Connect with us

Rhode Island

Dr. Jerome Larkin is one step closer to leading R.I. Department of Health • Rhode Island Current

Published

on

Dr. Jerome Larkin is one step closer to leading R.I. Department of Health • Rhode Island Current


After a small clinic’s worth of physicians showed up to testify in support of Gov. Dan McKee’s choice for the next director of the Rhode Island Department of Health, the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services affirmed its support for Dr. Jerome “Jerry” Larkin at a hearing Thursday.

The committee voted 5-1 in favor of Larkin’s nomination, with Sen. Elaine Morgan, a Hopkinton Republican, serving the only nay vote. 

Greg Paré, spokesperson for the Rhode Island Senate, said in an email Thursday that Larkin’s appointment will hit the Senate floor on Tuesday, May 19.

The clinicians, many of them colleagues and former protégés of Larkin, came to say nice things about the doctor who serves as medical director of inpatient infectious diseases consultation services at Rhode Island Hospital and teaches clinical medicine as a professor at Brown University. The committee’s mailbox had also been stuffed with written testimonies.    

Advertisement

“We got many, many letters,” said Sen. Joshua Miller, who chairs the committee. “I don’t remember seeing a letter that was not in support.”

But the most memorable affirmation may have been from Dr. Sabina Holland, medical director of the pediatric HIV clinic at Hasbro Children’s Hospital. 

“The highest compliment that a pediatrician can give another pediatrician is to entrust them with the care of their children,” Holland said. “He could have my children.” 

The crowd laughed. Chair Miller offered a playful retort. 

“He can’t have my children,” Miller said.

Advertisement

Jokes aside, Larkin’s competency with children was underlined in several testimonies — including those from members of the Tiverton School Committee, which Larkin has chaired since 2017. Larkin has served on the school committee since 2012 and was most recently reelected in 2020 with 31.1% of the vote.   

The afternoon’s first two testimonies came from school committee members, including Deborah Pallasch.

“I have known Dr. Larkin since he became involved in the anarchy that can be Tiveron politics,” Pallasch said. “In the middle of COVID, as the chair of our school committee — as you can imagine, quite a scary time for us, quite a scary time for our parents, quite a scary time for our children — he led us as a community through that so deftly and so patiently and so respectfully.”

Larkin, in his own words to the Senate, emphasized the at-time martial nature of municipal school politics. “As chair for the last seven years, I am the veteran of 12 hardball budget seasons — some of them scorched earth, some of them merely trench warfare,” Larkin said. “I believe if you can understand the budget of a small-to-medium-sized school district, you have a better-than-even chance of understanding the budget of the Pentagon.”

“The Pentagon might actually be easier, as it seems to be able to spend money unbudgeted, freely, without any apparent consequence.”

Advertisement

Priorities include stabilizing hospitals and nursing homes

The consistency of Larkin’s school board role contrasts the revolving door at the health department, a fixture of the McKee administration. The last permanent director, Dr. Nicole Alexander-Scott, worked under Gina Raimondo’s administration and led the department during the height of the COVID pandemic. Alexander-Scott was reappointed for another five years in 2020, but vacated the position in January 2022, less than a year into McKee’s governorship. 

That vacuum has been plugged by three interim directors since then: Dr. Jim McDonald, Dr. Utpala Bandy, and most recently Dr. Staci Fischer, who took over as acting director when Bandy retired on March 31. Statewide health directors are rare birds nationally, and regional directors are common in larger states. The compensation for such an encompassing job has been criticized for the turnover, although McKee recently and successfully raised the base salary to $250,000 

Speaking to reporters, Larkin said that, if confirmed by the full Senate, his priorities would likely include the stabilization of hospitals and nursing homes, as well as responding to the opioid overdose crisis.

“But I’m still on the outside looking in,” Larkin said. 

Larkin was so far outside, in fact, that he was unsure how to assess the time demands of his possible new job. Would he continue serving on the school committee?

