Progressive Charlestown
a fresh, sharp look at news, life and politics in Charlestown, Rhode Island
Friday, October 30, 2026
Scientists Find That Cats and Their Owners Share a Surprising Biological Connection
Cats often relish close physical contact
By Kyoto University
The comfort you find in a cat’s company may have less to do with years together than with everyday closeness, a small observational study suggests.
Cat owners often credit their pets with making life better,
but research has produced mixed evidence about whether owning a cat benefits
human health and well-being. Some studies have found positive effects, while
others have reported possible negative ones.
Researchers at Kyoto University wondered whether those differences might reflect the quality of the relationship between people and their cats, particularly their everyday interactions.
To
investigate, the team followed the daily lives of 29 cats and their 19 owners
for one month, recruiting participants through flyers and social media. They
assessed owners’ moods through questionnaires and observed how the cats behaved
toward their owners and unfamiliar people.
To measure everyday physical closeness, the researchers
attached small Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) beacons to the cats’ collars. Owners
who spent more time physically close to their cats tended to report more
positive feelings. How long they had owned their cats, however, was not
associated with those positive mood states. The distinction suggests that daily
contact may matter more to this aspect of owners’ well-being than the length of
the relationship.
Farewell, Captain
Fellow activist and cat person
In lieu of flowers, memorial contributions may be made to: Johns Hopkins Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center Fund https://alzresearch.org/giving/ or Alzheimer’s Foundation of America Caregiver Resources https://alzfdn.org/donate/
What legal experts say about the Trump administration’s attempts to make a federal case out of state elections
How far will Trump push it?
The Trump administration’s lawsuit against Alaska, which seeks to block certification of the U.S. Senate results there if the GOP candidate does not win, is the latest in a long series of actions throughout 2026 in which the administration has attempted to wrest control of federal elections from states.
In the Alaska case, the U.S. Department of Justice, directed by President Donald Trump, claims that it aims to “protect the integrity of the 2026 Senate election in Alaska.”
If incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan does not win reelection in a close vote, the DOJ asserts, it’s likely the result of voter confusion because another candidate with a very similar name – Daniel J. Sullivan, with no party affiliation – is on the ballot, too. So in the event that Sen. Sullivan fails to win reelection, the DOJ demands that Alaska not certify the election and instead should conduct an inquest into who voters thought they were voting for.
The campaign of the Democratic candidate, Mary Peltola, whose potential win in the hotly contested election could help shift the Senate to Democratic control, has called the lawsuit “wholly baseless” and “an unprecedented pre-emptive strike on democratic elections” in a court filing. Another filing states that the DOJ lawsuit “asks the Court to preemptively nullify Alaska’s U.S. Senate election and disenfranchise Alaska voters without any legal basis whatsoever. It seeks to go where law ends.”
There’s lots of other heated language in the case’s legal filings. But colorful language and legal citations are a much longer way of articulating a simple fact: The U.S. Constitution gives the president no authority over federal elections. That authority rests with the states and, to a limited degree, with Congress.
Over the past year, as the 2026 midterm elections approached, The Conversation has published a number of stories illustrating this fundamental constitutional rule. Here is a selection of them:
Thursday, October 29, 2026
Trump Tells Voters They Couldn’t Even Afford a Burger at His Private Club
And they feel so much better
Jake
Johnson for Common Dreams
![]() |
| Big mistake to let him near sharp objects |
Trump made the comment in the context of his farcical pledge
to send every American adult a $5,000 check if Republicans retain
control of the US
Congress in next month’s midterm elections.
“The problem,” Trump said, “is that for $5,000 the most you’ll be able to buy
is a hamburger and maybe a small dessert. I’m not even sure you could buy
that.”
“No, don’t go there,” the billionaire president said of
Mar-a-Lago, where he frequently hosts rich allies and donors. “That’s not a good place if
you’re price-conscious.”
Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAtdk0Om3mY
“Working people are struggling to make rent and pay for
groceries, and President Trump wants to sell you a $5,000 hamburger at his
private golf club. (Fries and a drink extra.),” the AFL-CIO wrote
in response to the president’s remarks, which drew laughter from the audience
gathered in Corpus Christi.
Who loves, ya?
AI recaps Charlestown Town Council Oct. 26 meeting
Council Advances Ninigret Park Cell Pole, Reshapes Farm Committee
Adriana
Vossari, RI & Local Government, is NOT an actual person but rather is an AI-bot used by UpriseRI to review and summarize public records. Click here for their explanation for how this is done:
The council also updated the membership rules for the
Charlestown Agricultural Preservation Committee, approved a Charlestown Land
Trust cleanup at Ninigret Park on Saturday, Nov. 7, and passed its
consent agenda. Councilor Stephen Stokes was absent, so every vote was 4-0.
The meeting lasted roughly 17 minutes.
The meeting opened with a moment of silence for Libby Bray,
the town's assistant emergency management director, who the council president
said was in charge of the special needs registry.
Ninigret Park cell facility
The item concerned an agreement between the Town of
Charlestown and Cellco Partnership, doing business as Verizon Wireless, to
install, operate and maintain a wireless communications facility at the park at
no installation or maintenance cost to the town, according to the agenda.
The council president said the matter "has been
percolating a while." The agreement was drafted as a lease, but the
president said that since the park's utilization plan was approved, the town is
now required to use concession agreements instead of leases.
Councilor Bonnie Van Slyke, who said she was not on the
council when the matter was discussed before, raised several questions. She
asked whether the National Park Service had been contacted, and said graves in
that area of the park had come up during the master plan. Van Slyke said the
spot is probably not in the 10-foot square, but the town should check. A
speaker responded that the spot has already been designated but that they could
check.
Van Slyke also pointed to language in the draft allowing
overhead utility wires. A speaker said that area of the park is wired
underground and that there would be no overhead wires. She also asked about
commercial liability insurance, and a speaker said they would check with the
trust.
Van Slyke asked why the equipment would go in the park
rather than on the tower at the police station. In response, a speaker said
portable units are typically brought in for large park events, that Verizon
service at the park is poor, and that a permanent facility would help public
safety services there. A speaker said the pole would be 40 feet or higher and
that there should be no lighting on it.
Councilor Craig Marr moved to authorize the town solicitor
to convert the document into a concession agreement and to address the overhead
wire language, inspection of any grave sites, and a provision for no permanent
lighting. Van Slyke seconded. Town Solicitor Peter Ruggiero said he was
comfortable with the direction. The motion passed by voice vote, 4-0.
‘Voting is medicine’: These health professionals want you to vote in the midterms
Your vote matters
By Neha Pathak, Yale Climate Connections
When wildfire smoke drifts over a city or a heat wave blankets a community, doctors and nurses see the results firsthand. Asthma attacks, heart attacks, strokes, and heat-related illnesses surge.
Dr. Cynthia Mahoney, a retired California internist and nephrologist, helps lead Climate Health • Civic Health, an all-volunteer alliance of health professionals and organizations, alongside colleagues Margie Chen and Karina Maher.
Yale Climate Connections spoke with Mahoney about how climate change affects our health, why data centers have galvanized action, and what readers can do leading into Election Day.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Yale Climate Connections: How does climate change affect people's health?
Dr. Cynthia Mahoney: Climate disruption and fossil fuel pollution impact our health from cradle to grave, and it's going to get much worse unless we change course now.
Think of a worker who collapses in 105-degree heat and ends up in the hospital. That's going to get worse. That's climate change.
What's so unique about climate change is that it's going to impact all of us. It puts us all in this together.
YCC: You practiced in intensive care units. Does that shape how you see this problem?
Mahoney: I was trained as a nephrologist and practiced a lot in ICUs. What I prided myself on was not just treating what I saw in front of me, but asking, "Where is this patient going? How do I intervene now to keep them from deteriorating?"
