Connect with us

Rhode Island

Half of Massachusetts residents support legalizing teachers’ strikes  • Rhode Island Current

Published

on

Half of Massachusetts residents support legalizing teachers’ strikes  • Rhode Island Current


Massachusetts state leaders have said they have no appetite for changing Massachusetts law to make it legal for public teachers to go on strike, but public opinion is more on the union side. In a new CommonWealth Beacon/GBH News poll, 50% of state residents favored legalizing teachers’ strikes, while 34% said strikes should remain illegal, and 16% said they were unsure or did not answer (toplines, crosstabs).

The survey, conducted by the MassINC Polling Group, comes on the heels of strikes in five Massachusetts school districts over the last two years. It is illegal for public sector employees to strike in the state, but that hasn’t stopped a wave of walkouts signaling a more militant posture on the part of teachers’ unions. The longest – and most recent – strike closed schools in Newton for two weeks in late January and early February.

The poll results point to a strong degree of sympathy for teachers’ efforts to secure better pay and other changes, even if it means shutting down schools to get there.

“Even though strikes are disruptive and inconvenient for families, the polling suggests people in Massachusetts recognize that the ability to strike is a primary point of leverage that teachers have,” said Richard Kahlenberg, director of the American Identity Project at the Progressive Policy Institute, a Washington, DC-based think tank.

Advertisement

The push to change state law to legalize teachers’ strikes, which is being led by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, the state’s largest teachers’ union, is taking place amid a surge of favorable public opinion toward organized labor. Since the 1930s, Gallup has polled Americans on the broad question of whether they approve or disapprove of unions. The approval rating hit 71% in Gallup’s 2022 poll and was 67% in 2023, levels not seen since the mid-1960s.

Layered over that rise in sympathy for unions, said Michael Hartney, an associate professor of political science at Boston College, is the positive view many people hold of educators. “I think teachers are generally one of the professional groups that have a lot of latent trust among the public, maybe up there with physicians,” said Hartney, author of the 2022 book How Policies Make Interest Groups: Governments, Unions, and American Education.

The poll, conducted among 1,002 Massachusetts residents from March 22 to March 29, showed a strong partisan divide on the issue, with 60% of Democrats supporting legalizing teachers’ strikes and 26% opposed, compared with 42% of Republicans who favor legalizing strikes and 44% who oppose such a change. There was also stronger support for changing the law among Black respondents (63%) and Latino residents (62%) than among Whites (48%) or Asians (41%).

The widest demographic difference was by age, with 64% of those aged 18-29 in favor of making strikes legal compared with only 39% of those 60 and older, a 25-point swing. Among those 30 to 44, 55% support legalizing strikes and among those 45 to 59, 46% do so.

Part of the explanation for the strong support for legalizing strikes among younger people is that, as a group, they skew more Democratic. But young people have also been hit hard by rising economic inequality, the high cost of housing, and have been part of a new union push, still in its infancy, in sectors ranging from Amazon warehouse workers to Starbucks baristas.

Advertisement

While they have a much bigger presence in the public sector, unions represent only 10% of US workers today, half the rate of 40 years ago. Because of that steady decline, young people are “much less likely to have an uncle, an aunt, a parent – someone they know – who is in a union,” said Kahlenberg. “Union leaders feared that would translate into less sympathy for unions, but the economic conditions on the ground have shifted such that young people are rediscovering the importance of unions,” said Kahlenberg, author of a 2007 biography of Albert Shanker, a major figure in the US teachers’ union movement, who led the New York City teachers’ union and the national American Federal of Teachers from the 1960s to the 1990s.

Kahlenberg said teachers’ unions have also effectively sought to link their grievances when they strike with issues parents care about, such as smaller class sizes or more guidance counselors. “Obviously, in the short term, it’s not great for kids who are out of schools, but the argument teachers will advance is, the working conditions of teachers are the learning conditions of children,” he said.

How questions about teachers’ strikes are framed can have a big impact on poll results.

Just over a year ago, in March 2023, MassINC Polling Group asked about teachers’ strikes in a statewide survey commissioned by Democrats for Education Reform. Using wording similar to the new CommonWealth Beacon/GBH News poll, it explained that some teachers unions have gone on strike recently despite it being illegal under state law. Asked whether they favor legislation that would make it legal for teachers to strike, 45% of respondents said yes, while 40% said strikes should remain illegal.