Advertisement

“I haven’t made a decision,” Larkin told a reporter. “Certainly, you know, the Department of Health is a full-time job but so is being a doctor.”

We got many, many letters. I don’t remember seeing a letter that was not in support.

– Sen. Joshua Miller, a Cranston Democrat who chairs the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services

Advertisement

Judging by the afternoon’s testimonies, Larkin is a good clinician. His 1993 medical degree is from Robert Wood Johnson Medical School at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, and his research specialty is tick-related illnesses and Lyme disease in children and pregnant women.

Dr. Michael Koster pointed out Larkin’s talents as a “med-peds” physician, or someone who “understands pediatric issues as much as he understands adult medical issues.”

“You don’t get a showing of physicians like this,” Koster said, referring to the turnout for the hearing. “You have to earn it. It’s not something you can buy.”

While the public offered no opposition, the senate committee did have a few questions. Miller pointed out the statute that outlines the health director’s qualifications — a prescription which includes “a minimum of five (5) years full time experience in health administration.” Miller was curious how that requirement fit into Larkin’s experience.

Advertisement

“I think it depends,” Larkin began. “So, if you look at how much time do I spend seeing patients — so, everything I do is subsumed under the title of the director of infectious disease consults service. So in many regards, my clinical work is an administrative responsibility. I have to know how those services work.”

Larkin estimated that administrative duties probably comprise half his time currently. 

Sen. Linda Ujifusa, a Portsmouth Democrat, asked Larkin about the state’s shortage of primary care doctors as well as reimbursement rates. Could any initiatives from the health department help shape a more positive environment for Rhode Island’s doctors?

Larkin replied that neighboring Massachusetts and Connecticut are well known to have superior reimbursement rates, but that “rectifying that ultimately is actually a federal issue.”

Dr. Jerome Larkin has served as chairman of the Tiverton School Committee for the past seven years. After a State House confirmation hearing on his nomination to be director of the Rhode Island Department of Health on Thursday, May 16, 2024, Larkin said he was still undecided if would continue to serve on the school committee or seek re-election if he was appointed. (Alexander Castro/Rhode island Current)

“Would you mask our kids again?”

Morgan asked Larkin about the state’s handling of the pandemic. Larkin suggested looking at a map, and that Rhode Island ultimately “dodged a bullet” given the severity of the pandemic in nearby Massachusetts and New York. 

Advertisement

Morgan then narrowed her focus. “Closing down the state: Would you do that again?” she asked.

“Do I think the decision was right to shut down in March of 2020 at that time? Yes,” Larkin said.  “Could we have reopened faster? Probably. There was certainly a loss in school districts, and there’s certainly an economic impact on this. So that’s my sort of armchair general retrospective perspective on it.”

“Would you mask our kids again?” Morgan continued.

“Yes. Yes,” Larkin said, and pointed to the measure as effective in reducing transmission, allowing kids to get back in school sooner.

At 4 p.m., bells started ringing.

Advertisement

“It’s not a fire alarm,” Sen. Pam Lauria said. “It’s just the bells for the Senate.”

Miller used the literal sounding of the alarm as a backdrop for one more comment.

“And with that bell from the Senate, I just would like to ask you to be aware of a couple of issues that we have discussed in committee this session,” Miller said, and pointed to recent discussions involving scope of practice. Should committees in the General Assembly be tasked with regulating scopes of practice, or should that be left entirely to medical boards and the health department?

But rather than discuss “going down a very slippery slope of having scope of practice legislated,” Miller filed the question away for another day, and the motion for a vote on Larkin’s advancement began. Sen. Alana DiMario seconded the motion. Only Morgan voted no.  

Larkin’s own words to the committee were punctuated with the occasional cough.

