The final Senate Finance hearing about the proposal for a new PawSox stadium in Pawtucket, as reported by Kate Bramson of the Providence Journal, has a couple of details that ought to be warning signs to Rhode Islanders with respect to the attitudes of government officials in the state:
[Pawtucket City Commerce Director Jeanne] Boyle said city payments could be made in early years from money set aside in a capitalized-interest account from bond proceeds. She said the city could also assess a fee on property near the stadium so some additional money would flow into the city’s general fund right away.
If this is correctly reported, then it’s new. Up to now, the hints that we’ve heard have been that the city might expand the tax increment finance (TIF) area around the stadium so that more taxes would go to the stadium. Ultimately, that’s just a sneaky way to force an increase in taxes without immediately blaming it on the development.
This sounds like a direct tax on businesses and residents around the stadium under the assumption that they’re profiting somehow from the stadium. That would be a terrible way to go.
On a different matter, consider this evidence that Bristol, Portsmouth, Tiverton Senator James Seveney isn’t really representing his own constituents:
… Sen. James A. Seveney pinpointed that the legislation says money from a surcharge on premium tickets (in corporate suites, for example) might help the state pay off its $23-million contribution. But as it is written, the legislation doesn’t allow that for the city’s payments.
“Maybe that should be in yours,” Seveney said, to which Grebien responded: “We’d gladly take that. Having said that, it was very difficult negotiations.”
Seveney continued: “I’m not too worried about the state’s position, and I’m not worried about the team’s position. I think they’re going to be fine. I am worried about you guys.”
Why is an East Bay senator more concerned about Pawtucket taxpayers than about the liability of the people who elected him? Sure, we should care about Pawtucket’s problems, but Seveney is essentially putting forward his constituents as a cash cow.
In the Ocean State, the political elites work hard to keep the average family out of the process. It appears that the Board of Elections and the Secretary of State’s office have deliberately left the door open for individuals to register to vote and cast a vote, without ever providing personally identifying information as required by state and federal law. As I have said before, the scale of these findings potentially shake the very foundation of our state’s democracy … and must be formally and independently investigated.
— OSTPA (@OSTPA1) October 21, 2017
Everybody’s being taken in by the #MeToo trick and some thoughts on freedom of speech.
The Providence Journal has published an op-ed that I wrote about Rhode Island’s slip on the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity’s Jobs & Opportunity Index (JOI):
When numbers that indicate economic health for families is up, a state’s score goes up. When the balance shifts toward reliance on and payments for government, a state’s score goes down. Nothing in the score should disadvantage Rhode Island in particular. The center’s goal with the index is to objectively measure states according to the principle that economic health means independence both from want and from government.
From this perspective, the strategies that elected officials advertise as steps forward are shown to be deeply flawed. Gov. Gina Raimondo has focused on bribing companies to move to the state in order to generate photo ops and claim that her administration is creating jobs. Meanwhile, the General Assembly has passed so-called tax reforms that were designed to game national indexes of business friendliness — lowering tax rates, for example, while increasing the amount of tax collected.
We need economic policies that unleash Rhode Islanders’ own potential and attract others who want to build opportunity for themselves and their employees. Pitching a new Amazon headquarters, subsidizing a minor league baseball stadium, and building hotels aren’t going to do it.
When people are rewarded for finding evidence of “isms” in their past, we move away from understanding and toward constant cultural warfare.
For my weekly call-in on John DePetro’s WADK 1540 AM show, last week, the topics were the lawyers of the General Assembly, the 1,000 days of Raimondo’s reign, and the policies go on.
Pawtucket’s “surplus” doesn’t seem as strong as suggested to the Senate Finance Committee, and promised development around the proposed stadium isn’t as hopeful as previously suggested.
For my weekly call-in on John DePetro’s WADK 1540 AM show, last week, the topics were a show hearing for the PawSox, a PR kingdom for the governor, and legislation harming business and tracking us around the state.
In order to follow up my post from yesterday about the political donations of the lawyers who work for the General Assembly, I requested and received from the speaker’s office the data that Providence Journal reporter Katherine Gregg used for her article directing attention to the group.
- In total, there are 56 lawyers on the list.
- Only 14 are listed as full-time employees, working 35 hours per week.
- The other 42 are listed as working 0.6-time, which is 21 hours — just enough to be eligible for health benefits.
- All of the employees have a comp-time system, so if they work extra hours during the legislature’s busy season, they can work less during the rest of the year, although they lose any comp-time hours they don’t use by the end of the year.
- Only six of the 56 lawyers do not take the health benefit.
- Only two of the 56 lawyers do not take the dental and vision benefits.
- A majority, 37, appear to have family plans (judged by the listed cost of the benefits).
- Part-time employees pay 20% of the cost of their health plans, which amounts to $165-$184 for every two-week pay period.
Given that the hours of most of these employees are set just high enough to trigger benefits and that so many of them take them, it’s reasonable to infer that the benefit is a significant reason they take the job. The allowance of comp time can turn this into a seasonal job, which is very convenient for lawyers who have their own practices. (A cynic might wonder how closely their hourly activity is tracked.)
From the taxpayer’s point of view, however, it isn’t clear why the state wouldn’t hire more full-time employees for year-round work and then use contractors for seasonal work, or limit the part-timers to 19 hours.
Lawyers for the General Assembly, many part-time with full health benefits, appear to donate quite a bit to local politicians, particularly the Speaker of the House.
Capitulation to the harmful progressive-Democrat agenda was enough to turn what might have been a positive special fall session of the state’s General Assembly into a net negative.
The drafting of the legislation eliminating Second Amendment rights for domestic violence convicts could go much farther than proponents have claimed.
A Wall Street Journal article in which Jennifer Levitz highlights an interesting corporate trend could almost give hope to Rhode Islanders:
Americans have traditionally moved to find jobs. But with a growing reluctance by workers to relocate, some companies have decided to move closer to potential hires. Firms are expanding to cities with a bounty of underemployed, retrieving men and women from freelance gigs, manual labor and part-time jobs with duties that, one worker said, required only a heartbeat to perform.
With the national jobless rate near a 16-year low, these pockets of underemployment are a wellspring for companies that recognize most new hires already have jobs but can be poached with better pay and room for advancement. That’s preferable to competing for higher-priced workers at home.
These sorts of natural incentives are how the market heals economic wounds and maximizes progress. Unfortunately, if you’re an un-or-under-employed Rhode Islander, your hopes for this sort of rescue are regularly shattered by a General Assembly that year after year after year makes it more difficult and more expensive to do business in your state. Yesterday brought a doozie, with the passage of the ill-advised and expensive progressive wish fulfillment of a mandatory paid time off benefit for all employees in companies with 18 or more employees.
As I explored in last week’s Last Impressions podcast, transportation and communication technology should be making it easier to relocate businesses and families. Rhode Island’s natural beauty and location should be a huge advantage in that regard, but our government is determined to eliminate all incentive for businesses to be the ones to do the moving (unless they want to be government-dependents right off the bat with a payoff), so it’ll have to be the workers who move elsewhere, which is exactly what we’ve seen over the last couple of decades.
For my weekly call-in on John DePetro’s WADK 1540 AM show, last week, the topics were the likelihood of an evergreen veto override, whether the DCYF would haunt Gina, PawSox, DACA, and Rhode Works transparency.
After the reality-shock of announced job losses from Benny’s and Alexion, and when the General Assembly reconvenes on Tuesday, Rhode Island legislators will be put to the test. Will they continue to push our state into the progressives’ anti-business, anti-family land of make believe?
Katherine Gregg has devoted another Providence Journal Political Scene to the worthy topic of the political connections of Rhode Island magistrates and judges. Long before knowing the score, on this count, anybody who takes an interest in Rhode Island governance learns that justice is best sought in federal courts, because Rhode Island’s system is (let’s say) not to be trusted.
With this anecdote, Gregg gives a sense of why:
A former public defender, [now Superior Court Judge Patrick] Burke had been at the center of a controversial court case that evolved from his arrest by the Warwick police in 1993 after they observed his car weaving on Route 2 around 2:30 a.m. The police charged him with refusing to submit to a portion of the breath test. The traffic court suspended his license and scheduled a hearing. Burke’s lawyer — then Speaker Harwood — filed for dismissal in 1996, saying the multiple delays in scheduling the hearing deprived Burke of his right to a speedy trial. A judge dismissed the charge.
This anecdote was 20 years ago, and we certainly have no reason to believe that things have improved. How can Rhode Islanders have confidence in a judiciary that operates like this?
Despite the false hopes expressed by lawmakers based solely on a reduced unemployment rate, Rhode Island families are hurting. The Ocean State suffers under a terrible business climate, and remains stuck 48th rank on our Center’s Job’s & Opportunity Index. Just this week, it was announced that Benny’s, a Rhode Island institution, is closing.
The progressive agenda is an assault on the human workplace. Indeed, Rhode Island is engaged in a battle of ideas. The progressive vision is transforming the Ocean State, right before our eyes, into an anti-human-work hell.
Already ranking a dismal 45th on the overall Family Prosperity Index, Rhode Islanders will soon suffer from a 16-21% increase on their electricity bills, making matters even worse.
To hear Dawn Euer talk, you might think she’s not much different from mainstream Democrats or even Republicans, but voters should keep an eye on progressive deception.
For my weekly call-in on John DePetro’s WADK 1540 AM show, last week, the topics were Gordon Fox, a summer Senate race, racial politics, and the possible WorSox.
In a heavy-handed edict, reminiscent of soviet-style totalitarianism, the state of Rhode Island considered restricting the free-flow of goods and commerce by restricting trucker traffic on secondary roads this week.
It has come to light that, on August 11, RIDOT *corrected* requested a hearing, scheduled for today, to issue commercial truck route restrictions within the state. The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity (for whom I am Communications Manager) has just issued a statement strongly condemning this. It says, in part,