The League of RI Businesses made a play to sidestep campaign finance limits. Now, it’s game time.

DINOS and MAGAs supported by stealth money

By Nancy Lavin, Rhode Island Current

Vanessa Lopez knew the odds were stacked against her.

A first-time candidate going up against a three-term incumbent, Lopez realized she needed outside help to succeed in her Democratic primary challenge against Sen. Meghan Kallman for the District 15 seat representing Pawtucket and Providence. 

“I have no one in my corner, so I was like, ‘how the heck am I going to do this,’” Lopez, 37, said in an interview. 

Enter The League of RI Businesses. The political group born out of a gun rights campaign was recruiting state legislative candidates to fill open seats and challenge incumbents whose records did not align with its “pro-business” platform. And, under an unprecedented maneuver to create 40 political action committees — one for each city and town plus a statewide organization — The League advertised up to $1 million in donations per year per endorsed candidate, circumventing state campaign finance laws that cap annual donations at $2,000 per candidate. 

No one has received a seven-figure donation from The League yet. But the execution of its multi-PAC strategy is coming into play for a handful of its chosen candidates, including Lopez.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Not included in this article is one candidate benefiting from LORIB's cash support. That's self-described "Sex Crime Defense Lawyer" Leah Boisclair. I'll bet a lot of people (e.g. Jim Mageau) with Boisclair signs are unaware of what she does for a living even though her website aggressively recruits clients charged with heinous crimes:

Boisclair wants to unseat Rep. Tina Spears in the September 9 Democratic Primary. Tina's history is in sharp contrast to Boisclair's. From Tina's website: 

Tina has spent the last decade advocating for people with disabilities, and is currently Executive Director of the Community Provider Network of Rhode Island. Her own experience as the parent of a child with significant health challenges led her to become an ardent advocate for families of children with disabilities.

While Boisclair makes her living defending pedos, Tina works to protect kids with disabilities. If you are a Democrat living in House District 36 (all of Charlestown and Block Island, plus sections of Westerly and South Kingstown) you will need to pick which side you're on come Primary day on September 9

The super-secret truth behind the Reflecting Pool scandal

Like father like son

Who stole the URI research camera at Charlestown Beach?

Charlestown Beach Camera Stolen, Town Says. It's not a Flock camera

Adriana Vossari, RI & Local Government News

Why This Matters

Charlestown loses a public feed of beach and water conditions that also supported coastal research, and the town has not said what replacement will cost or who pays.

A public beach camera installed on Charlestown Town Beach was stolen on Thursday, the town reported in an official statement that went well beyond the usual language of a municipal theft notice.

The camera was a live-feed unit installed for the University of Rhode Island's Ocean-CREST project, short for Oceanfront Observatory for Coastal Resilience, Engineering, Science & Technology. It fed a public view of beach and water conditions and supported coastal research and education. It replaced an earlier camera that was destroyed when its mounting pole snapped during a severe storm, according to the town.

The town's notice, headlined "Newly Installed Public Beach Camera Stolen in Disgraceful Act Against the Community," said officials were "outraged." It described the theft as not a harmless prank but "a selfish, destructive, and criminal act that deprived the public of a resource funded, installed, and maintained for everyone's benefit." 

The statement added that whoever took the camera "did not steal from an anonymous government agency," but from "Charlestown residents, beachgoers, students, educators, coastal researchers, and every member of the public."

Much of the statement is devoted not to the theft itself but to a rumor. The town said claims had circulated that the equipment was a Flock camera — an automated license plate reader — and called those claims "completely false" and evidence of "a basic failure to understand, or even verify, what had actually been installed." A "minimal amount of effort," the statement said, would have confirmed the camera's purpose was public viewing and coastal education, "not vehicle tracking or law enforcement surveillance."

The town did not say who spread those claims, how widely they circulated, or whether they had anything to do with the theft. The motive remains unknown, and the town has not said whether police have identified a suspect.

Two different kinds of camera

The distinction the town is drawing matters, because Rhode Island has spent the summer arguing about surveillance cameras.

Flock Safety devices photograph passing vehicles and store the images in a searchable database, typically for about a month. They read license plates. The Charlestown camera was a fixed-view CR63-E with a built-in LTE modem, an internal battery, 4K resolution and the option of solar or hard-wired power, according to reporting by The Westerly Sun on the project's approval. Because the camera cannot pan or tilt, town and university officials told the council that beachgoers would not face privacy concerns.

The installation was approved in public. Rhode Island Sea Grant coastal resilience specialist Casey Tremper and URI associate professor of ocean engineering Reza Hashemi presented the re-installation request to the Charlestown Town Council in November, and the council voted to allow it, with activities coordinated through the town administrator. 

URI covered the equipment; the town handled installation. The feed was made publicly accessible through the Web Camera Coastal Observation System, and the town maintains a live beach camera page.

A hostile season for cameras

The theft landed at the peak of a statewide backlash against license plate readers. The South Kingstown Town Council voted unanimously on July 27 to cancel its Flock Safety contract and remove the cameras. Narragansett's council did the same on Aug. 3. 