Advertisement

“Excuse my voice. My allergies decided to start today,” Larkin said after he sat down in front of the mic, following odes from his colleagues. “Yeah, I guess that was the easy part. It’s the fondest wish of every Irishman to attend their own wake, and I feel like that’s what I’ve been doing this afternoon.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement

 



Source link

Advertisement

Rhode Island

Pulled funding creates a bike path to nowhere. Let’s hope RI fixes it.

Published

on

Pulled funding creates a bike path to nowhere. Let’s hope RI fixes it.


play

I’ve long thought bike paths are among Rhode Island’s premier attractions, up there with the beaches, the mansions and the bay.

We like to knock government, but credit where it’s due, the state has done an amazing job building out an incredible pedaling network.

Advertisement

It’s clearly a priority.

At least I thought it was.

But they’ve just dropped the ball on what should have been a beautiful new stretch.

The plan was to finish a mile-long connector from the East Providence end of the Henderson Bridge all the way to the East Bay Bike Path.

There was even $25 million set aside to get it done.

Advertisement

Except WPRI recently reported that it’s now been canceled.

The main fault lies with the Trump administration, which is no friend of bike paths, and moved to kill that $25 million.

But it gets complicated, as government funding always does.

To try to rescue that money, the state DOT reportedly worked with the administration to refunnel it into a road project. Specifically, the $25 million will now be spent helping upgrade the mile-long highway between the Henderson Bridge and North Broadway in East Providence, turning it into a more pleasant boulevard.

Advertisement

That totally sounds worthy.

But it’s insane to throw away the bike path plan.

Especially for a particular reason in this case.

They’d already put a ton of money into starting it.

When state planners designed the new Henderson Bridge between the East Side and East Providence, they included a bike path.

Advertisement

It’s a beauty – well protected from traffic by a barrier, a great asset for safely riding over the Seekonk River.

The plan was to continue it another mile or so along East Providence’s Waterfront Drive, ultimately connecting with the East Bay Bike Path, which runs all the way to Bristol. Which, by the way, is one of the nicest bike paths you’ll find anywhere.

But alas, that connector plan has been canceled.

Advertisement

So the expensive stretch over the Henderson Bridge to East Providence is now a bike path to nowhere. Once the bridge ends, the path on it continues a few hundred yards or so and then, just … ends.

Too bad.

We were so close.

Most of the stories on the issue have been about the complex negotiation to rescue the $25 million by rerouting it to that nearby highway-to-boulevard project. But I don’t want to get lost in the weeds of that bureaucratic process here because it loses sight of the heart of this story.

Which is that an amazing new addition to one of the nation’s best state bike path systems has just been scrapped.

Advertisement

You can knock the Rhode Island government for blowing a lot of things.

The PawSox.

The Washington Bridge.

But they’ve done great with bike paths.

And especially, linking many of them together.

Advertisement

Example: not too many years ago, Providence bikers had to risk dicey traffic on the East Side to get to the more pleasant paths in India Point Park and on the 195 bridge to the East Bay Path.

But the state fixed that by adding an amazing connector that starts behind the Salvation Army building and beautifully winds along the water of the Seekonk River for a mile or so.

That makes a huge difference – and no doubt has avoided some bike-car accidents.

We were close to a comparable stretch on the other side of the river – that’s what the $25 million would have done.

But it’s now apparently dead.

Advertisement

Online commenters aren’t happy about it.

On a Reddit string, “Toadscoper” accused the state of being “complicit” with the feds in rerouting the money from bikes to cars.

And there was this fascinating post from FineLobster 5322, who apparently is a disappointed planner who worked on the project: “Mind you money has already been spent on phase one so rejecting it at this point is wasting money and also against the public interest … but what do I know? I only worked on the project as an engineer … I didn’t get into this to build more highways. I do it … to give back to communities and give them more access to their environment.”

Wow. One can imagine the state planning team is devastated. That’s not a small consideration. Good people go into government to make life better in Rhode Island, and it’s a bad play to take the spirit out of the job by first assigning a great human-scale project and then, after a ton of work, trashing it.