This is an ICU moment. The health of the people on Earth needs ICU-level care. We see where this is heading, and we need to intervene.
YCC: Why do you want people to vote?
Mahoney: Democracy is the way we change direction.
A lot of young people think, "Look what I've lived through. Voting hasn't helped me. Why should I bother?" Some people are cynical: The politicians are just in it for the money. There may be some truth to part of that. But that is furthering the goals of the people who are trying to corruptly extract our health from us. If voting wasn't important, they wouldn't be trying that hard to suppress it.
Trump’s FEMA Head Tells States to Prepare to Handle Disasters on Their Own
We have a federal government to handle problems too big to be managed locally
Trump tells campaign crowd no FEMA support unless they elect Republicans.
Stephen Prager for Common Dreams
As the climate crisis intensifies extreme weather events, Donald Trump’s head of federal disaster relief sent a stark message to states: You’re on your own.Politico reported that Cameron Hamilton, the administrator of the US
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), told state officials at
the National Emergency Management Association’s annual meeting in Little Rock,
Arkansas, that they would need to allocate resources to respond to most
disasters without help from the federal government.
“Every state must have the appropriate financial reserves”
and other abilities “to ensure that recovery efforts can start immediately and
not necessarily be held up simply because of the federal [disaster] declaration
process,” Hamilton said, according to a recording of his remarks obtained by
the outlet.
“A future that I hope we would shoot for is one where we
wouldn’t require as many disasters because the capability of states is so high
and so substantial,” Hamilton added, referring to presidential authorizations
of federal disaster aid.
Trump has instituted dramatic cuts to FEMA that have hampered its response to
disasters. When Texas faced
floods last year that killed at least 138 people, for example, the
administration’s spending restrictions delayed FEMA’s deployment of search-and-rescue teams for
more than 72 hours, while lapsed call-center contracts left thousands of
survivors’ calls for assistance unanswered.
Wednesday, October 28, 2026
Déjà vu all over again in House District 39 as Democratic incumbent faces MAGA Republican
District 39 continues to be a culture war battleground
By Nancy Lavin, Rhode Island Current
![]() |
| It's work like this that serve as reasons to re-elect Cotter |
They are both moms in their 40s who want to lower energy bills and preserve western Rhode Island’s rural beauty.
The similarities between Democratic Rep. Megan Cotter and her Republican challenger Jasmin Roy end there.
Cotter, the two-term incumbent for House District 39, has a record of legislative accomplishments she can point to while canvassing the 100-square mile district, spanning Exeter, Richmond, and Hopkinton: adding more money to the green bond for forest and farmland preservation, spurring — and leading — a newly begun legislative panel to study how housing developments affect water supply in rural communities; and limiting self-checkouts at grocery stores to preserve jobs.
About House District 39
Represented by Rep. Megan Cotter since 2022
Geography: Richmond, Exeter and a small piece of Hopkinton
Population: 14,828 residents; 11,382 registered voters
Partisan breakdown: 59% unaffiliated, 21% Republican; 20% Democrat
Demographics: median age: 41.1, 88.6% white; $127,552 median household income (2024)
Roy, a member of the Hopkinton Town Council, has focused her legislative campaign on denouncing various Democratic officials, including Cotter, for promoting “communism” and government overreach, including in education.
“I don’t coparent with the government,” Roy proclaimed in a June 1 episode of local conservative podcast Cumberland Unfiltered.
A vocal Trump supporter who touts Second Amendment protections and parental rights in education, Roy’s views, as shared on her campaign website and social media, are likely to resonate with many of the voters in the district, which backed Trump in the last three presidential elections. Cotter’s predecessor, Republican Justin Price, attended the Jan. 6 rally outside the U.S. Capitol, though Price said he did not participate in the riots.





















