For once in a long time, Avedisian faces a race

My take on the news

Posted

AVEDISIAN AND PETRI DEBATE: Last week’s debate between Warwick’s Republican Mayor Scott Avedisian and his Republican opponent, Stacia Petri, allowed both to highlight what’s good and bad about Warwick after 14 years of Avedisian’s mayoral tenure.

The longtime mayor rightfully pointed out Warwick’s successes during his tenure, to include responsible funding for the incredibly expensive pension plans he inherited, economic growth and safety. Petri pointed out the city’s failures, to include 14 years of tax increases, no cuts in operating expenses, potholed roads, and schools in poor physical shape.

Perhaps the most telling statements in the debate were how the two candidates described themselves and whether or not they will support the other if he or she wins the primary election.

Avedisian described himself as a “moderate Republican” while Petri called herself a “fiscally conservative, socially liberal Republican”. Her philosophy of small government, reduced spending and reduced taxes seemed to come through loud and clear during the debate. On the other hand, Avedisian came across as a solid manager who, while increasing taxes and not cutting spending, has kept increased taxes and spending under control compared to increases in other cities.

Avedisian contended that he has been part of a “flourishing Republican Party” in Rhode Island ever since he served as chairman of the Young Republicans and, because of that longtime Republican affiliation, he would support Petri in the general election should she win the primary.

Depending on your perspective, Petri showed either political naïveté or political boldness when she stated emphatically that because of Avedisian’s tax and spending increases she would not support him should he win the primary election.

This may turn out to be the most interesting race in the state this year. The questions many of us are asking are: Does Petri have enough hard-core, dissatisfied-with-city-government supporters to create a ground swell at the ballot box? Have a lot of Democrats dis-affiliated so they can cross over and vote for Petri in the Republican primary in hopes of pitting a previously unknown candidate against the Democratic nominee in the general election? Will Democrat-leaning unaffiliated voters who have voted for Avedisian in past general elections abandon their Democratic gubernatorial candidate and vote instead in the Republican primary to support Avedisian? Will city workers and retirees - whether Republican, crossover Democrat or unaffiliated - who have been treated well financially by Avedisian come out in droves to support him in the Republican primary? Will a substantial number of voters mark their ballots for Petri simply because they think 14 years is enough for one mayor?

It’s really hard to tell how the primary will turn out for these two candidates. What’s now clear, however, is that for the first time in a long time, Mayor Avedisian has a credible opponent who seems to be striking a chord among many Warwick residents.

TAVERAS CAMPAIGN DRIPS WITH DESPERATION: The term “mudslinging” isn’t strong enough to describe gubernatorial candidate Angel Taveras’ desperate attacks on Gina Raimondo.

One of his campaign ads says, “Her venture capital firm secured a secret, no-bid contract funded by taxpayers...” The “contract” he referred to was for the $1 million the Providence pension fund chose to invest with Raimondo’s former company, Point Judith Capital - an investment that was publicly vetted and openly voted on by the Providence pension board. There was no “contract” involved. Pension boards do not issue proposals for companies to bid on contracts, they simply make investment decisions in open meetings.

Taveras is well aware of how pension investments are made since he is mayor and president of the pension board. To claim such investments are “contracts” that require “bidding” and that this one was made in “secret” is ludicrous. His desperate claims are more than normal political mudslinging; they have now entered the realm of intentional deception and outright lies.

ONCE AGAIN, OBAMA IS “TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE”: If only President Obama were as fast to defend American interests around the globe as he was to invade Ferguson, Missouri with federal investigators, the term “too little, too late,” night not apply to so many of his international actions.

Obama says the U.S. does not negotiate with terrorists nor make concessions to them, yet it is likely that his past concession to terrorists by releasing five terror masterminds from Guantanamo is what emboldened ISIL to behead American journalist James Foley.

The Syrian civil war has raged for three years with Mr. Obama choosing to sit on the sidelines while moderate anti-Assad rebels have begged fruitlessly for U.S. support. The refusal to support the rebels included Obama’s drawing of a “red line” over which Assad could not cross without U.S. air strikes and then his backing off on the air strikes after Assad crossed the line. Obama’s ambassador to Syria quit in disillusionment over Obama’s unwillingness to support the moderates. After three years, the moderate rebels have been almost totally defeated and have been replaced by ISIL, the al-Qaida offshoot that has taken over much of Syria and Iraq and has just beheaded an American journalist. Obama’s limited air campaign is accomplishing little because it is “too little, too late.”

