Guy with enough money to fund 41 political action committees in Rhode Island, including ones aimed at ousting Charlestown legislators Tina Spears and Victoria Gu, claims he is being hurt by the minimum wage

If we pay a living wage, our businesses will suffer, argue lobbyists and business owners opposed to increasing the minimum wage

Steve Ahlquist

In a hearing that highlighted a fundamental disagreement over the purpose of the minimum wage and the economic consequences of raising it, virtually every Rhode Island business represented by a trade association opposed it.

The Rhode Island House Committee on Labor heard three bills seeking to raise the minimum wage:

• H7770, from Representative David Bennett (Democrat, District 20, Warwick, Cranston), would increase the minimum hourly wage commencing January 1, 2029, by an amount equal to the total percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) for the Northeast Region for the calendar year 2027;
• H7769, from Representative Jenni Furtado (Democrat, District 64, East Providence, Pawtucket) would set the minimum wage for 2027 at $20 per hour; and,
• H7771, from Representative Enrique Sanchez (Democrat, District 9, Providence), would set the minimum wage for 2027 at $24 per hour.

Here’s the video, edited to exclude bills and discussions not related to the three minimum wage bills: House Labor - Minimum Wage - March 18, 2026

Proponents, including labor representatives, public health professionals, and economic justice advocates, argued that the current minimum wage was not a living wage, forcing full-time workers into poverty and creating health inequities. They contended that raising the wage would provide economic stability, stimulate local economies, and offer dignity to workers.

Opponents, primarily small-business coalitions and a hospitality association represented by well-connected, high-priced lobbyists, argued that significant wage increases would hinder small businesses already facing high costs. They warned, without evidence, that raising the minimum wage would lead to higher prices, inflation, and job losses, making Rhode Island less economically competitive.

But the core of the opponents’ argument is that most businesses in Rhode Island cannot survive if they are required to pay their workers a wage sufficient to lift them out of poverty. In other words, an “economically competitive” Rhode Island depends on the exploitation of low-income workers.

Among the lobbyists present to make these arguments were:

• Jason Martesian, representing the Rhode Island Business Coalition;
• William Walsh, representing the Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce, the Rhode Island Builders Association, the Rhode Island Hospitality Association (RIHA), the Rhode Island Marine Trade Association (RIMTA), and the Construction Industries of Rhode Island;
• Robert Goldberg, representing the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce; and,
• Ryan Moot, manager of Government Affairs at RIHA, who doesn’t appear to be registered as a lobbyist.

Some business owners, such as David Levesque of Brewed Awakenings, also spoke in opposition:

“I don’t know how many of you guys actually sign the front of a check, but I do. And many of the businesses that I work with also believe in what I’m about to say: You guys are trying to push a minimum wage so we can have a livable wage. Well, what is a livable wage? What’s it for you? What’s it for you? It’s different for everybody.

“I can tell you, when my daughter started working for me a year and a half ago, at 15 years old, she wasn’t worth $15 an hour. She had no experience. She hadn’t worked before, but you required me to pay her $15 an hour. So the worker that’s been with me longer, eight, nine, 10, or 20 years… We can’t afford to pay more when we’re forced to pay an entry-level worker an unacceptably high wage. There needs to be an entry-level wage.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Dave Levesque is the founder of the League of Rhode Island Business (LORIB), a statewide political action committee with 40 subsidiary PACs in every Rhode Island city and town, including Charlestown. Levesque is pro-MAGA and Trump, as well as bitterly opposed to gun control and taxes on the wealthy. His PAC seeks to unseat virtually every Democratic woman legislator in South County, as detailed HERE.

War on terror

Truly stable genius

March 24: Discussion with indigenous author at Tomaquag

CRMC Denies Westerly Couple’s Application to Redo Seawall

Stones unturned

By Rob Smith / ecoRI News staff

How many stones can you replace in a seawall before it becomes a new wall?

Five percent? Ten? What if the stones are almost twice the size?

That was the subject of debate between commissioners on the Coastal Resources Management Council and a waterfront property owner.

James and Cheryl Chrones own, via a family trust, the last house on Atlantic Avenue in Westerly before the street turns into sandy beach. Like many houses dotting Rhode Island’s shoreline, this one has a 400-foot revetment, a seawall that has existed in some form or another since 1938.

The water in front of the Atlantic Avenue home is designated as Type 1 waters by CRMC; it’s meant for conservation only, and shoreline-hardening structures like seawalls aren’t allowed. It’s why coastal regulators have gone back and forth with the Quidnessett Country Club in North Kingstown over its illegal seawall.

But there’s a catch: the Chrones’ seawall is grandfathered in because it predates the formation of CRMC by more than three decades. So, while state regulations say they can’t expand it or create a new wall, they are allowed to keep the current one and put in applications to maintain it.

Since 1993, the Chrones have put in seven other, separate CRMC applications for seawall maintenance, including an emergency permit following Superstorm Sandy to replace riprap and repair a concrete patio.

Thinking about switching from Medicare Advantage to Medicare/Medigap?

In Switching to Original Medicare, Beware of Medigap Plan Refusals

Michelle Andrews 

It’s open enrollment season for Medicare Advantage, when people currently enrolled in private managed-care plans can either sign up for a new one or switch to original Medicare through March 31.

But there’s a catch: If people want to move to original Medicare and buy a supplemental Medigap insurance plan to cover some out-of-pocket costs, they may not be able to. Medigap insurers can generally refuse coverage to applicants whose medical history or current health problems might make them expensive to cover, a process called medical underwriting.

“We really want people to factor that in,” said Kata Kertesz, managing policy attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy. “If someone is in a Medicare Advantage plan for several years and then wants to switch to original Medicare, they may find they can’t switch and also get a Medigap plan.”

There are many reasons people might want to trade their MA plan for traditional Medicare. Although MA managed-care plans are typically cheaper and offer benefits not available in original Medicare, such as coverage for vision and hearing services, they have smaller provider networks than the original program and, sometimes, extensive prior authorization requirements.

In addition, as Medicare Advantage plan profits have sagged in recent years, a growing number of plans are pulling out of areas they used to serve, leaving members with fewer options. This year, an estimated 1 in 10 MA plan members will be forced out of their plans for this reason, according to a study published in JAMA in February.

“We saw some Medicare Advantage plans that just left the market completely and stopped issuing plans,” said Emily Whicheloe, education director at the Medicare Rights Center.

For those considering a switch to original Medicare, getting a Medigap plan can be tricky. Federal law provides a one-time, six-month opportunity for people 65 or older and newly covered by Medicare Part B to sign up for any Medigap plan without underwriting. After that initial sign-up period ends, however, there are fewer coverage guarantees.

But some do exist. Here are a few key circumstances and time frames when people are guaranteed a Medigap plan without having to undergo underwriting:

Pope Leo to Iran War Architects: ‘Cease Fire’

Trump is as likely to listen to Pope Leo than he did Pope Francis

Olivia Rosane for Common Dreams

This is an actual Trump post from May 2025

Pope Leo XIV called for a ceasefire in the Middle East on Sunday, in his most direct appeal for peace since the US and Israel launched a war on Iran on February 28.

While the pope did not mention either US President Donald Trump or Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by name, he directly addressed those driving hostilities.

“On behalf of the Christians of the Middle East and all women and men of good will, I appeal to those responsible for this conflict,” Leo said, according to The Associated Press. 

“Cease fire so that avenues for dialogue may be reopened. Violence can never lead to the justice, stability, and peace that the people are waiting for.”

The remarks came following his recital of the Angelus Prayer from the Vatican at 12:00 pm local time.

“Some claim to involve the name of God in these deadly decisions, but God cannot be enlisted by darkness.”

‘One Person Cannot Tear Our Movement Down,’ Farmworkers Say of César Chávez Revelations

The danger of revering heroes

Jessica Corbett for Common Dreams

“Our collective power is what defines us and is our movement, and one person cannot tear our movement down,” Alianza Nacional De Campesinas said in the wake of The New York Times reporting Wednesday on multiple sexual abuse allegations against late Mexican-American labor leader César Chávez.

