My friend Matt gave me a rash of grief yesterday about my generally favorable take on Cliff Wood's proposal to reconstitute the Providence City Council with 10 ward-based seats and five at-large seats. He equates the concept with downsizing democracy and says it would severely advantage deep-pocketed (white) candidates.

He's got a post up today about the subject, as does state Representative David Segal, a former member of the Providence council and someone who has ardently backed measures to increase proportional representation.

Segal:

[While proponents tout broader thinking] this is a BAD idea, unless seats are allocated proportionally.  Ari and I wrote about these issues here. Two quick points about the 10-5 plan:

• It’d mean more representation by rich, white, high-turnout portions of town, and therefore more influence by moneyed interests.

• The city would be setting itself up for a civil rights lawsuit, as Ward 11 — the only seat held by an African American — would be chopped up into majority white and Latino areas.  A city that is 15% African American would likely be left with no African American on the city council.  (Have we really not learned the lessons of the redistricting of 2002, which pitted Sens Pichardo and Walton against one another?)

I’ll write about all of this in more detail later.

Jerzyk:

It is disturbing to see so many "liberals" support the idea of downsizing the Providence City Council from 15 wards to 10 wards and then adding 5 at-large seats.  This effort will reduce the ability of Providence residents to run for office, reduce the minority representation on the Council (from 4 to 2 or 1 or 0) and position the wealthy areas of our city to have a windfall on the Council.  I support the progressive solution: Councilman Seth Yurdin's idea of keeping our 15 wards and adding 2-6 at-large seats to the Council elected on a "proportional representation" system to ensure "one-person, one-vote" throughout the city.  

Let's acknowledge a few things:

-- The tradition of not publicly criticizing things in other councilors' wards does promote an extreme form of parochial thinking. A rare exception came some years back when Luis Aponte spoke critically about a development proposal for Eagle Square, which is outside his ward.

-- There is a Cicilline-esque patina to Wood's effort. Certainly, the mayor, who might run for reelection, as opposed to pursuing a gubernatorial bid, would like to enhance his influence over the council. Back in 2006, I was the first to write in-depth about this subject, when I broke the news of Wood's challenge to longtime incumbent Rita Williams.

So if this is a circle that needs to be squared, how does that happen?

Matt suggested to me that if the 10-5 at-large concept is flawed, it shouldn't be put to the voters. He suggested that the council instead hold publicly accessible hearings, with lots of public input, on all three related proposals -- Wood's, Yurdin's, and one by John Igliozzi. Let me add that my main interest in writing about this subject was to put it out there. And while Matt and David raise some good points, that is not necessarily a reason to maintain the status quo.

This being Providence, Matt and I continued discussing the issue over a post-work drink yesterday, and one of the 10-5 proponents, Steve Durkee, wound up in the same establishment, briefly joining our debate.

Coming your way, at the State House:

From MERI:

On Wednesday, May 7, the Rhode Island Assembly's House Judiciary Committee will hear testimony on several bills addressing marriage equality rights for all Rhode Island couples, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. Supporters of marriage equality, including several members of MERI, are expected to testify.

 

WHAT: Marriage equality legislation, pro and con:

 

Bills under consideration that MERI supports include:

 

• Compassion for All Families Act – Sponsored by Rep. John McCauley of Providence, H. 7711 would give domestic partners the spousal benefits of family medical leave, nursing home visitation and funeral planning.

• Equal Divorce Act – Sponsored by Rep. Gordon Fox of Providence, H. 7939 would allow same-sex couples who married outside of Rhode Island to divorce in Rhode Island.

• Equal Marriage Act – Sponsored by Rep. Arthur Handy of Cranston, H. 7839 would allow all Rhode Island couples the equal freedom to marry.

 

Bills that MERI opposes include:

 

• Divorce legislation – Sponsored by Rep. Al Gemma of Warwick, H. 7081 would codify into law the Rhode Island does not recognize marriages between same-sex couples. Although the legislation would permit same-sex couples to divorce in RI, the bill would likely close the Massachusetts border to Rhode Island same-sex couples who wish to marry there and doesn't' address jurisdiction for same-sex couples married in Canada or overseas.

• A constitutional amendment – Sponsored by Rep. John Brien of Woonsocket, H. 8017 would define marriage as between a man and a woman and would nullify any recognition of marriages, civil unions or domestic partnerships for same-sex couples.

From FairVoteRI:

Youth Voter Pre-registration, H 7106, is out of committee and scheduled for a vote on the House floor this Wednesday. This is a big step towards turning early registration for 16 and 17 year olds into law. The push to get young Rhode Islanders excited about democracy is moving forward— please come to the State House on Wednesday afternoon at 4 PM, and, in the meantime, contact your state representative and ask them to support this common-sense, non-partisan reform.

From the RI Patient Advocacy Coalition:

On Thursday, May 8, 2008, at 4:00pm, the Senate will vote on S2693 in the Senate chamber at the State House. This bill would allow the Department of Health to license a non-profit organization to serve as a Compassion Center, to grow and distribute medical marijuana for registered patients. THIS WILL BE THIS BILL'S FIRST FLOOR VOTE.

Kim wants you to know:

This Saturday, May 10th at 10:00AM, we will be re-opening the Obama HQ on Westminster Street for a Voter Registration Drive.  After remarks from Congressman Kennedy and Attorney General Lynch (and a brief training) we'll hit the streets! Join Us!

I checked out the scene last night at Lupo's. Here's a brief report I wrote for this week's Phoenix:

There were the makings of a celebration as the What Cheer? Brigade unleashed its joyous cacophony amid hundreds of Barack Obama supporters at Lupo’s Heartbreak Hotel on Tuesday night. Yet the results being described via MSNBC on the large screen on the nightclub’s stage – with Rhode Island being called for Hillary Clinton not long after polls closed at 9 pm – told another story.

 

It was predictable that Clinton’s string of victories here, in Ohio, and in the Texas primary would be swiftly recast into the memo – subject: “The Path to the Presidency” – by Clinton advisers Harold Ickes and Mark Penn that landed in the e-mail inboxes of reporters Wednesday morning.

 

To some of the Obama supporters at Lupo’s, the extension of the Democratic contest makes for more drama, a chance for the country to debate liberal politics.

 

Yet it’s hard not to think that the big beneficiary of Tuesday night is John McCain, the Republican nominee-in-waiting, since Obama and Clinton have dropped many millions of dollars raising each other’s negatives in such key states as Ohio – and now that process will continue, for how long no one knows.

 

Some Obama supporters preferred to focus on the positive, noting their candidate’s continued advantage in the delegate count. “She’s still in the hole,” said Providence Councilman Cliff Wood.

           

Marti Rosenberg, who stressed that she was speaking as an individual, and not in her official capacity as development director of US Action, spoke of the pride inspired by Obama among his supporters. “His roots are as a community organizer,” she points out. “We figure out how to do the impossible. The voters get it. I think he’ll make it through.”

 

Organizer and Roger Williams Law School student Kim Ahern, who proved the top vote-getting Obama delegate in the First Congressional District, said, “Like any competitor, I would have liked [for Obama] to have won Rhode Island.” Ahern took solace in how the Illinois senator gave Clinton a local run for her money.

 

Yet after Obama’s campaign ran an energetic ground effort in the Ocean State – and outspent Clinton on advertising by better than three-to-one – it was frustrating to realize that the state’s demographics (heavy on older, predominantly working class and Catholic voters) still played directly into Hillary’s strengths. Even with a historic turnout, she scored a decisive victory in Rhode Island.

           

Suddenly, the Ocean State’s unprecedented role in presidential politics – a taste of the New Hampshire primary moved a few states south, with a front-page story last weekend in the New York Times – was over.

 

In an e-mail to his supporters, Obama wrote, “When the dust settles from [Tuesday’s] contests, we will maintain our substantial lead in delegates. And thanks to millions of people standing for change, we will keep adding delegates and capture the Democratic nomination.”

         

Like their candidate, the Obama supporters at Lupo’s were yielding no quarter.

 

Yet with the first bleak projections of the exit polls on Tuesday night, they had to confront the unwelcome reality of a more complex and less predictable presidential landscape.

With most of the action on the Democratic side, today should nonetheless be a big day for John McCain and his top Rhode Island supporter, House Minority Leader Bob Watson of East Greenwich. (Watson had also been a strong proponent of keeping the Ocean State primary in March, rather than moving it up to Super Tuesday, sagaciously and presciently reasoning that the later date could enhance the state's relevance.) I recent asked the rep about how he took on his local leading role with McCain. Here's some of what he had to say, via e-mail.

I got to know John McCain in 1999 when I met him at Senator John Chafee’s funeral.

 

At that time, the 2000 Presidential campaign was heating up and I had not yet endorsed a candidate even though most elected Republicans had already signed on with then-Governor George Bush.

 

A week later I was invited to New Hampshire to travel with the McCain campaign for several days aboard the “Straight Talk Express,” going from one Town Hall meeting or house party to the next.

 

At the time in 1999, he was measuring at 3 percent in the polls in New Hampshire, well behind then-Governor George Bush.  

 

Later, Senator McCain asked me if I would chair his campaign here in Rhode Island and I readily agreed to do so.

 

I was impressed with his compelling life story and liked what he had to say on most issues and I believed back then, no less than I do now, that John McCain would make a great president.

What are you chances of getting a job in DC if McCain wins in November? 

My reason for supporting John McCain has nothing to do with me personally other than that I consider him a friend. 

 

I support John McCain for president because I believe his life experience makes him best qualified for the job as our Commander in Chief.

 

I serve as John McCain’s chairman in Rhode Island because he asked me to do so and I expect nothing for my service or support other than perhaps the Senator’s appreciation

 

Were a “President-Elect” John McCain to again ask me for my help, I would obviously be honored and would certainly consider it.

Speaking of delegates, voters in the First Congressional District have the opportunity to cast tallies for Joseph M. Fernandez, Jeff Padwa, and Rhoades Alderson, three of the key figures in Obama's RI campaign. The trio helped to get things moving here back when Obama's campaign looked very much like it was facing an uphill battle.

Members of the Rhode Island Young Democrats are among the delegates running on today's primary ballot:

For Senator Clinton

CD1:

Jennifer Claire Paolino

Meghan Grady

CD2:

Andy Andujar

James A. Cenerini

Amy E. Gabarra

Mark S. Weiner

 

For Senator Obama

 

CD1:

Kimberly R. Ahern

Edwin Pacheco

 

CD2:

Gonzalo Cuervo

Bart D. Johnsen Harris

Karen E. Whitaker

Also, look up your polling location!  There are fewer polling places than in previous elections, so please check here. 

In further evidence of how the Clintons consider Rhode Island a must-win, Chelsea Clinton is being redeployed here today.

Here's her sked:

Providence, RI:  Chelsea Clinton returns to Rhode Island to assist with local GOTV efforts today.  As thousands of Hillary for President volunteers phone bank and canvass around the state, Chelsea Clinton will join the effort by talking to voters about why her mother is the best choice for president.

 

12: 30 p.m. Retail Stop at Twin Oaks During Lunch

                 100 Sabra Street, Cranston, RI

 

1:15 p.m. Rally and Thank Volunteers at Hillary for President Rhode Island Headquarters

              175 Broad Street, Providence, RI

 

2:00 p.m. Visit To AFSCME To Greet and Thank Volunteers

               1179 Charles Street, North Providence, RI

           

2:30 p.m. GOTV Meet and Greet at Providence Place

              Providence Place, Providence, RI

Very curious that the ProJo skips any endorsement today, even on the Republican side, for Tuesday's primary.

In related news,

-- Brown's Jen Lawless is out with a poll showing 42 percent of respondents for Clinton, 37 percent for Obama, and a whopping 22 percent undecided.

-- The Obama campaign has launched what it calls an unprecedented GOTV effort:

On Saturday, thousands of grassroots supporters and volunteers participated in the GOTV kickoff by door-knocking and calling tens of thousands of voters across the state. Canvasses will launch daily through Tuesday at 9:00 AM and 2:30 PM from 15 staging locations across the state, and phonebanks will operate across the state all day.  

U.S. Senator John Kerry will fire up volunteers in Providence and Newport tomorrow, Monday March 3rd, before they head out to canvass. In addition, key foreign policy advisor, Tony Lake, the former National Security Advisor in the Clinton Administration, will participate in a house party tonight, one of 33 house parties set up by grassroots supporters. On Monday, Lake will lead a foreign policy discussion at the University of Rhode Island and speak about Obama’s judgment to lead this country forward and keep America safe.

-- The Clinton campaign staged a conf call today with 18 admirals, generals, and senior defense officials explaning why they support Hillary.

-- The Clinton campaign today had a volunteer rally featuring Sheldon Whitehouse and a busload of Latino supporters from New York.

You don't have to be a political scientist to know that polling -- thanks in part to the ubiquity of cell phones -- is a lot less reliable in the past. Scott MacKay and Mark Arsenault take a look at the trend in today's ProJo:

Pollsters say this race is a perfect storm of uncertainty, with a volatile electorate, well-financed campaigns, and record voter turnout that makes predicting who will show up to vote more difficult.

In New Hampshire, the major polls put Obama ahead by an average of about 8 points in the days before the vote, according to the poll-tracking Web site RealClearPolitics.com. Clinton narrowly won the state, and the political junkies who devour polls were left to wonder what happened.

Many more recent polls have vastly underestimated the margins of Obama’s big victories in his streak of 11 consecutive primary and caucus wins.

“Polling a primary is far more difficult than polling a general election,” says national pollster Scott Rasmussen. “You’ve never seen anything like this on the Democratic side.”

Democrats this year are generally pleased with both of their candidates. “They’re having a hard time deciding, and they’re deciding late,” he said. “One of the things we’ve been pointing out on our polls recently is that many of these voters are saying they still might change their mind before voting. It’s typically 25 or 30 percent. That just automatically makes it fluid and very difficult to poll.”

Matt offers a look at the delegate process in RI, and how it might impact the primary on Tuesday:

Here’s how the system works: 4050 delegates at the Democratic Convention in Denver will select a nominee for president. Of these, 3250 are elected delegates who are chosen through the state-by-state primaries or caucuses. In addition, 800 superdelegates have a vote at the convention.
 
Superdelegates are quintessential Democratic insiders: governors, senators, representatives, and party officials. Thus, after 37 contests, while Obama currently holds a 1180–1026 elected delegate lead over Clinton, according to The Associated Press, Clinton retains a 239-176 superdelegate lead over Obama. 
 
The power of superdelegates to “anoint” a nominee has raised the ire of party activists. The advocacy group MoveOn.org recently published a full-page ad in USA Today, urging the superdelegates to postpone their endorsements and to allow the elected delegates to determine the winner. More dramatically, Donna Brazile, Al Gore’s former campaign manager, has threatened to resign from the Democratic National Committee if the superdelegates contradict the choice of the elected delegates.
 
How does this process play out in Rhode Island? A 50-page delegate selection plan available at the RI Democratic Party Web site provides a road-map.
 
Rhode Island will send 33 delegates to the Democratic Convention: 21 elected delegates, 11 superdelegates, and one delegate chosen at the June state convention. Rhode Island voters will select 13 of the 21 elected delegates in Tuesday’s presidential primary. Six will be elected from Congressional District 1 and seven from Congressional District 2.
 
These delegates will be proportionately allocated, depending on the popular vote in each district, to Obama or Clinton. For example, if a candidate gets 60 percent of the vote in District 1, that candidate gets four of the six delegates (meaning, the top four vote-getting delegates for that candidate in that district). ....
 
Of the 11 superdelegates, Clinton currently has eight, and Obama two, and there remains one uncommitted vote.
 
Here is a list of the superdelegates, their titles, and who they currently support: Bill Lynch, RI Democratic Party Chair (Clinton); State Representative Grace Diaz, RI Democratic Party Vice-Chair (Clinton); Frank Montanaro, RI Democratic National Committeeman (Clinton); Edna O’Neill Mattson, RI Democratic National Committeewoman (Clinton); Mark Weiner, DNC Member, (Clinton); US Senator Jack Reed (Uncommitted); US Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (Clinton); US Representative Patrick Kennedy (Obama); US Representative Jim Langevin (Clinton); Attorney General Patrick Lynch, Democratic AG Association (Obama); Providence Mayor David Cicilline, Democratic Mayors Association (Clinton). 
 
Thus, due to Clinton’s strong support among Rhode Island superdelegates, even if Obama wins an upset victory in Rhode Island on Tuesday, a greater number of Rhode Island delegates will be committed to Clinton.

We knew that Giovanni Cicione, RI GOP chairman, is no fan of the union movement, but he's really steamed about plans to use a Teamsters Hall in East Prov as a voting place in our March 4 primary.

From Republican central:

WARWICK, RI - Rhode Island Republican Party Chairman Giovanni Cicione today offered his heartfelt congratulations to Barack Obama for securing recently announced endorsement of the Teamsters. 

“I guess that explains the recent push to certify a Teamsters Hall as one of only four primary day polling places in the City of East Providence”, said Cicione. Clearly the Rhode Island Board of Elections is standing firm with the Kennedy’s and the many other early adopters who have know for months (or years even) that Barack was the best choice for the Democrats.

Despite a long history of political support from the Clintons, democratic leaders in Rhode Island are showing a level of buyer’s remorse not seen since the second time we paid for the new Jamestown Bridge. 

“The rental of a polling place which for the other 364 days of the year serves as a union hall and hive of political activity shows a new respect for efficiency in government,” continued Cicione. “Only in Rhode Island would our hard working elections officials have the creativity to devise a strategy that allows union leaders to Xerox their message for change one day and cast their vote for change the next day without ever leaving the building.”

The Teamsters Hall was removed from the approved list of polling places for the 2006 election after reports of illegal campaigning, intimidation of candidates, and general purpose union thuggery. “I’m sure we are all confident that those tactics will not be repeated this year given that this is a time of change and audacious hope. Given the clarification by Board of Elections Director Bob Kando that a primary is not in fact an ‘election’ under his interpretation of the law, I guess the rules don’t apply anyway, concluded Cicione, who called East Providence a “model” of fair elections for the state.

“I’m sure the Clinton camp is comfortable that their candidate will be given the same fair shot in East Providence that a Republican would receive despite the fact that their own political machine is being used to rig the system against them.”

More young people voted in 2004, and the youth vote could be huge in 2008 if Obama is the Democratic nominee. On a related note, Jessica Kerry writes in the Phoenix about efforts to push pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds in Rhode Island:

Last year, a teen pre-registration bill sponsored by state Representative Ed Pacheco (D-Burrillville) passed overwhelmingly in the Senate and the House before Governor Donald Carcieri vetoed it in July, citing a need to clean up the voter rolls first (Savitsky calls this a “red herring response.”)

On January 10, Pacheco reintroduced the bill in the House with four co-signers, including Republican John Savage. State Senator Rhoda Perry will introduce the bill in the Senate.

Pre-registration for teens is part of a national FairVote campaign, [Ari] Savitsky says, because it would promote a “culture of participation” among younger citizens. Registering 16- and 17-year olds before they are eligible to vote would significantly increase their likelihood of voting later, he says, asserting that more than 80 percent of registered young people voted in the 2004 presidential election. He attributes opposition to the measure to “this obnoxious myth about young people being apathetic.”

Savitsky, who graduated from Brown in 2006, argues that Rhode Island’s new high school civics curriculum and the Division of Motor Vehicles provide the “civic infrastructure … already in place” to bring teenagers into the democratic process by registering them to vote.

Pacheco says Savitsky and FairVote are major assets in the pre-registration battle, doing crucial legwork and reaching out to local media. “Having FairVote brings a new energy to the effort to get this bill through,” he says. “Some of these issues can’t come to fruition until the organized effort is behind them.”

Last month, FairVote Rhode Island published a policy briefing detailing the rationale for its proposal and suggested implementation for the bill, which is supported by almost 20 local organizations, from the Rhode Island AFL-CIO to the Brown College Republicans.

[Clarification: since at least one conservative has taken the headline on this post a bit personally, let me state that "loser" is meant here in the strategic sense of winning or losing elections.]

....

The recent arrest of Mynor Montufar has triggered a string of letters to the editor in the ProJo and posts on Anchor with a similar focus, particularly the generally ill-advised idea of having a string of children as teenagers. Today, Bill Felkner of the Ocean State Policy Research Institute released a related statement, questioning Steve Brown's description of Montufar as "a hard-working immigrant."

All this goes to the seeming point that immigration remains a hot button in Rhode Island and elsewhere around the US. We recall how the topic dominated the first half-hour of one of the nationally televised GOP presidential debates.

Yet there's a big disconnect here. I've written before (here and here) about how focusing on illegal immigration has been an unsuccessful strategy for candidates in other states (for the record, N4N believes the US should have secure borders). And Dan Kennedy today has more information to support the view that illegal immigration is not a big issue with voters:

A New York Times/CBS News national poll of Democrats and Republicans shows that the constant drumbeat over illegal immigration simply isn't registering.

According to the underlying data (PDF), just 5 percent believe that immigration is the most important problem facing the country — well behind war and Iraq (a cumulative 22 percent) and the economy (20 percent), and slightly behind health care (7 percent).

When asked what kind of change they most want to see the next president bring about, reducing illegal immigration (4 percent of respondents) was again well down on the list, behind improving the economy (20 percent), dealing with the war in Iraq (14 percent), improving health care (6 percent) and helping the middle class (5 percent).

Just to reinforce the point, John McCain — perceived as taking the least draconian stand on illegal immigration of any Republican presidential candidate — now gets the highest favorability ratings.

As Globe columnist Joan Vennochi points out, even though Gov. Deval Patrick is taking a political risk with his not-quite-proposal to extend in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants, Patrick is well aware that immigrant-bashing has proved to be a loser of an issue.

In the aftermath of Hillary Clinton's surprise win in New Hampshire, most everyone is talking up the moistened-eyes episode and the power of sisterhood. Dan Kennedy points to something else:

Robert David Sullivan, one of my editors at CommonWealth Magazine, has analyzed the results of the Hillary Clinton-Barack Obama contest in New Hampshire and finds an eerie resemblance to the 2000 Democratic primary between Al Gore and Bill Bradley.

Apparently the archetype is more important than the person. I can't see much resemblance between Hillary Clinton and Al Gore, but each appealed to New Hampshire's more traditional Democrats. And the smug, self-regarding Bradley couldn't be more different from the electrifying Obama (OK, Obama is a bit self-regarding, too), but both had their base among the affluent, the well-educated and the young.

Robert does things with maps and stats that I can barely comprehend, but he makes a plausible case that the way to win a Democratic primary in New Hampshire is to go after the party regulars. Among other things, unlike young people and independents, they can always be counted on to vote.

The New York Times Magazine featured a lengthy story this past Sunday about voting machines and their integrity, raising the question of whether America is ready for another contested election. I haven't yet read the piece, but you'd have to be in a cave not to have some questions about this topic.

MoveOn is using Clive Thompson's article as a jumping off point for a petition:

The petition says: "We must act quickly to secure our elections with paper ballots and audits before November."

 

Elections are run at the state level, so we'll deliver your signature and comments to local election officials in addition to members of Congress.

 

Electronic voting machines are so unreliable and insecure, we might elect the wrong person president in 2008. As The New York Times Magazine reports:

[Voting machines] fail unpredictably, and in extremely strange ways; voters report that their choices "flip" from one candidate to another before their eyes; machines crash or begin to count backward; votes simply vanish. (In the 80-person town of Waldenburg, Ark., touch-screen machines tallied zero votes for one mayoral candidate in 2006—even though he's pretty sure he voted for himself.) Most famously, in the November 2006 Congressional election in Sarasota, Fla., touch-screen machines recorded an 18,000-person "undervote" for a race decided by fewer than 400 votes.

As Charlie Bakst has noted, Rhode Island's presidential primary in March will pretty much be an afterthought. Be that as it may, the office of Secretary of State Ralph Mollis reports that six more candidates have qualified for the RI ballot:

In order to appear on the March 4 ballot, Mollis must certify that the presidential hopefuls had collected the signatures of at least 1,000 eligible Rhode Island voters on their nomination papers.

 

Late last month, Obama became the first candidate to reach the qualifying threshold. The latest additions are Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republicans Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney.

 

“We are posting running totals on our website so Rhode Islanders can track the progress of their favorite candidate. Based on the number of signatures that were submitted, it appears likely that all the established candidates remaining in the race will be on the ballot,”

said Mollis.

 

Clinton leads all candidates with 1,900 certified signatures. Ron Paul is the top Republican with 1,727 signatures. Republican Fred Thompson is closest to making the cut with 939 certified signatures. At 750, John Edwards is the closest Democrat to the 1,000-signature threshold.

 

Getting on the ballot is a two-step process. First, the candidates had until Dec. 26 to submit signatures to municipal elections officials for initial validation. Then, cities and towns have until Jan. 10 to submit the names to the secretary of state’s office for final certification.

 

The next milestone in the state’s presidential primary calendar is Feb. 1, when Mollis will hold a public lottery at the State House to determine the order in which the candidates will appear on the Democratic and Republican ballots.

-- The RI Democratic Party is doing a prediction contest for the outcome of tomorrow's primary.

-- Governor Carcieri stumped over the weekend for Mitt Romney.

-- The League of Young Voters' Billy Wimsatt has some ideas on how non-NH residents can expand their influence.

-- The aforementioned RI Dems are seeking people to become delegates for the 2008 DNC:

PAWTUCKET- With the declaration period approaching and on the heels of the Iowa Caucus, the Rhode Island Democratic Party is calling on Democrats all across the state to declare their candidacy and run for delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention. Delegates will travel, at their own expense, to the Democratic National Convention in Denver Colorado from August 25th to August 28th, 2008.

 

To qualify as a candidate for delegate in Rhode Island's March 4th Presidential Preference Primary candidates must declare between 8AM on this upcoming Monday (Jan. 7) through Wednesday at 4PM (Jan. 9) with the Rhode Island Secretary of State Elections Division, located at 148 West River Street in Providence. In addition candidates must also file the Rhode Island Democratic Party's Pledge of Support Form which, for convenience, is distributed at the time and location of declaration. The Pledge of Support form is also available on the Rhode Island Democratic Party's Web site, www.ridemocrats.org.

 

Once declarations have been submitted, the Secretary of State's Elections Division will produce nomination papers. To qualify for the ballot, all declared candidates for delegate must collect at least 150 signatures from qualified voters within the Congressional District from which they are running.

                       

The Rhode Island Democratic Party is especially encouraging minorities, woman, and members of the Gay Lesbian Bi-sexual and Transgender community to campaign to become delegates.

 

"Historically, the delegations to national conventions from Rhode Island have been diverse groups of Democrats and we encourage this trend to continue so that Rhode Island's Democratic demographic make up is properly represented at the National Convention in Denver," said Chairman of the State Democratic Party William Lynch. 

 

Rhode Island's March 4th, 2008 Democratic Presidential Preference Primary is a binding primary and the first determining step in the two-part process. During the March 4th Primary the voters of Rhode Island will elect 13 delegates and 3 alternates to the National Convention, with six delegates from the First Congressional District and seven from the Second Congressional District.

 

For more information on the Rhode Island Democratic Party's Delegate Selection Process and for a copy of the Delegate Selection Plan please visit the RIDP Web site, www.ridemocrats.org.

With all eyes on New Hampshire, N4N is teaming up with Rhode Island's Future, Providence Daily Dose, and FairVote RI to host a primary-watch event tomorrow night, starting at 8 pm, in the basement speakeasy at Local 121 in downtown Providence. Come on down!

Attention is obviously riveted on Iowa today, but next Tuesday's New Hampshire primary will quickly gain the spotlight. The Granite State event has a long and venerable history, leading presidential contenders to rub shoulders with ordinary citizens in coffee shops and the like. Writing in this week's Phoenix, Adam Reilly believes, though, that this might be the final year in which the New Hampshire primary really matters:

How, exactly, did two small states manage to fend off 48 potential rivals? Chalk it up to inertia, or fear of unintended consequences, or a genuine conviction that New Hampshire and Iowa work, or the fact that any new state(s) poised to bump off Iowa and New Hampshire would similarly incur the envy of their erstwhile allies. But also credit New Hampshire and Iowa for an almost pathological determination to take any steps necessary to maintain their privileged role. “This is their life,” says University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato. “They’ll hold their contests right after July 4 the year before the election if they have to — they don’t care, as long as they’re first.” ....

The central argument for the primacy of New Hampshire and Iowa has long been that those states force candidates to practice a different, purer kind of politics. You don’t succeed in those states by bombarding the airwaves with ads or trotting out trite sound bites. You succeed by going out and meeting the public one or two or 10 at a time, face to face, and conversing as equals: that’s retail politics. “It’s like a Norman Rockwell painting,” said New Hampshire state senator Lou D’Allesandro. “And we all want that Norman Rockwell painting to be true.”

Flash back, though, to the aforementioned Obama-Oprah rally, which didn’t quite jibe with this whole notion of noble Granite State exceptionalism. For one thing, Winfrey and the Obamas weren’t courting voters in a living room or a diner — they were wooing them in an 11,000-seat arena that was nearly half full. In addition, while the phrase “New Hampshire primary” conjures up images of crusty Yankees peppering candidates with discomfiting questions, this particular audience was decidedly passive. There was no Q-and-A, so the crowd had to content itself with clapping, or chanting Obama’s name, or just doing the Wave. What’s more, the rally in question was just one in a series of Oprah-Obama events; the duo also visited South Carolina (where they drew 30,000 people) and Iowa, hewing to the same script in all three places.

The Oprah-Obama event doesn’t mean that retail politicking is dead in New Hampshire. But it is a bellwether of sorts: compared to past primaries, Obama and Hillary Clinton, the two Democratic frontrunners, have been paying less attention to intimate events and more to the sort of mass gatherings you’d find in bigger states — like, say, Michigan or Florida. According to James Pindell, who writes the Primary Source blog for the Boston Globe, the shift began with Obama’s first trip to New Hampshire one year ago. “This was a low-dollar fundraiser,” recalls Pindell. “And suddenly, you had 1500 people, one of the largest gatherings in New Hampshire history.”

And isn't the small-town nature of the NH primary at odds with the reality of contemporary politics?

Maybe it’s time to rethink the very notion that starting small means starting better. After all, there’s something escapist and self-delusional about this approach. It’s nice to pretend — for a few months every four years — that America is one big small town, and that the success of our would-be presidents depends on their willingness to chat frankly with ordinary people in ordinary settings. Eventually, though, each and every general-election campaign shows how absurd this charade actually is. You don’t become president by charming a few people at a diner. You do it by raising obscene amounts of money, and spending it on the best pollsters and consultants and organizers you can find, and sticking to an airtight script for months on end, and blanketing the airwaves with ads that make you look better than you are and do the exact opposite for your opponent.

In theory, of course, starting with New Hampshire and Iowa gives unknown candidates a chance to come out of nowhere — relying on charm and hustle and word-of-mouth buzz — and force the nation to take them seriously. Invariably, though, this small-d democratic fantasy carries a decidedly undemocratic price: every time we elect a president, we allow the same two (tiny) states to winnow down the field for the rest of us. Yes, New Hampshire and Iowa offer valuable insight into key electoral groups (exurban independents in the former, Midwesterners and evangelicals in the other). But there are other states that could do this, and other constituencies worth considering. If New Hampshire’s current travails lead, ultimately, to the end of the state’s long ascendancy, presidential politics as we know them won’t be ruined. But they will be a little bit fairer.

Couch Pundit 2008, a get-together to watch the results as they come in from the Iowa Caucuses, will take place tomorrow night. The confab will be from 8-11:30 pm, at McFadden's, 52 Pine St., Providence.

Gadfly and former legislator Rod Driver is doing his best to land presidential candidates Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul on the Rhode Island ballot, distributing a flyer he made with picture of both men and the following headline: "You can't vote for both End-the-War candidates for President." The text continues, "But you can help put both of them on the ballot for RI's Presidential Preference Primary by signing their nomination papers."

Let's go to Driver's flyer:

If terms have any real meaning, some would say Kucinich is 'liberal' and Paul is 'conservative.' But they are both passionate and unrelenting in their support for a sensible and human foreign policy, for human rights and for the civil liberties defined in the US Constitution.

After describing the candidates' votes against the war, and against a war with Iran, Driver adds:

But many Americans haven't heard of Kucinich or Paul, because the media is trying to ignore them.

Is this acceptable?

Although the flyer contains a disclaimer indicating that it "was neither approved nor authorized by any candidate," it has caused a bit of concern for the Kucinich camp. Driver writes to me via e-mail:

When I first contacted Dennis Kucinich's national campaign no one seemed aware of Rhode Island's ballot-access requirements. I pointed out that Dennis needed to file a "Declaration of Candidacy" during a 3-day window (Dec. 5-7) and then collect 1,000 signatures of registered voters in accordance with Rhode Island laws.  I said, make that 2,000 signatures (or at least 1,500) to be safe. And don't wait until Dec. 26 to turn the notarized nomination papers in to 39 different cities and towns.

But when I said I was also supporting Ron Paul, they became very uncomfortable.  They stopped returning my calls or answering my emails. The Kucinich people apparently feared I would use their information to help Ron Paul. I had to find volunteers myself and explain the procedure to them for gathering signatures for Kucinich.

 

Nevertheless Kucinich's Declaration of Candidacy was filed with the RI Sec. of State on Dec. 5 and we got the blank nomination papers Dec. 6. 

 

Then few seemed to understand that getting 1,500 signatures in two weeks in December would require serious work -- and there was no guarantee of good weather.  (They may not realize it yet.)

 

Meanwhile I had also attended a couple of meetings of Ron Paul supporters in RI. Ron Paul's campaign is much more locally-autonomous than Kucinich's. They already had a couple of people who understood the R.I. ballot-access procedure. 

 

Some Ron Paul supporters may have been uncomfortable when I said I was also supporting Dennis Kucinich. But I think they got over it rather quickly.

 

Gathering signatures for both campaigns means carrying two sets of nomination papers.  I produced the little dual-candidate flyer (with the disclaimer) so as not to also have to juggle two sets of literature. 

 

Many people (in a Stop and Shop parking lot) are bewildered when I give them the flyer and ask for their signatures.  Perhaps never before was there a flyer promoting two different candidates for the same office. 

 

But, unfortunately, even more people are not bewildered! They simply don't want to think about government. And they don't want to hear anything other than what the pundits tell them on TV.

 

On Wednesday evening I should get an idea how we're doing for Kucinich. I asked each of about 20 volunteers to gather just 100 signatures. I'll be lucky if 4 or 5 volunteers reach that quota.

With state Representative Peter Palumbo (D-Cranston) and state Senator Christopher B. Maselli (D-Johnston) due to have a news conference at this moment to introduce illegal immigration-related legislation, it's worth considering the wider impact of this issue. The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza happens to have an article, entitled Return of the Nativist, on the subject in last week's issue.

In short, Lizza reinforces the point that while illegal immigration is a hot button that moves part of the Republican base, it' overshadows more important issues and is a loser in electoral politics. I made these points previously with these two respectives posts, here and here.

Let's go to Lizza's article.

To his credit, John McCain has been the Republican presidential candidate most unwilling to demagogue on the illegal immigration issue:

To the student with the immigration question, McCain patiently explained that some illegal immigrants had faced unusual circumstances, and he mentioned a woman who has lived in the United States for decades and has a son and a grandson serving in Iraq. When the student said that he wanted to see punishment meted out to anyone who has broken the law, McCain stopped trying to find common ground. “If you’re prepared to send an eighty-year-old grandmother who’s been here seventy years back to some country, then frankly you’re not quite as compassionate as maybe I am,” he said. Next question.

Meanwhile, single-issue immigration opponents, like Tom Tancredo, are moving the national GOP, and the party's presidential candidates, farther to the right:

Anti-immigrant passion also owes much to the disproportionate influence of a few small states in the nominating process. National polls show that, as an issue, immigration is far behind the Iraq war, terrorism, the economy, and health care as a concern to most Americans; a recent Pew poll shows that, nationally, only six per cent of voters offer immigration as the most important issue facing the country. But in Iowa and South Carolina, two of the three most important early states, it is a top concern for the Republicans who are most likely to vote.  ....

Huckabee’s excitement [about his improved standing] was tempered by Romney’s persistent attacks on his immigration record as governor of Arkansas, and he seemed to be grappling with the intensity of the question among Republicans. “It does appear to be the issue out here wherever we are,” he told me. “Nobody’s asked about Iraq—doesn’t ever come up. The first question out of the box, everywhere I go—Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, Texas, it doesn’t matter—is immigration. It’s just red hot, and I don’t fully understand it.”

Romney has not been similarly reflective in trying to discern the source of the issue’s power. Rather, he has quickly and easily adopted the negative code words of the anti-immigration movement—“sanctuary cities,” “amnesty”—and has tried to attach them to Giuliani and Huckabee. In doing so, he became the first top-tier candidate to seize the Tancredo mantle. My own sense, from talking to Huckabee, a Southern populist, and McCain, a border-state senator, is that they are genuinely appalled by Romney’s tactics, not only because of the damage to their campaigns but also because of the damage they believe he’s doing to the Party’s image.  ....

Nevertheless, last week, Huckabee, too, found his inner Tancredo: he announced the Secure America Plan, which included tough language about enforcement and pressuring illegal immigrants to return home. This leaves McCain as the only Republican candidate who hasn’t folded in the face of Romney’s attacks. At the press lunch in Virginia, after McCain had discussed his warm relations with several candidates, a reporter asked about Romney. “I’ve never known him,” McCain said icily. “I’ve never had a relationship with him.”

And Republicans are apparently pursuing a self-destructive path:

Barack Obama, during a recent interview with the editorial board of the Boston Globe, predicted that the Republicans will run next fall on two issues: terrorism and immigration. When I asked a leading Republican strategist and former Bush lieutenant if he agreed, he said merely, “I hope not.” He argued that it was incorrect to think that immigration was the second most important challenge facing the United States. “We need to address other issues, like the economy, health care, and education,” he said. When I asked Tancredo if he was leading his party “over a cliff” or “to the promised land,” he laughed and said, “I see manna out there.”  ....

Far from fearing the immigration issue, some Democratic strategists are quietly cheering how the subject has played out. Simon Rosenberg, a Democratic strategist who has closely studied the politics of the issue, says simply, “The Bush strategy—enlightened on race, smart on immigration, developed in Texas and Florida with Jeb Bush—has been replaced by the Tancredo-Romney strategy, which is demonizing and scapegoating immigrants, and that is a catastrophic event for the Republican Party.”

We read the Saturday New York Times so that you don't have to. Get a glimpse of these gems:

-- China, the biggest importer exporter of seafood to the US, is awash in "water supplies contaminated by sewage, industrial waste, and agricultural runoff that includes pesticides. The fish farms, in turn, are discharging wastewater that further pollutes the water supply." Mmmm, pass the shrimp.

-- In Ohio, a state whose electoral votes narrowly swung two elections toward President Bush," all five voting systems "have critical flaws that could undermine the integrity of the 2008 general election," a report commissioned by the Democratic secretary of state has found.

-- Fred D. Thompson has not just a guys' guy's self-awareness, but a sense of humor about how he's married to a FLILF! (In an AP survey, he cited his "trophy wife" as his favorite possession.)

-- This week, I told you that Google will soon be in our bathtubs. Now, the increasingly omnipresent company is developing a competitor of Wikipedia.

-- On the lines of the more things change, the more they stay the same: "Report says the rich are getting rich faster, much faster."