Finally, last month Obama sent special forces troops into Syria to try to rescue the American journalist. Once again he put forth “too little, too late”, and the effort failed because the journalist had been moved.

What must truly upset many Americans, especially the parents of the slain journalist, is Obama’s proclamation last week in the wake of the journalist’s beheading by ISIL that, “When people harm Americans, anywhere, we do what’s necessary to see that justice is done.”

What a crock! We’ve done virtually nothing to assist moderate rebels in Syria, thus laying the groundwork for the ISIL terrorists to flourish and capture and behead the American journalist. We did nothing for two years while ISIL held him in captivity until the failed effort last month. And Obama had the nerve to make such a self-serving, dishonest statement to Americans? What a disgrace!

PELL EVENS FIELD BECAUSE OF TEACHERS: The National Education Association, the union that represents the majority of Rhode Island’s teachers, is strongly backing Clay Pell for governor with time, labor and lots of money. Why? Because he is the only candidate who is behind the union’s demand to keep the antiquated teacher tenure and seniority laws in place in our state.

It is tenure and seniority that guarantee some terrible teachers remain in our classrooms, and guarantee the quality of instruction in their classrooms is so poor that many undeserving students don’t receive the kind of instruction they need to qualify for graduation or for acceptance to a good college.

Most teachers, indeed the vast majority, are really good teachers who have dedicated their lives to making sure their students succeed. There are, however, some teachers who should be fired.

Even most teachers agree that some of their peers’ teaching performance is so poor they should be given failing grades.

Education Next, a very reputable, non-partisan group, conducted a poll in May that had astonishing results. Twenty-two percent of respondents said many teachers they have dealt with deserve grades of D or F as teachers. Twenty-four percent of parents said the same thing. Most interesting is what teachers had to say about their peers.

Teachers polled said 69 percent of their fellow teachers deserve an A or a B; 18 percent deserve a C; 8 percent a D; and 5 percent an F. When even teachers recognize that 31 percent of their fellow teachers are performing at a C level or below and that 13 percent deserve a D or an F, then teacher tenure and seniority laws should be changed so these teachers can be pushed out of our classrooms.

Which candidate for governor would follow the teachers union’s dictate and keep tenure and seniority laws in place? It’s Clay Pell. So, if voters want our public education system to continue its decline, they have an easy decision to make - vote for Pell.

QUOTE OF THE WEEK: Author Tom Plate, in a commentary piece published in the Providence Journal last Thursday, wrote in praise of President Barrack Obama’s “contemplative wisdom” in pulling all troops out of Iraq and refusing to get involved in the Syrian civil war. He compared Obama to a “monk on a prolonged retreat of inner contemplation and stocktaking.”

Although he meant it derisively, he also said, “The problem for Mr. Obama is that America’s historic DNA comes not from the heritage of thoughtful monks but from armed-to-the-gills cowboys. We lasso or shoot bad guys, not pray for their sins and hope for their redemption.”

In a world where U.S. inaction has allowed the Islamic terrorists of ISIL to conquer much of Syria and Iraq and to behead an American journalist, and to behead thousands of innocent Shiites and Christians simply because of their beliefs, it sure looks like it’s time for our president to grow some “American DNA” and “lasso or shoot” a few of the terrorist “bad guys.”

Comments

2 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • falina

    Ah yes, the Arizona raised, California boarding school educated Clay Pell. I mean who really, is best to know what RI'ers really need and want? (And, of course, to help Mrs. Summeroff keep her lucrative part-time teaching/ snoozing career...) Where does RI rank in education nationally again? Ah yes.....

    Wednesday, August 27, 2014 Report this

  • bbbal8

    I am not going to comment on statewide elections at this time, The important issue in front of us as Warwick tax payers is a simple cut and dry question !!!, Are you better or worse off now than you were 14 years ago living in Warwick, the answer is a simple one...NO. I do understand that all cities and towns have had to make tough decisions in this bad economy, but the tax increases in Warwick were not necessary!!, if the mayor had made those tough decisions when they needed to be made we would not be in the mess were in today. I say 14 years is enough for any politician. We have not had a candidate in this city in the last 14 years that could do the job, so the voters chose the same old thing. The democrats have not put forth a candidate who could do the job and neither did the republications, never mind an independent !!. In fact the republications did not put forth Stacia Petri, she is a hard working Warwick resident, not endorsed by her party, who is deeply concerned about our city !!!. I will say this again SHE is the right person at the right time for the city of Warwick !!!

    Friday, August 29, 2014 Report this