Charter school association revokes award they gave Dan McKee

McKee used to be charter school champion, but tough re-election campaign made him abandon his principles

By Diane Ravitch

Rhode Island welcomed charters under former Governor Gina Raimondo. When she left to become President Biden’s Secretary of Commerce, lieutenant governor Dan McKee took her place. 

He was widely viewed as a strong supporter of charter schools. He was closely associated with the creation of Rhode Island’s mayoral academies, especially the Blackstone Valley Prep network. 

But this year, he signed legislation pausing the approval of new charter schools for three years. He said that declining enrollment and funding challenges warranted the pause.

This was awkward for the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (sic), which had honored him in 2009 as a Charter School Champion. Taken aback, the Alliance did something unprecedented. It withdrew his award!

Today, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools withdrew its recognition of Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee as a Charter School Champion, marking the first time in the organization’s 21-year history this award has been rescinded.

This happened after McKee signed a bill “that enacts a moratorium on public charter schools for three years, lowers the statewide cap from 35 to 28, and prohibits already approved schools from opening.”

Chemical Accidents Rise, Analysis Shows, as Trump Administration Proposes Weakening Safety Rules

Chemical accidents can happen anywhere, including Charlestown, as past history shows

By Liza Gross

2007 explosion at Bradford Dye

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here.

Physicist Ronald Koopman appeared at a Southern California Air District meeting in 2018 to talk about what seemed like an arcane scientific topic: hydrofluoric acid dispersion and water mitigation testing. 

Hydrofluoric acid, also known as hydrogen fluoride or HF, is used to manufacture a range of materials, including refrigerants, gasoline, fluorine-based pesticides and fluoropolymers like those used to make Teflon. It’s also one of the most corrosive and dangerous chemicals known. Koopman conducted experiments with the chemical in the 1980s that warned about the potential of deadly accidents at facilities that use the hazardous materials.

2023 fire at former Kenyon Mill on Route 2

With the Trump administration poised to roll back rules intended to protect workers and communities from catastrophic industrial chemical releases, and a new analysis showing rising rates of chemical accidents, Koopman’s presentation on highly hazardous materials has taken on a new urgency. 

The number of accidents involving releases of dangerous chemicals rose by 57 percent between 2021 and 2025, from 83 to 131, according to an analysis released Monday by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a nonprofit that works with former government officials. 

Injuries or deaths from accidents also rose, from 60 to 89 over the same five-year period, the analysis found. Incident reports released by the Chemical Safety Board (CSB), an independent agency that investigates chemical accidents, show that more than 650 accidents occurred between April 2020 and May 2026, with 103 resulting in fatalities, 355 causing injuries and 314 doing “substantial property damage.” 

Close to 150 million people live within 3 miles of these facilities. Historically underserved and overburdened populations, including people who identify as Black and Latino, are at greatest risk of exposure to an accidental release.

Put some peroxide on it

Donald Trump post shows what he will do when he lands on the moon. Brilliant idea!

Trump's war on green energy is about as successful as his war on Iran

How US renewable-energy growth persists despite federal policy uncertainty 

This guest post is by:

Dhruv Modi, research analyst, Center for Global Sustainability, University of Maryland

Alicia Zhao, research manager, Center for Global Sustainability, University of Maryland

Tyler Stotland, research analyst, Center for Global Sustainability, University of Maryland

Prof Nate Hultman, director of the Center for Global Sustainability, University of Maryland, and professor in the School of Public Policy, University of Maryland

Despite recent shifts in federal energy policies, our analysis shows that the US transition to renewable energy is continuing. 

The current administration has enacted a range of changes to prioritize fossil-fuel energy and environmental deregulation in the US, while withdrawing support for renewables. 

Yet solar, wind and battery storage accounted for over 90% of new energy capacity in 2025.

This is thanks to the falling cost of renewable energy technologies, investments spurred by the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and local and state policies, according to our research at the Center for Global Sustainability, University of Maryland.  