“As a farmworker women’s organization, many of us have experienced or witnessed the sexual abuse and silence women endure in many aspects of our lives,” the group continued, adding that “we are deeply troubled and devastated” to learn about the reporting, and “we stand with Dolores Huerta, Ana Murguía, and Debra Rojas, who have bravely shared their painful stories.”

Huerta, cofounded with Chávez a group that went on to become the labor union United Farm Workers (UFW). In her comments to the Times and a separate statement, the 95-year-old described two separate encounters with Chávez that led to pregnancies: “The first time I was manipulated and pressured into having sex with him... The second time I was forced, against my will, and in an environment where I felt trapped.”

Murguía told the Times that Chávez molested her for four years, beginning when she was 13. Rojas said she was 12 when Chávez first groped her breasts in the same office where abused Murguía. When Rojas was 15, the newspaper reported, “he arranged to have her stay at a motel during a weekslong march through California, she said, and had sexual intercourse with her—rape, under state law, because she was not old enough to consent.”

The reporting has sparked a wave of responses from labor groups, elected officials, and others who have expressed support for survivors and stressed, as Guardian US columnist Moira Donegan wrote Friday, that “the rightness of the movement for the dignity of workers, for the rights and respect of Latinos, and for a future in which there is more freedom and possibility for poor people... cannot be tarnished by Chávez’s behavior.”

UFW Foundation said this week that “as a women-led organization that exists to empower communities, the allegations about abusive behavior by César Chávez go against everything that we stand for.”

Describing the alleged abuse as “shocking, indefensible and something we are taking seriously,” the UFW Foundation also announced that it “has cancelled all César Chávez Day activities this month.”

EDITOR'S NOTE: I spent a day with Cesar Chavez when he visited Providence in May 1972. I was a young organizer of 23 and was picked to be part of a contingent who essentially served as human shields. Cesar had gotten many death threats. I was mostly within an arm's length of him and liked and admired him at the time, but much less so now. - Will Collette

What are they dying for?

If you have any prohibited items in your luggage, they'll shoot you in the face

 

Thank you for your attention to this very important message from the President of the United States. Sigh.

Sen. Valverde, Rep. Speakman introduce bill allowing portable solar

Small systems would provide Rhode Islanders less-expensive, easier entry into electricity generation 

Sen. Bridget Valverde and Rep. June S. Speakman have introduced legislation to enable Rhode Islanders — even renters and those without rooftop access — to reduce their electric bills and generate green energy through small solar arrays that can be plugged into an ordinary outlet.

Plug-in solar (also called “balcony solar”) typically consists of one to four portable solar panels and is designed for simple self-installation by renters and homeowners alike. Plug-in solar panels can be placed on a balcony or patio or in a yard, then safely plugged into a standard wall outlet. 

Once plugged in, the solar energy immediately flows through the home to power appliances and lights, reducing the electricity that home must draw from the electric grid and saving money on household electric bills. Systems typically cost between $500 and $1,200.

The legislation (2026-S 2359, 2026-H 7269) defines portable solar devices and exempts them from permitting and utility-agreement processes that are intended to regulate much larger systems.

Scientists Say Conquering Age-Related Diseases Could Dramatically Extend Human Life

A new perspective on how to slow aging

By Genomic Press

Multidimensional nature of aging: phenotypic changes across levels of biological complexity. The figure illustrates time-dependent phenotypic change across molecular, cellular, tissue, and organismal scales in multiple species. Credit: Dan Ehninger

The analysis, published in Genomic Psychiatry, calls on researchers to rethink how biological aging is measured and interpreted. Dr. Dan Ehninger, who leads the Translational Biogerontology Laboratory at the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases, and Dr. Maryam Keshavarz conducted a systematic review examining widely used indicators of aging.

Their work argues that common measures such as lifespan extension, epigenetic clocks, frailty indices, and even the widely cited hallmarks of aging framework may blur the line between true changes in aging and general physiological effects that occur regardless of age.

One of the most surprising insights comes from comparing causes of death across species. In humans, cardiovascular disease is responsible for roughly 35 to 70 percent of deaths among older adults. Autopsy studies prove that even centenarians who appeared healthy shortly before death almost always died from identifiable medical conditions rather than from old age alone.

Research on people between 97 and 106 years old further supports this pattern, with vascular diseases remaining the leading cause of death. These findings highlight that even exceptional longevity usually ends with a specific disease.

George Washington was a huge vaccine supporter and even used the smallpox vaccine to help beat the British

Washington MANDATED that American troops be vaccinated against smallpox

By Matt Kaplan

It was June of 1775 and the British army was in control of Boston. George Washington had only recently become the commander of the colonial army and, while he had not fought at Bunker Hill, he arrived there shortly thereafter. He and his soldiers hid in the woodlands around the city watching and waiting for an opportunity to take Boston back. There were several problems with that plan, though.

First, Washington did not have the weapons on hand for a siege. Second, even if the weapons had been available, they wouldn’t have done him much good since he didn’t have enough troops to actually lay siege. Yet both of these problems paled in comparison to the third. There was a smallpox outbreak in the city.

The accompanying excerpt is adapted from “I Told You So!: Scientists Who Were Ridiculed, Exiled, and Imprisoned for Being Right,” by Matt Kaplan. (St. Martin’s, 288 pages.) Copyright © 2026 by the author and reprinted by permission of St. Martin’s Publishing Group.

You can say what you like about Covid-19, but when you compare it to the great many diseases that have infected human beings throughout history, it is not as bad as most of them. I am not trying to make light of a pandemic that killed millions, but it is important to put it in perspective. Even at the very beginning, when there were no vaccines and no known treatments, Covid-19 rendered roughly 15 percent of those who caught it in North America and Europe seriously ill. Many of these sufferers ended up in the hospital. Some developed complications. Some of those with complications died. In short, for those who were identified as carrying Covid-19, the chance of dying from the disease in 2020 was around 1 to 3 percent. Now let’s take a look at smallpox.

Early stages of smallpox were not much different from Covid-19 and influenza. People would get a fever, they’d have aches and pains, they’d feel tired, and often develop nausea. Then the real horror of the virus emerged. Little pimples started to appear on the patient’s forehead.

These multiplied rapidly, covering the face and the inside of the mouth. They then spread pretty much everywhere else on the body. Over the next few days, these pimples filled with fluid. They transformed into the dreaded pustules (pox) that smallpox is known for. These were horrible round, hard, and raised structures that looked like Rice Krispies that had been inserted under the skin.

Patients were often covered with them from head to toe. The infectious liquid inside these pustules then slowly started leaking until, a couple weeks after the disease appeared, the pustules dried out, broke off the skin, and left behind permanent disfiguring scars. This was the “ordinary” version of smallpox, and conservative records indicate that it killed 30 percent of those who caught it. There were more deadly versions of the disease (aptly named the malignant and hemorrhagic variants). They killed just about everyone who caught them.

South County Health’s Mystery Partner

What the Community Deserves to Know

By Dr. Chris Van hemelrijck 

In mid-November 2025, South County Health (SCH) CEO Aaron Robinson and Board Chair Joseph Matthews announced they had signed a letter of intent with one of the “top 10” health systems in the country. A 120-day due diligence period followed. That period is now closing — and the community still knows remarkably little about what has actually been agreed to. 

SCH leadership has described the arrangement as “transformational” and “non-traditional” — a clinical and digital partnership that would bring an Epic electronic medical records (EMR) system, artificial intelligence tools, and world-class clinical expertise to South County. 

We are told that existing and future funds raised locally will remain with SCH and that local governance will not change. These are reassuring words. But words are not a governance structure, and reassurances are not contractual protections. 

The unnamed partner is just one of several unknowns. Robinson has referenced “multiple partners” — strategic, AI, digital, and clinical — but has not identified the AI company involved, the clinical partner providing second opinions, or how any of these relationships would be structured. 

Each of these entities may have its own financial interests and contractual claims. The public deserves to know who they are. 

Understanding why SCH is pursuing this deal requires looking at the finances honestly. Three consecutive years of net losses — $4.6 million in 2022, $6.5 million in 2023, and $534,000 in 2024 — against total revenue of roughly $239 million tells a difficult story. Current net assets stand at approximately $72 million.