A poll commissioned at the same time by Northwind Strategies, a Boston-based political consulting firm that generally works with left-leaning candidates and causes, found much stronger support for legalizing strikes when Massachusetts residents were asked whether they favor allowing teachers to strike “to fight for higher wages and improved working conditions.” When the question was posed with that language, 67% favored legalizing strikes and just 29% of respondents were opposed.

Advertisement

The Democrats for Education Reform poll revealed considerable confusion about basic facts concerning the teacher strike issue. Fully one-third of respondents thought it was already legal for teachers to strike compared with 45% who correctly said it was illegal.

While their unions are pushing legislation that would make it legal for teachers to strike, the  prospects for the bill seem dim. The Democratic troika that sets the agenda on Beacon Hill – Gov. Maura Healey, House Speaker Ron Mariano, and Senate President Karent Spilka – all oppose changing the law.

“I think there’s a pretty clear rationale for not allowing public sector unions to strike, because they play a key role in the provision of public services and interruption of those can be pretty disruptive,” said Marty West, a professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and member of the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Paul Reville, a former state education secretary, said despite the fines handed out to striking teacher’s unions, the incentives not to engage in walkouts don’t appear to be strong enough to prevent them, and he thinks there will be more strikes in the future, even without a move to legalize them.

“Teachers have legitimate grievances and legitimate demands to be paid reasonably,” said Reville, a professor at Harvard Graduate School of Education. He said a new structure should be developed that “creates disincentives for school committees to drag the process out” in negotiating contracts and “at the same time, puts pressure on unions to bargain in good faith and not consider striking as an option.” Reville said such a system could involve a judge assigning an arbitrator to decide the terms of a new contract if no agreement is reached after a specified period of time.

Advertisement

“It’s in the public interest to avoid these kinds of strikes,” he said. “So if we create a policy that, in effect, mandates that they come to the table to settle or, if they can’t, turns over that power to an arbitrator, that would be best.”

This article first appeared on CommonWealth Beacon and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement

Rhode Island

Proposed tax hike would hurt small businesses and our communities | Opinion

Published

on

Proposed tax hike would hurt small businesses and our communities | Opinion


play

Advertisement
  • A proposed “millionaires tax” in Rhode Island could impact small, family-owned businesses structured as pass-through entities.
  • The author, a state representative and business owner, argues the tax would reduce funds for payroll, equipment, and expansion.
  • The op-ed suggests the tax could make Rhode Island less competitive, citing high earners leaving Massachusetts after a similar tax was passed.
  • The author advocates for policies that encourage business investment rather than penalizing financial success.

Rhode Island is built on the strength of small, family-owned businesses. They are the backbone of our economy, the employers of our neighbors, and the reason our communities have character and opportunity. I know this not just as a legislator, but as someone who works every day in a family business alongside the people I care about most. That’s why I am concerned about the impact of the proposed “millionaires tax” on businesses and our communities.

While it may sound like a measure aimed at a narrow group of high earners, the reality is far different. Many family-owned businesses – especially those structured as pass-through entities – report their business income on personal tax returns. That means this tax doesn’t just target “millionaires” in the traditional sense; it directly impacts small and mid-sized businesses that reinvest their earnings into payroll, equipment, expansion and employee benefits.

In my case, our family business is a private ambulance service. Every day, we are responsible for delivering critical care to Rhode Islanders, particularly seniors and our most medically fragile neighbors. That responsibility comes with significant costs. Ambulances, lifesaving medical equipment, and the technology needed to support our crews are expensive, and they must be maintained and updated regularly to meet the highest standards of care.

Tax increases like this directly impact our ability to make those investments. These are not abstract tradeoffs – they have real consequences for the level of care we can provide. For businesses like mine, margins matter. Every dollar that goes out the door in taxes is a dollar that can’t be used to hire another worker, increase wages, buy new equipment or sponsor the local Little League team. These are real decisions that affect real people.

Supporters of this proposal often frame it as a fairness issue. But fairness should also mean recognizing the role that employers play in creating opportunity. When government makes it more expensive to operate a business in Rhode Island, we risk pushing investment – and jobs – elsewhere. Policies like this don’t exist in a vacuum; they shape decisions about where businesses grow and where families choose to put down roots.

