WPRI’s Ted Nesi reports that Governor Chafee just can’t understand why people are so opposed to raising taxes. He blames the Providence Journal.
The Providence Journal is “hurting Rhode Island” with its barrage of negative editorials, advertisements and articles about the Chafee administration’s sales tax proposal, the governor told WPRI.com on Monday.
He blames former Governor Carcieri.
Chafee said the first suggestion – renegotiating contracts – is nearly impossible because of a two-year ban on state worker layoffs agreed to by Carcieri in late 2009. “Mayor Taveras is not saddled with a no-layoff contract,” Chafee said. “He can go to his union and say there will be layoffs – and they know that there will be layoffs. I can’t do that.”
Asked whether he had approached Council 94 and other unions about concessions anyway, Chafee said he didn’t see the point when he could not threaten layoffs and might just add to the existing unhappiness about previous furloughs and his proposed hike in employee pension contributions.
“I’ll look for savings, but I don’t want to go into a meeting with no cards in my hand,” he said.
B.S. “I can’t do that.” Ask N.J. Governor Chris Christie. Meanwhile, he continues to throw out the red herring of “show me the alternative” when it’s obvious there is nothing anyone can propose that resembles actual cutting that he will consider as a “real” alternative. As Dan Yorke noted today, this is all so disingenuous given that it was the Chafee Administration that did little-to-no due diligence on the impact of this proposed “flatten and broaden” tax increases in the first place. So instead Chafee whines and obfuscates. Such a leader.
Umm, sounds like he’s leading to me just not in the direction you’d like so you’re “whining” about it, no?
The fact that you’d renege on the deal just cut by Carcieri says a lot about how much you care about the people affected, not to mention the effect it would have on future labor negotiations. Why would anyone make concessions when the state doesn’t hold up their end of the bargain, even in the short-term?
Yes Russ, you know me so well. Wait. You almost had me. I started to respond more extensively, but realized that this comment didn’t include an extended quote from one of Russ’ roster of higher authorities. What did you do with the real Russ?
Boy, thank God Mayor Scott Avedisian and all his union allies in Warwick supported Lincoln Chafee!
“Why would anyone make concessions when the state doesn’t hold up their end of the bargain, even in the short-term?”
They do all the time. Why would anyone make concessions when the state wants to re-open a contract for the first time? What’s the difference between the first and second time? Nothing. Why can’t Chafee re-open the discussions.
This is exactly why contracts shouldn’t be so long, no one has any idea of the future finances, yet they’re making promises on how much they can afford. That’s why contracts need to be re-opened. It’s why if I sign up with AT&T on a cell phone deal and three months in, I realize I can’t afford it, I can re-open negotiations and end the contract, or switch to a new one.
Hey, slam my quoting of process improvement experts if you like, but that just confirms my suspicions that you don’t actually care about improving schools (versus using faux reform as a stalking horse to privatize the system or break the unions).
I’ll note too that you seem to prefer to attack me than to clarify why you think leadership involves backing down in the face of opposition. Or how you think reneging on recent deals would affect the state’s ability to negotiate in the future. Who cares when the goal is to ruin the system anyway, right?
No, Chafee is talking about a deal signed by Carcieri and affecting the next two years. So your contention is that Carcieri was incabable of planning three years out, yes?
Look I’m no fan of regressive taxes, but as near as I can tell the RI right has no plan other than to complain.
Russ, you’re so full of it. Spare me your tiresome “you don’t agree with me which means you don’t care” sophistry with all your cool lingo like “stalking horse”, etc. It’s getting old and its also completely disingenuous and unfair on your part. But by now I shouldn’t be surprised. Regardless, I’ll respond. Once. I’ve got two kids in public school. I believe in public school. I think the system is too much for the adults ($) and not for the kids. That’s my reform perspective. I’m genuinely interested in reform and new ideas. I don’t automatically think charter schools or the teacher-eval system du jour (value added) are the way to go. But you knew all that if you’ve really read what I’ve posted. Even then, that’s not the sum total of my active interest and participation in my local school system. But that’s not your game. Instead, we get another tired attempt by you to tag me with some oversimplified generalization because I made a little fun of you. Sorry, “attacked” you. Thin skin? As for Chafee and leadership: yeah, usually leadership is not “backing down” but it can also be admitting when you were wrong (not sure if you’re familiar with that word, w-w-w-w-w-rong.) It’s also doing things like actually providing the stats to back up your policy proposals. Any good Progressive computer geek like you should know that. (Woops, another attack). Did you hear Licht today on Yorke? It was obvious they didn’t do the due diligence on the effect that the tax increases would have on the economy (viewing it as a tax on consumers not business…I assume you understand the basic economic flaw there). As for the sacred union contract, well, Patrick answered that one satisfactorily for me. I’ll just add that I don’t… Read more »
Did anybody tell Chafee that it’s 2011 and that all he has to say is, “If we don’t open the contracts, I’ll be cutting the workforce at my first opportunity.” Let’s face it, this guy does not want to face down the unions and that’s the bottom line. Those agreements were made in 2009. What ‘card’ doesn’t he have besides the one that keeps him from being disingenuous?
I think Governor Chafee should ban his entire administration from having anything to do with that fear-mongering Providence Journal. It’s really the responsible thing to do. A compromise might be to suggest that the Projo’s advertisers should effectively shut it down.
Blaming the Projo does make me wonder though: Just how small is Mr. Chafee’s world? I don’t mean that he should read more broadly; I mean that he should see that not all opposition must originate with guidance from some elite news source. Sometimes people, you know, think for themselves.
I’d also like to go on record in response to Marc’s reference to “charter schools or the teacher-eval system du jour”: I support every fad that will shake up the current system. The problem is obvious, and the topic too important for all of us pointy heads to come up with the perfect solution before shaking things up. Charters don’t have to solve every problem; evaluation systems don’t have to be perfect. Anything that sows a healthy unease and a feeling that they must compete among union-led teachers is a positive step.
Justin, quick clarification (if it’s needed)–I agree that we shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
“No, Chafee is talking about a deal signed by Carcieri and affecting the next two years. So your contention is that Carcieri was incabable of planning three years out, yes?”
I know exactly what Chafee’s talking about.
And yes, Carcieri was incapable of predicting what the economy would be three years out and knowing what the revenues and incomes would be to the state three years out. I don’t know if anyone can predict that, which is why I don’t think anyone should agree to three year contracts unless they’re tied to revenues or inflation.
“I think Governor Chafee should ban his entire administration from having anything to do with that fear-mongering Providence Journal.”
Yes. Absolutely. Immediately.
Much like Taco, I’m outta here, counting the days (actually months, it’s not that easy to extricate yourself from one place and move your life, career and home – but I’m doing it).
Hate to be in your shoes folks, perhaps you’ll follow me out of state.
“Hate to be in your shoes folks, perhaps you’ll follow me out of state.”
Wasn’t it just a couple days ago that Chuck was calling us all a bunch of hate-filled fear mongerers? But he continues to come back and invite us to follow him?
I don’t get it.
Do you think the ProJo and Gump are trying to create a fake skism?
The fact is his wife owns a good chunk of Belo stock and the paper has NEVER seen a tax hike as a bad move, until now.
Why is it that when unions complain about cuts, Chafee and his henchmen are silent or supportive, and when businesses complain, somehow it’s their fault?
“Russ, you’re so full of it.”
Ah, the witty repartee of the fringe-right. Honestly never pegged you as one of the brownshirts over here. I stand corrected.
Gee, wherever did I get the crazy idea that the “reform” effort wasn’t really about improvement? At least Justin is honest about it.
Nevermind that there’s plenty of evidence that unease has exactly the opposite effect (see Deming’s 8th Point).
Oh, and BobN, you’ll never guess who Deming quotes about education (see “The Economics,” p. 147). LOL!
er, “The New Economics.”
So Marc’s idea of “leadership” is paralysis by analysis (oddly something that didn’t come up when the prior administration proposed block grants for Medicare, tax cuts for the rich, etc, etc).
It’s of course a recipe of inaction or for shooting down any new ideas versus say models like Plan, Do, Check, Act, which allow for experimentation without a priori “proof” of success.
Now I’m a brownshirt. Russ offers more ad hominem, tries to re-characterize and then throws up more Deming.
I also assume he must approve of Raimondo, because the prolific Russ has offered no comment on that post by me. Par for the course. Only drops in to complain and quibble, never to add anything. Er, except Deming, which if you disagree with are a “brownshirt” or any number of Kos-like epithets.
Whatever floats your boat.
Have fun and thanks for the hits.
Hey, if you don’t want to debate then don’t (who is it again that’s thin skinned?). Responding with personal attacks isn’t doing me any favors, although it is a good way to shut down discussion.
fwiw, I supported Raimondo. Not sure what you wanted to me to post over on that thread. Give ’em hell, Gina?
And my calling you a brownshirt has nothing at all to do with you disagreeing. I don’t throw it around save for a few people over here. Honestly was kind of surprised to see you taking the low road.
Well, you can’t have it both ways, spraying Godwin’s Law violations and then masquerading as the master (de)bater.
Bob, perhaps I should use a different metaphor, but I think a few folks over here actively try to suppress progressives from joining in the debate (the brownshirts were intially known for ejecting dissenters from party meetings). I don’t see any reason to stop pointing that out, Godwin’s Law or not.
Russ, you started this all with “says a lot about how much you care about the people affected”. Not the first, nor the last, time you attempt to “debate” with a projection/assumption of what I “really” think or feel.
You regularly throw poison pills like that out there and then act surprised when tweaked for your regular “debate” tactics (re-quote and re-characterize what is said to fit your preconceptions or talking points). I teased you about Deming, you took that as confirmation that I don’t care about school reform. Non sequitur.
Then, shortly before pulling out the old brownshirt canard, you quote the “Your so full of it” line, call me “fringe-right” (ow) and then ignore the rest that I typed, including a response to your mistaken conception of leadership and saying the thousands of words I’ve typed (and millions I’ve read) about school reform was just a front.
Again, operate in good faith, stop the ad hominems and we’ll go from there.