The ACLU of Rhode Island, which has campaigned against the technology, counts at least 295 Flock cameras in the state and notes the exact figure is unknown because some police departments have been difficult to get information from.

Those objections are about warrantless records of drivers' movements — a debate with no bearing on a fixed camera pointed at the surf. But the sequence is close enough in time that the town's statement reads as an attempt to break the association, sharply.

What the notice does not address is cost. The town has not disclosed what the stolen camera was worth, who pays to replace it, or what security measures might protect a third unit. It also has not said whether a replacement is planned.

Scientists Link Heavy TV Watching to Brain Changes Decades Later

Heavy television viewing in middle age was linked to a troubling brain signature more than 20 years later.

By Margaret Crable, University of Southern California

Television may be doing more than filling quiet hours. A long-term study suggests that people who watched it most frequently in middle age later showed structural brain differences linked to memory loss, vascular damage, and dementia.

The findings, published in Alzheimer’s and Dementia: Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association, challenge the idea that all sitting affects the brain in the same way. Time spent watching television was associated with poorer brain health decades later, while sitting at work showed a very different pattern.

“For years we’ve focused on how much people sit. Our findings suggest we should also pay attention to what they’re doing while they’re sitting,” says David Raichlen, professor of biological sciences and anthropology at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, and a senior author of the study.

What MRI Scans Revealed Decades Later

Researchers followed about 1,700 adults who joined the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study between 1987 and 1989. Participants were 53 years old on average when they reported how often they watched television during leisure time and how much of their workday they spent seated.

More than 20 years later, MRI scans revealed notable differences between the brains of frequent viewers and those who said they watched television “never” or “seldom.”

People who reported watching television “very often” had less volume in several brain regions, including areas tied to memory and early Alzheimer’s disease. They also had smaller frontal and occipital lobes, which support planning, attention, decision-making, and visual processing.

The scans also showed more white matter hyperintensities. These bright spots on MRI can reflect damage to the brain’s small blood vessels and are commonly associated with aging, stroke risk, cognitive decline, and dementia.

Marco Rubio uses AI to make the US look stupid

US State Department map used at international AIDS conference mislabeled every African nations

Isn't geography something the State Department should know?

Jessica Corbett for Common Dreams

“AI use gone wrong.” “Utter embarrassment.” “Stupid empire.” “Idiot Reich.”

Those were just some of the responses to Thursday reporting on a US Department of State map presented at a global conference in Brazil that mislabeled every African country it included.

“Reuters viewed a video of the presentation given at the AIDS 2026 conference in Rio de Janeiro, which shows the errant map displayed halfway during a presentation about the State Department’s new health agreements,” the news agency reported.

“A Reuters analysis found the image of the map included in the presentation contained an artificial intelligence watermark that ⁠signals it was made with OpenAI tools,” the outlet noted. “The company said it was investigating the report.”

RI's Flock Divide: Cameras that read your license plate and store it in a database

Another battle of privacy versus technology

Rocco Caravaggio, Civil Rights & Law Enforcement

Location of Flock cameras in South County.  Source: DeFlock.org

Rhode Island has at least 239 to 295 license-plate reading cameras operating with no state law governing who can search the data, how long it is kept, or who it can be shared with — meaning your vehicle's movements across a 37-mile-wide state are logged under rules each police department writes for itself.

Twenty-two of them are already watching.

That is the state of Rhode Island's newest surveillance system as of July 30: 22 automatic license plate readers live on Rhode Island roads, out of 39 the Rhode Island State Police intend to install under a three-year, $597,000 contract with Flock Safety, the Atlanta company whose cameras photograph every vehicle that passes and hold the images in a searchable database. The first state police camera went up on June 25. The rest are coming.

And while that network fills in, the towns are pulling theirs out.

On Monday night the Narragansett Town Council voted unanimously to terminate its Flock contract — the second South County community to do so in eight days, following South Kingstown's unanimous vote on July 27 to cancel its own agreement and rip out the half-dozen automated license plate reader cameras already standing in town. South Kingstown's deal ran $30,300 a year for seven cameras, signed last July but not effectively live until the first pole-mounted unit went up in February. 

Little Compton's council rejected an installation request on June 4. Warren and Portsmouth turned down the state police outright when troopers came asking to put cameras on their streets, and both council presidents said the reason was residents' privacy — Portsmouth's Keith Hamilton and Warren's Joseph DePasquale each pointed to constituent objections rather than any dispute about whether the technology works.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Charlestown debated similar issues leading up to the October 2015 activation of two red-light cameras (at East and West Beach Roads). The privacy argument is certainly valid but so is the public interest in busting drivers who run through red lights. After all, we drive on public roads with state-issued licenses and registrations. Do we have the right of privacy to break the law and endanger other drivers? Flock cameras have far broader uses and there are no uniform standards regulating their use.  - Will Collette

The choices we make

 

"Like no one has ever seen before"

Birding hobby may boost your mental health and build community

Flocking together

Jennifer G. Andrews, Morehouse College 

Birding is a good way to practice mindfulness,
psychologists report. Jennifer Andrews

If you’ve ever found yourself stuck in a rut while cooped up all day at a nine-to-five job, or just felt stressed about work, school or life in general, you’re not alone. 