We don’t have to guess what would happen if we raised taxes here – we can just look to Massachusetts. They passed a millionaires tax and the latest data shows a steady stream of high earners leaving for lower-tax states like New Hampshire and, you guessed it, Rhode Island. We could take advantage of Massachusetts’ mistake and build on the momentum we have built in recent years. We’ve seen the benefits of thoughtful policy decisions that encourage investment and support job creation and tax revenues are up. But progress is fragile. Policies like the millionaires tax risk undoing that work by sending the message that success will be penalized rather than encouraged.

Advertisement

As both a business owner and a legislator, I believe strongly that we can – and must – strike a better balance.

We can support public services, invest in our communities, and maintain fiscal responsibility without resorting to policies that put our local businesses at a disadvantage. We can grow our economy by creating an environment where businesses want to stay, expand and hire.

Let’s focus on solutions that strengthen our economy, support our workforce, and ensure that family-owned businesses like mine and so many others across our state continue to thrive.

Rhode Island’s future depends on it.

Advertisement

Jacquelyn Baginski is a state representative from Cranston.



Source link

Continue Reading

Rhode Island

RI Lottery Mega Millions, Numbers Midday winning numbers for May 8, 2026

Published

on


The Rhode Island Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at May 8, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Mega Millions numbers from May 8 drawing

37-47-49-51-58, Mega Ball: 16

Check Mega Millions payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Numbers numbers from May 8 drawing

Midday: 9-8-9-7

Evening: 7-9-8-9

Check Numbers payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Wild Money numbers from May 8 drawing

10-13-15-16-30, Extra: 09

Check Wild Money payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from May 8 drawing

14-16-21-43-51, Bonus: 03

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your prize

  • Prizes less than $600 can be claimed at any Rhode Island Lottery Retailer. Prizes of $600 and above must be claimed at Lottery Headquarters, 1425 Pontiac Ave., Cranston, Rhode Island 02920.
  • Mega Millions and Powerball jackpot winners can decide on cash or annuity payment within 60 days after becoming entitled to the prize. The annuitized prize shall be paid in 30 graduated annual installments.
  • Winners of the Millionaire for Life top prize of $1,000,000 a year for life and second prize of $100,000 a year for life can decide to collect the prize for a minimum of 20 years or take a lump sum cash payment.

When are the Rhode Island Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 10:59 p.m. ET on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 11:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday and Friday.
  • Lucky for Life: 10:30 p.m. ET daily.
  • Millionaire for Life: 11:15 p.m. ET daily.
  • Numbers (Midday): 1:30 p.m. ET daily.
  • Numbers (Evening): 7:29 p.m. ET daily.
  • Wild Money: 7:29 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Rhode Island editor. You can send feedback using this form.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Rhode Island

TGIF: Ian Donnis’ Rhode Island politics roundup for May 8, 2026

Published

on

TGIF: Ian Donnis’ Rhode Island politics roundup for May 8, 2026


The tectonic plates of Rhode Island politics keep shifting, but does the state really change? Thanks for stopping by. You can follow me through the week on Bluesky, threads and X. Here we go.

*** Want to get my column in your inbox every Friday? Sign up right here ***

Listen up: Ocean State Media now has a single powerful statewide radio frequency at 103.7

1. STORY OF THE WEEK

Advertisement

Fifteen years after starting his first term in the Rhode Island House of Representatives, Chris Blazejewski has ascended to the pinnacle of power, winning an overwhelming 65-10 vote Thursday to become the new House speaker. Blazejewski’s path was paved when he teamed up with Joe Shekarchi on the leadership team after Nicholas Mattiello lost his state rep seat in 2020. Over time, a few things stand out about the 46-year-old lawyer variously known as Chris, Blaz, and Blaze. He has impressive academic credentials, including two degrees from Harvard. Blazejewski is known for his devotion to his wife, Ami Gada, and their two young children, Aria and Liam. Blazejewski represents a safely Democratic seat based in Fox Point. He was a loyal ally to Shekarchi, patiently biding his time. At his essence, Blazejewski has an appreciation for progressive politics, but he’s also an institutionalist steeped in the culture of the House of Representatives and grounded by the fiscal challenges of Rhode Island’s budgetary outlook. A fanciful skit for the bygone Providence Newspaper Guild Follies could feature Blazejewski pursuing a utopian scheme – perhaps nationalizing Rhode Island’s strategic reserve of coffee milk. Back in the real world, though, a number of factors – including the array of Democratic views in the House and the state’s structural deficit – seem likely to temper the new speaker’s progressive impulse. In the first question he took after his win, Blazejewski told me his core values as a Democrat include helping working people, improving healthcare and public education, protecting the environment and guarding against federal overreach. The devil is in the details, of course, and the proof of how Blazejewski influences state policy will be in the pudding. He’ll have his initial test next month when the House rolls out its version of the budget, with a big potential impact from President Trump’s spending bill.