Our analysis examines recent trends in the US energy landscape, focusing on rising electricity demand, new electricity capacity additions and generation, as well as fossil-fuel production and state-level case studies. 

Chariho United organization makes the case for your support for new elementary school

Unified Elementary Campus Update

Public Hearing on the Land Deal for the New Elementary School: July 7 Charlestown is holding a public hearing on Tuesday, July 7 at 7:00 p.m. at Charlestown Elementary School (in the cafeteria/gymnasium) to discuss a question that will appear on the August 4 referendum ballot. This is separate from the school bond vote in November. It deals specifically with the land and lease arrangements needed to build the new school. Referendum Vote (Charlestown residents only) Tuesday - August 4, 2026 - 8:00am - 8:00pm Charlestown Town Hall Council Chambers

What's actually being decided The town owns the land where the new unified elementary school would be built (the current Charlestown Elementary School site) and also owns Wicklund Field next door. For the school project to move forward, the town needs to formally authorize two things: a ground lease with Chariho Regional School District and a license agreement for Wicklund Field.

Ground Lease with Chariho Regional School District This would let the district demolish the old Charlestown Elementary building and construct, finance, and operate the new elementary school on that same site. The town would still own the land. The district would be leasing it long term to build and run the school there. Proposal Wicklund Field License Agreement This would allow the district to use Wicklund Field, a town owned recreation area, for school purposes. Because Wicklund Field was purchased or improved using federal Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) grants, there are rules about how it can be used. The town would keep ownership, and the field would still have to remain available for public outdoor recreation, in line with those federal requirements.

Why this matters Even if voters approve the school bond in November, the district cannot build the school without the town's permission to use this land. This August referendum question is what gives the town council the legal authority to enter into those lease and license agreements. Without it, the project has nowhere to go. What a "yes" vote means A yes vote authorizes the town council to move forward with the ground lease and the Wicklund Field license, and to pass whatever ordinance is needed to put those agreements into effect. What a "no" vote means A no vote means the town council would not have that authorization, which would stop this piece of the project from moving forward as planned.

View Presentation Chariho United is a non-partisan community group formed to support inclusive, fully funded public schools in Charlestown, Richmond, and Hopkinton. We believe strong schools are the foundation of a strong community, and that every student deserves the resources, opportunities, and support they need to thrive. Subscribe Past Editions

25 Democratic-led states sue Trump administration over Medicaid work requirements

We're suing Trump again

By Anna Claire Vollers, Rhode Island Current

Twenty-five Democratic-led states plus the District of Columbia have sued the Trump administration over its new work requirements for people who get their health insurance through Medicaid.

At issue is a “medically frail” designation that the states say is too narrow and will make it too difficult for ill and disabled people to remain on Medicaid.

They’re challenging the administration’s guidance on who can be exempt from the work requirements included in the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the broad tax and spending measure President Donald Trump signed a year ago.

Medicaid is the publicly-funded health insurance for people with low incomes. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, states that have expanded Medicaid eligibility to more adults under the Affordable Care Act — 40 states plus the District of Columbia — must require those adults to prove they’re working, going to school or serving their communities for at least 80 hours a month to receive Medicaid. Georgia, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, which have used federal waivers to expand their Medicaid programs, are also subject to the new work rules.

The new lawsuit specifically targets new federal guidance that narrows the definition of who can qualify as “medically frail,” a key exemption used to excuse Medicaid recipients from work requirements if they have serious disabilities or illnesses. The guidance came in the form of an interim final rule published this month by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

South County Democratic women get a wave of legislation passed at the end of the General Assembly session

Coffee autocrat wants to push them out to MAGAtize South County

By Will Collette

MAGA millionaire Dave Levesque, owner of the Brewed Awakenings coffee shop chain wants to change the political landscape of South County to fit his vision of a MAGA paradise by ousting virtually every South County Democratic woman holding a General Assembly seat.

