See more at: http://www.rifuture.org/progressive-disatisfaction-and-the-democratic-primary.html#sthash.QpTdra5p.dpuf
It’s no secret then,
that progressives are dissatisfied with the status quo of Rhode Island. There
have been victories; notably marriage equality. But marriage equality only
arrived after a compromise of civil unions riled up enough people that there
was a large-scale campaign to gain true equality before the law. Full
progressive change in Rhode Island happens when there is a confluence of
outrage and money.
While some of them have not been the most progressive candidate in their races, they
have been the most progressive candidate possible.
But recent events in
New York City and Boston have empowered progressives across the country, and
Rhode Island progressives especially have taken note (sandwiched, as they are,
between those two regional poles). Candidates with explicitly progressive
campaigns have won mayoral races in those cities in off-election years. The New
York City example of Bill de Blasio is especially hopeful.
NYC has a population
of somewhere around 7 times larger than the entirety of Rhode Island, which
despite a Democratic majority has been ruled by non-Democrats since 1994, the
last full year in which there was a Democratic governor in Rhode Island.
If it can happen in
New York and Boston, then it can happen here, the reasoning goes. As Rhode
Island progressives eye the governor’s race, they may start drawing parallels
with New York City. This may explain the hoopla over Clay Pell, the untested
scion of Rhode Island’s greatest political legacy.
There are a few
factors to consider. First, progressives may believe they are the Democratic Party, but that’s ultimately
false. Many of Rhode Island’s Democrats are more accurately described as
“Christian democrats” generally socially conservative but supportive of social
justice and welfare.
These are the elder type of Democrats, part of the party
before the progressives split from the Republicans. The reality is that Rhode
Island’s Democratic Party incorporates three general sections; the
progressives, the Christian democrats, and the neoliberals. There are also some
genuine conservatives.
However, of these
three wings, the progressives are by far the most politically dangerous and
important. Time and time again they’ve proven they can break or make Democratic
candidates.
Therefore, it’s not surprising to see all Democratic candidates in
the gubernatorial primary proclaim themselves progressives.
Progressives have a
pastime of DINO-hunting, which generally means weeding out the Christian
democrats or neoliberals. But as the gubernatorial race approaches, they may
find themselves hunting progressives-in-name-only instead. I doubt I’m wrong in
thinking that progressives believe that if the first elected Democratic
governor is coming in 2014 they’ll allow that governor to be anything short of
a true-blue progressive.
Providence Mayor Angel
Taveras is especially vulnerable to the whims of progressive fervor. He’s
managed to position himself somewhere between the neoliberal position and the
progressive position. Meanwhile, General Treasurer Gina Raimondo has been
firmly defined as part of the neoliberals; the “Wall St. Democrats.” But that
line-walking is not playing as well as it should.
On a recent appearance on WPRI’s Newsmakers, when pressed
by Ted Nesi, Taveras was unable to draw a distinction between himself and
Raimondo in terms of actual policy, suggesting that it’ll come out in the
campaign.
On one hand, that’s
correct; and politically it’s unnecessary to draw a distinction this early when
Rhode Islanders won’t be paying attention for another year or so. But on the
other, those contrasts should be clear already, especially as activists begin
examining the candidates closely and building enthusiasm for campaign season.
Taveras’ vulnerability
is clear in Clay Pell, as ill-defined a candidate as ever there was. We know
virtually nothing about him beyond the name, a brief biographical sketch, and
that his wife is Olympian Michelle Kwan. Yet Pell is bending progressives
towards his center of gravity, and that should be worrying this early. His
grandfather was also a relative unknown who defeated two former Governors for
his U.S. Senate seat.
Despite their
strengths, one shouldn’t think of the progressives as a wholly deciding factor
though. For one thing, the movement is, like most things in Rhode Island,
fractious and full of personalities.
With the disbanding of Ocean State Action,
the main meeting table and organizing presence for progressive groups has been
removed. For another, what gets defined as truly “progressive” is open to
debate. And finally, while the gubernatorial race will gain the most attention,
the real power lies in the General Assembly, where progressives will have to
focus on electing more friendly candidates as well as protecting those they
already have.
2014 will be a serious
test for progressives in Rhode Island. Can they elect a governor who represents
their values? Can they take a controlling majority in the Assembly? And should
they manage that, will they be able to produce results and right Rhode Island after
years of neoliberal failure?
Samuel G. Howard - A
native-born Rhode Islander, educated in Providence Public Schools, went to
college in North Carolina and a political junkie and pessimistic optimist.