2. WINDS OF CHANGE

Speaker Blazejewski is 17 years younger than his predecessor and he’s one of just six state representatives left from the incoming class of 2010. (The others are Reps. David Bennett of Warwick, Teresa Tanzi of South Kingstown, Ray Hull of Providence, Robert Phillips of Woonsocket and GOP House Leader Michael Chippendale of Foster). His ascent reflects generational change and how progressives have nudged the House in a more progressive direction over the last 15 years. Blazejewski’s predecessor in District 2, David Segal – once dubbed the hippest guy in state government – was among those who came to the House chamber to congratulate him. Segal was part of an early boomlet of progressive wins in the House, along with Chris Fierro and the late Ray Sullivan. But none of them stayed long. Instead, the growing proportion of women lawmakers over time has fueled a move away from the socially conservative/pro-2A Democratic center of gravity that formerly typified the House. That also explains how former House Majority Whip Katherine Kazarian of East Providence made history this week, beaming in her new role as the first female majority leader in the House. “I have a feeling, Katie,” Blazejewski said in his speech from the rostrum, “that this is not the last of your firsts.”

3. REALITY CHECK

The passing of the torch from Joe Shekarchi to Chris Blazejewski mixed celebration and bittersweetness in the House chamber. For Blazejewski, it’s the culmination of a long journey. It’s also the end of an era for Shekarchi, whose voice broke with emotion as he gave a parting speech reflecting on more than five years in what is sometimes called Rhode Island’s most powerful political post. He took credit for changing the House culture “into a more positive member-driven body where all perspectives are heard, respected and valued.” Speaking to what he sees as his legacy, Shekarchi cited progress on housing, healthcare, education funding, pay equity and other issues. There was a buzz of goodwill in the House chamber for the departing speaker and the new team rising in power. But Rhode Island’s thorniest challenges – the housing crisis, insufficient drivers of economic growth, under-performing public schools, and lower insurance reimbursement than in neighboring states – never remain far away.

Advertisement

4. NEXT STEP

Roger Williams University School of Law professor Michael J. Yelnosky is the most outspoken critic of former Speaker Joe Shekarchi’s application to move directly to the Rhode Island Supreme Court from the General Assembly. Shekarchi said he has studied the revolving door law and is convinced it doesn’t apply to the Supreme Court. A complaint filed by Yelnosky with the state Ethics Commission may be taken up during the commission’s next meeting, on June 2. A number of prominent people, including Gov. Dan McKee and candidate Helena Foulkes, have said they don’t see a problem with Shekarchi’s application. Speaking from the rostrum Thursday, Speaker Blazejewski said he believes Shekarchi will make a great justice.

5. THE MILITARY

The Pentagon’s recent $25 billion estimate for the cost of the war in Iran doesn’t come close to resembling the true amount, according to Stephanie Savell, director of the Costs of War Project at Brown University. “That is just the very smallest tip of the iceberg,” Savell said during a One on One interview with me this week. The bigger point is the huge amount of economic cost being accumulated by the U.S., she said, with no end in sight. Savell said the U.S. now owes $31 trillion in debt, largely from post-9/11 wars and a series of tax cuts, and she said 15% of the federal budget goes for that each year. “I have to get in front of my college students and tell them ‘Our leaders have made a decision to saddle you with a tremendous amount of debt that’s gonna affect all of the things that you care about,’” Savell said. We also talked about drones, Rhode Island’s defense sector, whether other forms of spending are more efficient and more.

U.S. Rep. Gabe Amo joined CNN to talk about the cost of gas.