To further his dream, Levesque set up the “League of Rhode Island Businesses (LORIB)” with a statewide political action committee and a local version in all 39 Rhode Island cities and towns. Don’t bother looking for the “Charlestown LORIB” or the “Westerly LORIB” because they only exist on paper filed with the Board of Elections.

This panoply of PACs serve the useful purpose of allowing Levesque to get around state law that limits PAC donations to $2000 per candidate. His clever solution: set up each of his candidates with multiple donations from his array of PACs.

Charlestown’s challenger to our state Rep. Tina Spears, self-described “sex crimes defense attorney” Leah Boisclair, received her initial cash from five different Levesque PACs.

According to declarations filed with the Board of Elections, Levesque is challenging these incumbent Democrats:

• Rep. Tina Spears (Charlestown, So. Kingstown, Westerly and Block Island) faces a Sept. 9 primary challenge
• Rep. Megan Cotter (Hopkinton, Richmond, Exeter and West Warwick)
• Rep. Carol Hagan McEntee (South Kingstown et al.)
• Rep. Kathy Fogarty (South Kingstown et al.)
• Open seat left by Rep. Julie Casmiro
• Open seat left by Rep. Bob Craven Sr.
• State Sen. Alana DiMario faces a Sept. 9 primary challenge
• Sen. Victoria Gu (Charlestown, Westerly and South Kingstown)
• Plus conservative Democrat Rep. Sam Azzinaro (Westerly)

Levesque supported Laura Turini to challenge Sen. Bridget ValVerde in the Sept. 9 Democratic Primary, but Turisi didn’t file a declaration. He also failed to find candidates to challenge one of his prime targets, Rep. Teresa Tanzi as well as Sen. Sue Sosnowski. Tanzi, Sosnowski and ValVerde are now running unopposed.

If records make any difference, Levesque bevy of challengers will have to confront the incredibly productive General Assembly session these Democrats achieved as well as their earlier achievements.

Just before the Assembly closed this session, the following bills were passed. I am using the descriptions produced by the State House News Bureau.

Yes, they are

South County Rising community meeting on July 10

Protest in Ashaway on Wednesday

Legislation enacted to provide safety guidelines for AI chatbots and AI use in mental healthcare

Much needed protection 

Two bills from Sen. Lori Urso and Rep. Tina L. Spears to create artificial intelligence safety guidelines related to suicidal ideation and mental health treatment have been signed into law. The bills are part of the Senate’s 17-bill package of healthcare legislation.

“As the incorporation of AI in uses that directly impact human health and safety rapidly expands, it is imperative that we recognize the potential harm from these systems, whose operation is often inconsistent with professional standards,” said Senator Urso (D-Dist. 8, Pawtucket). “We have all read about the tragic instances in this country in the last few years involving distressed individuals who have turned to chatbots for companionship, advice or counsel and whom, evidence has shown, have been encouraged to, or not appropriately discouraged from, engaging in self-harm. It is time to put safeguards in place to protect Rhode Islanders of all ages from this rapidly expanding technology, both at home and in a clinical setting.”

The first bill (2026-S 2195Aaa, 2026-H 7350Aaa) requires developers to incorporate protocols to protect vulnerable users who may express suicidal ideation, desires for self-harm or desires to physically harm others while interacting with a chatbot. The systems must also refer users to a crisis service provider as soon as it detects any of these expressions, and developers will have to submit annual reports to the Attorney General’s office showing the number of safety protocol activations and related metrics.

No, your drinking water isn’t contaminated by abortion pills

Viagra, maybe? Condoms, definitely.

Jenae Barnes, Climate Reporter

This story was originally reported by Jenae Barnes, Climate Reporter of The 19th. Meet Jenae and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

Anti-abortion advocates, including Republican lawmakers and state officials, want the EPA to review mifepristone as a water contaminant. Scientists say there’s no evidence it harms the environment or people.

While there is no scientific evidence that abortion medication is contaminating Americans' water supply, it has nonetheless become a central claim by the anti-abortion movement. Activists, Instagram influencers and Republican Party officials — including state and federal lawmakers — are doubling down on what experts describe as a disinformation campaign that mixes environmental policy and reproductive rights, and risks exploiting legitimate concerns about clean water.

“What if I were to tell you that every time you fill up a glass of water at your kitchen sink from the tap, you were actually *drinking* someone else’s abortion,” influencer Isabel Brown wrote in an Instagram post in May. In the accompanying video, the Gen Z conservative content creator, who has more than 1 million followers on her platform, talks to Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America, a national anti-abortion organization, and contends that anti-abortion medication is “poisoning” the water.

The claim isn’t new. For decades, anti-abortion advocates have argued that abortion medications, primarily mifepristone, pollute the environment and put pregnant people’s health at risk. But the argument has now become part of a widespread and often coordinated effort to create federal and state policy that further suppresses abortion access. 

Energy costs are high and unaffordable

What utilities, governments, communities and you can do to help cut energy costs

Sanya Carley, University of Pennsylvania; Alexandra Klass, University of Michigan; Alison L. Knasin, University of Pennsylvania; David Konisky, Indiana University, and Shelley Welton, University of Pennsylvania

For many Americans, energy bills are becoming increasingly unaffordable.

Energy prices increased approximately 30% on average from 2021 to 2026. In some places, the rates of increase have been much steeper. In the Mid-Atlantic and eastern Midwest region where several of us live, the regional electricity grid is run by PJM Interconnection, and power prices in the first quarter of 2026 were 76% higher than the same period in 2025.

These rising utility costs are a shock to many people, including those already having a hard time paying for the energy they need. In 2024, 1 in 3 American households reported struggling to pay their energy bills, and 15.1 million homes were disconnected from their electricity or gas services because the residents couldn’t pay their bill. Energy insecurity is a pervasive and potentially dangerous predicament for these millions of households, and a growing challenge for America as energy bills rise.

Energy markets, which we study, are famously complex. But many parties in these marketplaces, from the federal government to individual consumers, have opportunities to help provide Americans with affordable energy. Some may not be obvious to the casual observer, or even to savvy energy wonks.

Trump doesn’t own the government – even though he acts as if Congress is not his equal in constitutional power and authority

The Constitution does not give Trump the power he thinks he has

Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin, Boise State University

In a recent exchange with reporters about the newly brokered Iran agreement, Donald Trump was asked whether he planned to submit the deal to Congress.

“I never thought about sending – never even thought about it, but I will,” Trump said. “I will send it to Congress. I like the idea.”

The most revealing phrase in the president’s statement was not “I will send it.” It was “I never thought about it.”

In a constitutional system built around separated powers, the consent of Congress should be more than an idea the president remembers after a reporter asks. Especially when it comes to questions of war, peace and foreign policy, Congress is where the public’s representatives play a crucial role in national decision-making.

Exactly what role Congress has in this particular agreement is not yet clear. The Constitution gives the Senate formal responsibility for approving or rejecting treaties. But presidents also enter many international agreements without submitting them for a Senate vote. As a result, lawyers and lawmakers often disagree about when congressional approval is legally required and when a president can act on his own.

But the legal question is not the only issue. Trump’s comment was revealing because it suggested that Congress had not been part of his thinking from the beginning.

That fits a larger pattern in Trump’s rhetoric. In his public remarks, he rarely describes Congress as a coequal branch of government. It appears as an obstacle, an audience, a pressure point, a rubber stamp or an afterthought.

As a scholar of media and presidential rhetoric, and an endowed professor for the Frank Church Institute, a center established to honor the former senator who once chaired a committee that aimed to ensure Congress’ role overseeing executive branch activities, I pay close attention to how presidents talk about power. The language they use often reveals not only what they intend to do, but how they understand America’s constitutional system itself.

In 2016, Trump accepted the GOP nomination for president, saying of the country’s problems, ‘I alone can fix it.’