Hearing “just go outside” might sound like trivial advice, but researchers have been investigating a new, unconventional strategy to boost mental health: Seeking the company of wild birds.

You’ve probably heard them singing or noticed them flitting through the canopy, but if you’re not deliberately paying attention to their presence, they can fade into the background. A growing body of research suggests that keeping a watchful eye or attentive ear out for birds can help people from all walks of life feel more calm, present and refreshed.

Birding, the practice of observing birds in their natural habitat and also known as bird-watching, has experienced a renaissance in recent years. Birding exploded in popularity during the pandemic, and you may have even seen it popping up on your social media feeds. Newcomers to the practice discovered something seasoned birders have always known: Simply paying attention to birds can be surprisingly rewarding.

There is a wealth of data demonstrating that spending time in nature leads to health improvements. For example, reviews of scientific research have cited consistent evidence for nature’s important role in supporting health and well-being.

An increasing body of research, which my colleagues and I reviewed in 2024, also suggests that interactions with birds may play an especially important role in well-being. Encounters with birds may improve mood, reduce stress, restore attention, strengthen social connections and even encourage people to care more about the environment.

URI Studying Jonah Crabs to Learn about Offshore Wind Turbines’ Effect on Underwater Ecosystems

Boost to local fishing?

By Joshua Geaughan / ecoRI News contributor

Jonah crabs are being studied in Rhode Island waters
as part of a project examining the effect of offshore
wind turbines on underwater ecosystems.
(Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission)

Since the first offshore wind project was developed in Rhode Island in 2016, University of Rhode Island researchers have been attempting to understand their impacts on local marine ecosystems. That work is continuing with first-year URI Ph.D. student Emmanuel Oyewole’s study of the artificial reefs that are often found at the base of turbines.

It’s been established through research surrounding offshore wind that the base of turbines serves as a foundation for algae and coral, which acts as a base for a booming ecosystem.

Bottom of Form

In an attempt to find the cause of this blossoming of aquatic activity, Oyewole is studying the movement and dietary habits of one special creature found at the base of offshore wind turbines: Jonah crabs. He’s working with his academic advisor, Kelton McMahon, an associate professor of oceanography.

Trump wants to run scientific research like his family business.

The new "science golden age" looks suspiciously like a grift

Lisa Needham

The Trump regime is trying to usher in a “Golden Age in Science” where scientific research is run like a Trump family business, artificial intelligence is all that matters, profit is everything, and expertise is for chumps.

Or at least that’s the vision emerging from a new 123-page “Report to the President” from Michael Kratsios, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

In a normal administration, you could probably skip over learning about a science policy document — but this is no normal administration, and this is no normal science policy document. Instead, it’s Trump’s attempt to end the actual golden age of science that was kicked off in 1945 with the publication of '“The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush.

Bush, at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s request, laid out a vision of federal support for science that centered on funding universities to do basic research, saying that as long as those institutions were “vigorous and healthy and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it to practical problems in Government, in industry, or elsewhere.”

Kratsios’s report is supposed to be the successor to Bush’s, and even apes the format, but this isn’t really a document about science policy. It’s one about ending science research as we know it in favor of shoveling cash at big tech companies.

While it might be temping to wave this away as an aspirational policy document, Trump has already begun to shift billions in research funds to AI projects and has taken a hatchet to science funding across the board. He’s teed up the shift Kratsios proposes here, and since neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem inclined to stop him from doing whatever he wants with taxpayer money, it isn’t doomering or hyperbole to say we are staring down the barrel of a world where the only “science” the government intends to support is for-profit tech and defense advancements.

Elon Musk’s Fortune Comes From Not Paying Taxes

So why does he complain all the time?

By Stephen Land, Bob Lord 

The valuation trends up and down, but one thing’s for sure: Elon Musk became the world’s first trillionaire this summer. At the height of the SpaceX IPO he was briefly worth around $1.45 trillion.

Then SpaceX stock tanked, rallied, then tanked again. But the most important thing about Musk’s wealth isn’t whether it stays above the 13-figure threshold — it’s that 94 percent of it comes from not having to pay taxes on unrealized gains.

That’s right: Musk’s fortune effectively comes from not paying taxes.

It’s no exaggeration to say that trillionaires (Musk likely won’t be the last) are creatures of the tax code. 

They ought to be called “taxillionaires.” If it weren’t for laws that permit the wealthy to endlessly defer paying taxes by keeping their gains unrealized, there would be no trillionaires — and many fewer billionaires.

According to Musk’s own account, when he sold his stake in Paypal in 2002, he netted $180 million, invested it all in SpaceX and Tesla, and borrowed to pay his living expenses. To get from $180 million to a trillion today implies annual returns of over 40 percent (returns that would be considered impossible for ordinary investors).

Allowing these returns to compound untaxed supercharges growth.

Musk paid some taxes along the way, when he exercised stock options or sold some Tesla shares, but any taxes he paid are insignificant compared to his wealth. By contrast, for most working Americans earning a good salary, total state and federal taxes are significant — typically around 40 percent.

Cold

How Trump has changed world opinion about America