Advertisement

Stephanie Savell, director of the Costs of War project at Brown University, says much of the United States’ massive defense budget could be better spent on education, health care and green energy

Advertisement

6. CITY HAUL

Providence City Councilor Ana Vargas pulled in the biggest campaign fundraising of her career – more than $16,000 – as the council was approaching a vote on rent stabilization. Landlords flooded her campaign account, as my colleague Ben Berke reports, and she took their side in two votes. As Ben reports, “Prior to the rent control debate, Vargas had been one of the city council’s least prolific fundraisers, raising an average of $873 per quarter. She began 2026 with just $426 in her campaign account, and received only two campaign contributions all of last year.” Vargas declined an interview request and she did not respond to additional requests for comment.

Providence City Councilor Ana Vargas is one of 6 councilors to vote against a rent control ordinance.

Providence City Councilor Ana Vargas supported rent control during her election campaign. As she prepared to vote on it, she received the largest political donations of her career

Advertisement

7. BARGAIN HUNT

Democrat Wil Gregersen got in touch after going unmentioned in last week’s column in an item on first-quarter fundraising by candidates for governor. As Gregersen noted, he has more in his campaign account ($473.60) than some of those who were mentioned. “I’m serious about my candidacy,” he wrote. “Money is corrupting, and I’m purposely staying off the usual path candidates take to get elected.” Gregersen, a librarian in Warwick, proposes single-payer healthcare, a publicly owned energy utility and more – without explaining how he would pay to do this. Candidates like Gregersen and independent candidate for governor Paul Rianna Jr. run in every statewide election cycle, attracting a small amount of votes. Like it or not, campaign fundraising is a big part of our politics – a situation intensified by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010. The only counter-example in recent Rhode Island history is the late Robert “Cool Moose” Healey, who won 21% of the vote for governor in 2014 while barely spending any money. But that was after a half-dozen or so runs for statewide office and Healey understood how to use schtick to gain wider recognition. Something he told me in 2002 about the challenge facing third-party candidates seems apt for those hoping to run a statewide campaign without significant fundraising: “It’s about being outside the mainstream, being able to challenge the status quo. As one person said to me, `You can’t beat City Hall, but you can piss on the steps.’”

8. THE KIDS ARE NOT ALRIGHT

The latest data from Rhode Island KIDS COUNT shows that more Rhode Island children (16.3%) live in poverty than the national average. The rate in Newport, a city known more for tourism and Gilded Age mansions, is 32%. “We see kids with mental health challenges, challenges in school, difficulty in school, mental behavioral health,” KIDS COUNT Executive Director Paige Parks told Luis Hernandez in an interview. “It all stems from poverty.” She urges state lawmakers to continue to invest in early childhood programs and Rhode Island Works, a workforce development program for low-income families.

Advertisement

9. RI POLI-MEDIA PEOPLE ON THE MOVE

State Rep. Julie Casimiro (D-North Kingstown) is not seeking re-election, and former Sen. James Sheehan – motivated by the controversial sludge proposal – may run for the seat. Casimiro had been considered a top target for the League of Rhode Island Businesses …. Nick Fede, who spoke with me for a previous story about the challenge facing small brewers in RI, has won election as president of American Beverage Licensees, a leading national trade association …. Haley Gervino is the new executive director of the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence. A graduate of Providence College and Brandeis University, she serves as VP of operations for Sisters in Public Health …. Will this be the year when Drinking Liberally seeds new statewide leaders? Speaker Blazejewski hosted the bygone beer-and-chat series at the Wild Colonial back in the day. Another host was Kim Ahern, one of four Democrats running for AG …. Danica Iacoi, who served as chief legal counsel for former Speaker Nicholas Mattiello, is back in that role with Blazejewski.

10. OLD SCHOOL

Eighty percent of Americans think there should be age caps on serving in Congress, according to a new NPR/PBS News/Marist poll. As NPR’s Elena Moore reports, “The current Congress is now the third-oldest in U.S. history, and has seen five members die since last March. Each was 65 or older. For some voters, the widening age difference between them and members of Congress is contributing to an already growing disconnect that they feel with leaders.”

11. KICKER

Advertisement

Betting has become inextricably intertwined with professional sports, with predictable results. Now, as NPR’s Luke Garrett reports, campaign staffers are getting in on the action, making thousands by betting on their own candidates. What could possibly go wrong, eh? U.S. Rep. Seth Magaziner said his office has implemented a prohibition on participating in prediction markets or wagering on political, legislative, regulatory, geopolitical or other outcomes.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending