. old, white lawyer who’s run unopposed more than he’s faced challengers in his six terms.

Margaux Morisseau, Senate 21—Woonsocket non-profit leader with genuine progressive cred vs. A REPUBLICAN!

Shelby Maldonado, House 56—New CF vs old CF…’nuff said.

Carlos Tobon, House 58—Not the most progressive Democrat vs. incumbent that often fails to vote and voted against marriage equality

Note: The second and third paragraphs in the section on Jorge Elorza were inverted in the original version. The author corrected the error approximately 6pm on the day of publication.

June 30, 2014September 25, 2014

Jorge Elorza says he wants to be mayor for working families

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

Jorge Elorza, a 38-year-old former housing court judge and faculty member at Roger Williams University, may be short of political experience as he bids to become the next mayor of Providence, but he’s long on life experiences. I asked him how he got involved in politics, and he told me a story of childhood friend’s murder, and leaving a Wall Street job fresh out of the University of Rhode Island.

Elorza is full of such amazing stories. His parents were undocumented workers who crossed the border illegally from Guatemala. His father decided to come to the United States after being approached by Guatemalan guerrillas during political unrest of the mid-1970’s.

He speaks fondly of his hardscrabble upbringing on Cranston Street, on Providence’s West Side.

Elorza is a longtime Angel Taveras supporter – he worked on the current mayor’s first campaign for congress and briefly as Taveras ran for mayor. When he was first approached about the idea, Elorza said he was initially uninterested in running for mayor but eventually decided it was a great way to help the community.

We talked a lot about education policy, and Elorza’s idea to keep schools open through the summer and restructuring them to be more akin to community centers.

In some regards, Elorza would mimic Mayor Taveras on education policy. Though Elorza said he wouldn’t have fired the teachers as Taveras did.

Elorza is on the board of directors of Achievement First, and spoke highly of the effect charter schools can have on traditional public schools.

Forget Buddy Cianci, I wanted to know how an Elorza administration would be different than a Smiley administration. I asked him about their differences.

I asked him about the biggest issue for Providence? Of course he said, education and the economy, but he reiterated what he said at his announcement. “I’m running for mayor for one reason: because I want Providence to be a place where working families can succeed.”

“Sometimes I truly believe that we all just don’t interact enough to know that we all want the exact same thing, we want better schools, we all want a stronger economy and we want safe and vibrant neighborhoods,” Elorza said when we were talking about working together.

June 2, 2014June 2, 2014

Elorza, Smiley speak out on cancelled City Hall meeting

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

Thursday night’s last minute cancellation of the Providence City Council’s Ordinance Committee remains unexplained. Both the mayor’s office and members of the city council remain silent about the cancellation that left more than a hundred hotel workers and supporters, mostly women and working mothers, to arrive at an empty and unresponsive City Hall.

Two Democratic primary mayoral candidates did respond to my request for a comment on the cancellation, however. While not going so far as to support the $15 an hour minimum wage ordinance the hotel workers have brought before the City Council, the two candidates did champion the idea of open government and were critical of the decision to cancel the meeting without taking into account the sacrifices made by the workers to attend.

“This cancellation was an unnecessary and avoidable problem for those who planned on attending,” said Elorza, “As I made clear in my proposal on Revitalizing and Revamping City Hall, I believe that creating a friendly, customer service oriented atmosphere in City Hall is vital to maintaining the healthy functions of our government.”

Josh Block, Communications Director for the Smiley campaign, relayed the following statement to the hotel workers, “Brett shares your frustrations. He believes that, whatever decision is reached, it must be done in an open and transparent process. Brett is disappointed in the City Council leadership for playing politics and canceling the vote at the 11th hour without notifying the many hardworking men and women who made significant sacrifices and arrangements in order to show up and make sure their voices were heard.”

It is the right of every American that government be open and accessible. One might hope that the hotel workers be someday given an explanation and apology.

February 11, 2014February 12, 2014

Jorge Elorza: School transportation ‘a matter of priorities, not cash’

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

Housing Court Judge Jorge Elorza, who is running for mayor of Providence, said the city has to find the money to offer transportation to students who live more than two miles from school.

“We need to dramatically decrease the minimum distance for students to receive bus passes,” Elorza said in a detailed statement released this afternoon. “With a total city budget of $662 million, we must make it a priority to find the $1.35 million to fund passes for the 2,100 students who live between 2 and 3 miles from school. $1.35 million is only 0.2% of the total budget. This is a matter of priorities, not cash.”

A new report and the Providence Student Union have called attention to Providence as a regional outlier in that it doesn’t provide transportation to high school unless the student lives more than 3 miles away. Most districts in Rhode Island and other cities in the region provide transportation at two miles.

He wrote: “As a community, we have to do everything in our power to make sure our students are in their classrooms and learning. Our students face too many challenges for us to be creating additional institutional barriers for them. Denying students who live between 2-3 miles away from school bus passes impacts learning, impacts health, and impacts safety, and our low-income communities are disproportionately affected.

When I was a child growing up on Cranston Street, my Mother acted as the school bus for many kids in the neighborhood. Although we were lucky to have her there to bring us to school, not every student is as lucky as we were.”

January 20, 2014January 21, 2014

MLK Day candidates forum meets Chris Young

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

The overflow crowd spilled out the door.

To celebrate the life and work of Dr. Martin Luther King, the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence hosted a candidates forum, focusing on their approaches to minimize violence in Providence and Rhode Island. The forum opened with a session for gubernatorial candidates, and concluded with a session for the Providence mayoral candidates.

The gubernatorial candidates comprised only three declared Democrats: Todd Giroux, Angel Taveras and Gina Raimondo. Likewise, the mayoral candidates also included only those declared (or not) for the Democratic nomination: Lorne Adrain, Jorge Elorza, Brett Smiley and Michael Solomon. GOP aspirant Daniel Harrop sent regrets. It does seem that any other more-or-less serious candidate who wanted to participate could have…as will become clear in a bit. I never bothered to find out why Fung, Block, Lombardi and other likely participants did not attend. (If you know for certain, please add it in the comments.)

Naturally, your Frymaster arrived late, far too late to get a seat in the already-packed assembly hall, which held fewer than 100 seats. The SRO crowd jammed the back of the room, spilled out the door and filled an adjoining room with the audio piped in. Under the pretense of taking photographs, I was lucky enough to get access to the Institute’s boardroom on the second floor overlooking the assembly hall.

Unfortunately, the only audio we had was the mobile phone of a staffer who had called another staffer whose phone was placed in front of a loudspeaker. Eventually, yet another staffer brought a pair of computer speakers from his office and, powered through the USB port on my borrowed laptop, we eventually succeeded in providing a passable audio feed for the dozen or so who filled the boardroom.

We got the jury-rigged system working just in time for the gubernatorial candidates’ 1-minute closing statements. Thus, this reporter can only comment on the action among the hopefuls for Providence City Hall.

Mayoral Candidates: Initial Impressions

(seated, l-r) Brett Smiley, Lorne Adrain, Michael Solomon, Jorge Elorza. Teny Gross of the Institute far right.

Other news outlets can bore you with what the candidates said, but I’ll sum up: not much. As you might expect, all the candidates were long on the “what” and short on the “how.”

Overall, they all agreed that violence is bad and that nonviolence is good and should be encouraged. The unifying element of the “how” was that the broader community collectively needs to take ownership of the city…we all need to do our part…it takes a village.

You know the rap. It translates roughly as: I have no idea how to do this, so you people figure it out.

It was hard to find enough policy differences to differentiate sharply one candidate from another. What follows is a mix of the style and substance that one observer took away from the event.

Lorne Adrain – Some felt Mr. Adrain showed himself thoughtful and open, even admitting that he didn’t really have specifics on certain topics. While that is refreshing in its rarity, I took it as a lack of preparation. For Mr. Adrain to succeed in winning the confidence of voters, he will need to start nailing down exactly what makes him the one and only choice in this ever-growing field. Bottom line: leaders need to have answers, not more questions. Approachable and smart, but not ready for this warm-up event.

Jorge Elorza – I give Mr. Elorza the win, but it was marginal. Having grown up on Cranston Street, he spoke to his specific understanding of urban violence in a way that other candidates did not and probably could not. And he had some ideas that set him apart—public schools should be accessible to more residents for more hours, including evenings and weekends; in-school accountability, not out-of-school suspensions; a police academy as diverse as the city. Well-prepared, focused, street-smart.

Brett Smiley – Mr. Smiley came in 2nd on my scorecard. Of all the candidates, he had a specific “how”—a 10% supplemental tax on gun and ammo sales that goes specifically to fund nonviolence programs and training. And he spoke directly to difficult issues, like the uselessness of public programs where the rules are such that kids with two working parents can never participate. Advocated recruiting public safety people with connections in DC to access more federal money. Well-prepared, specific, government-savvy.

Michael Solomon – Mr. Solomon did not impress me as particularly modern. More than any other candidate, he talked about more police, more police, more police. When he talked about non-punishment discipline in schools or post-prison transitioning, he somehow didn’t connect. His accent puts him at a disadvantage. And he was perilously close to the line with his “some parents don’t know how to parent” line. True though it may be, he needs to craft that point more carefully. Aware of modern thinking, but sounds like a throw-back.

And Then There’s Chris Young…

Irony: Chris Young at the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence

Though cropped from the photo above, Mr. Young did attend. Yes, he was a full participant. Toward the end, he got himself worked up to the point that the moderator had to reiterate the rules against personal attacks. But no, he was not asked to leave. And that’s the good news.

At this strongly left-leaning event, even his rhetoric came off as violent. He brought up abortion in almost every one of his opportunities to speak, and he somehow managed to bring up the Frankfurt School, the Nazis and “negroes.” Everybody breathed a sigh of relief when he somehow managed to get through the entire event without one of his trademark meltdowns.

Self-delusion can be a powerful force, and Mr. Young has somehow convinced himself that he offers an attractive alternative to the other candidates. In reality, he is a horror show that alienates almost everybody who sees his shabby act. It’s unfortunate that, in the interest of open debate, we inflict this ugliness on ourselves each election season.

Thus it seems clear that if Mr. Young were allowed to participate, then any warm body that could string together a coherent sentence could have participated. So unless we find new information via comments, we can assume that Lombardi, Fung and Block took a pass on this early campaign event.

January 8, 2014

Time for all to come together

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

Rhode Island’s recent decision to relocate the probation and parole office to downtown Providence — since set aside — has sparked controversy. Good. We in the city need to be publicly debating administrative choices like these to maintain a well-functioning democracy.

But I am greatly concerned that different sides of the debate are missing a critical point: We are all in this together. We are all one Providence, and that means that each of our residents — whether he or she owns a major business or is re-entering society from the criminal-justice system — is an equal stakeholder and each of his or her needs and interests must be reflected in government decisions.

Critics of this decision have done us a valuable service by pointing out several legitimate problems with the current relocation plan. In fact, I agree that the proposed downtown space may not be the best location for the probation and parole office. If the state is going to administer a public program, it should do so in the best interest of all of its constituents, including ex-offenders.

I believe the office should be located in a space that can most effectively connect parolees and probationers to the multiple services and supports they need, such as education, workforce development, health and housing services. I also agree that increased rental costs are a valid concern.

While the location’s proximity to Kennedy Plaza would convenience many parolees and probationers who commute by bus, I have spoken to several who have expressed concerns about the challenges of downtown parking. For these reasons, I am unconvinced that the state’s initial decision was the best possible answer.

Despite those concerns, I have been upset to hear strains of another argument made against the state’s plan. It is an argument claiming that the mere presence of “those people” will damage our economy and threaten the safety of “legitimate” downtown-goers, despite assurances by the Providence, Pawtucket and Woonsocket police departments that they have never experienced increased problems around parole and probation offices.

Let me make this very clear: Parolees and probationers, who have committed themselves to rehabilitation and re-entry into society, have just as much right to be in downtown Providence as, say, the head of a bank. Segregation and inequality are the greatest challenges our society faces, and these problems are compounded every time we choose to exclude the most vulnerable among us — the very people we should be working to help and support.

As a lawyer at Rhode Island Legal Services, I represented many of “those people” in their efforts to avoid homelessness and obtain better living conditions. I know first-hand that many stereotypes we have of them are unfounded and that many people simply need a supportive hand to help them turn their lives around.

I believe that this controversy has offered us a great opportunity. Let us use this moment to come together, with opponents and supporters, to improve the way ex-offenders are reintegrated into society; to provide pathways to education and employment for those who seek them; and to treat the most vulnerable with the benevolence that only a great society can extend.

I have made the theme of my mayoral campaign “One Providence” because I believe with every fiber of my body that we can only be a great city with a thriving economy when every resident has an opportunity to participate and to have a voice in our shared community.

We need to listen to our business leaders and our successful entrepreneurs, who are doing so much to innovate and revitalize Rhode Island. But we need to listen just as carefully to our low-wage workers, our working families, our youth and students, our seniors, our small business owners, our homeowners and our renters and, yes, to our ex-offenders.

This is an opportunity to come together. We do not need further division. We are one community, One Providence, and the only way we can rise and succeed is if we rise and succeed together.

Jorge Elorza is a Democratic candidate for mayor of Providence.

This is an op-ed that originally ran in the Providence Journal.

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