A poster named Homosapiens simply said, “We just accept this?”

Advertisement

Hopefully not.

The first stretch of the path over the Henderson Bridge is done, money already sunk.

What a shame to leave that as a path to nowhere.

It doesn’t have to happen.

Between Governor McKee and our Washington delegation, there’s got to be a way to get this done.

Advertisement

There’s got to be.

mpatinki@providencejournal.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Rhode Island

2 dead, 1 seriously hurt after crash on I-95 South in Warwick

Published

on

2 dead, 1 seriously hurt after crash on I-95 South in Warwick


WARWICK, R.I. (WPRI) — Two people are dead and another person seriously hurt after a crash involving two vehicles on the highway in Warwick Saturday.

Rhode Island State Police said the crash happened around 1:34 p.m. on the ramp from Route 113 West to I-95 South.

According to police, a Hyundai SUV that was driving in the middle lane of the highway started to drift to the right, crossed the first lane, and then crossed onto the on-ramp lane. The car struck the guardrail twice before driving through the grass median.

The Hyundai then struck the driver’s side of a Mercedes SUV that was on the ramp, causing the Mercedes to roll over and come to a rest. The impact sent the Hyundai over the guardrail and down an embankment.

Advertisement

The driver of the Hyundai, a 73-year-old man, and his passenger, a 69-year-old woman, were both pronounced dead at the hospital.

A woman who was in the Mercedes was rushed to Rhode Island Hospital in critical condition.

State police said all lanes of traffic were reopened by 4:30 p.m.

The investigation remains ongoing.

Download the WPRI 12 and Pinpoint Weather 12 apps to get breaking news and weather alerts.

Advertisement

Watch 12 News Now on WPRI.com or with the free WPRI 12+ TV app.

Follow us on social media:

 

 



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Rhode Island

Judge rejects DOJ push for Rhode Island voter information

Published

on

Judge rejects DOJ push for Rhode Island voter information


A federal judge on Friday tossed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit aiming to force Rhode Island to hand over its voter information as part of the Trump administration’s push to acquire voter data from several states.

Rhode Island U.S. District Court Judge Mary McElroy wrote that federal law does not allow the DOJ “to conduct the kind of fishing expedition it seeks here,” siding with Rhode Island election officials. She added that the DOJ did not provide evidence to suggest that Rhode Island violated election law.

Advertisement

McElroy, a Trump appointee, wrote that she sided with the similar decision in Oregon. That decision ruled that the DOJ was not entitled to unredacted voter registration lists.

“Absent from the demand are any factual allegations suggesting that Rhode Island may be violating the list maintenance requirements,” she said in her ruling.

Rhode Island Secretary of State Gregg Amore (D) praised McElroy’s decision. He said in a statement that the Trump administration “seems to have no problem taking actions that are clear Constitutional overreaches, regularly meddling in responsibilities that are the rights of the states.”

“Today’s decision affirms our position: the United States Department of Justice has no legal right to – or need for – the personally-identifiable information in our voter file,” he said. “Voter list maintenance is a responsibility entrusted to the states, and I remain confident in the steps we take here in Rhode Island to keep our list as accurate as possible.”

The Hill reached out to the DOJ for comment.

Advertisement

The DOJ called for the voter lists as it investigated Rhode Island’s compliance with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which allowed Americans to register to vote when they apply for a driver’s license.

The DOJ sued at least 30 states, as well as Washington, D.C., in December demanding their respective voter data. This data includes birth dates, names and partial Social Security numbers.

At least 12 states have given or said they will give the DOJ their voter registration lists, according to a tracker operated by the Brennan Center for Justice.

The department stated after it lost a similar suit against Massachusetts earlier this month that it had “sweeping powers” to access the voter data and that, if states fail to comply, courts have a “limited, albeit vital, role” in directing election officers on behalf of the administration to produce the records. The DOJ cited the Civil Rights Act as being intended to unearth alleged election law violations.

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending