R.I. Senate looks to publish written testimony online, four years after the House
The Rhode Island Senate is moving to put written testimony online, mirroring a practice adopted by the House of Representatives in 2021. (Photo by Alexander Castro/Rhode Island Current)
Better late than never.
That's the message of the Rhode Island Senate, which announced Thursday that it was moving to make public testimony on legislation available online.
The proposal, part of a larger set of chamber rules included in a resolution sponsored by Sen. Mark McKenney, a Warwick Democrat, will be introduced for preliminary hearing before the Senate Committee on Rules, Government Ethics and Oversight on Monday.
'It's time, it's long overdue,' McKenney, who chairs the rules committee, said in an interview on Friday. 'It's 2025. We have got to get this done.'
McKenney, along with public access advocates and members of the media, have pushed for years for the Senate to post committee documents, including written testimony on bills, on the General Assembly website, mirroring the practice adopted by the House of Representatives in 2021.
Senate leadership has historically resisted following suit, citing the lack of staff. Unlike the House, which has full-time clerks, the Senate's clerks work part-time and typically begin their days shortly before the afternoon and evening committee hearings, said Greg Paré, a Senate spokesperson.
The Senate is planning to hire a new, full-time staffer specifically dedicated to sorting public commentary and posting it online with the appropriate committee to meet the proposed rule change, Paré said Friday. Additional information on the hiring plans, including whether there will be a public job posting and the salary, was not immediately available.
Funding will come from the General Assembly's fiscal 2025 budget, which has 'a little cushion,' Paré said.
Asked why the Senate had not previously considered hiring another staffer if it had the money, Paré pointed to McKenney's advocacy with legislative leaders this year.
'He made it his top priority, so credit goes to him,' Paré said.
McKenney tells it differently, saying he has urged the Senate to adopt the practice since he was reelected in 2022. While the Senate provides submitted testimony upon request, most people don't know that option exists, or how to get it.
And, as McKenney noted, the process of responding to individual requests for testimony also eats up staff time.
Both McKenney and Paré denied any relationship between the timing of the decision and increased scrutiny over Senate President Dominick Ruggerio. Ruggerio missed the Senate's weekly session Tuesday — his third absence this year — because he was hospitalized with pneumonia. Ruggerio was transferred from the hospital to the rehabilitation center at Our Lady of Fatima Hospital Wednesday, where he remains and is 'doing very well,' Paré said.
Ruggerio's absences for large chunks of the 2024 legislative session due to his health created a rift among Senate Democrats over his ability to continue leading the upper chamber.
McKenney, who voted for Ruggerio in the contested caucus leadership vote in November, said the continued divisions were irrelevant to the rules change.
'We all recognize there is a faction in the Senate that is trying to suggest the body is not functional, not doing things as well as it should in part because the Senate President is having health problems,' McKenney said. 'The important thing for me is that we are getting this done. And soon, it will just be the status quo.'
Ruggerio expressed support for the proposal in a statement Thursday.
'Responsibly balancing our available resources with the many demands on staff is always a challenge, but it is time to take this important step forward,' he said. 'Improving access to public testimony will strengthen the committee process, improve public transparency, and foster trust in government, all of which is essential to the work we do at the State House.'
The text of the resolution, including other proposed rule changes, was not available as of Friday afternoon. The initial hearing, slated for 4 p.m. Monday, will not include a committee vote, a date for which has not been scheduled, Paré said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' Would Slash Medicaid & SNAP: 3 Moves Retirees Should Make Now
President Donald Trump's 'one big beautiful bill' has passed in the House and is now awaiting Senate approval. If passed, Trump's signature bill would extend the tax cuts granted by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and add additional tax cuts. While this might be welcome news to many, the bill also includes changes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that could threaten seniors' access to these programs. Find Out: Read Next: 'The 'one big beautiful bill' passed by the House of Representatives, if it were passed into law today, would cut Medicaid and SNAP by a combined $1 trillion,' said Chris Orestis, president of Retirement Genius. 'In addition, because of the increase to federal debt of as much as $5 trillion, the bill would trigger an automatic reduction in Medicare funding of $500 billion,' he continued. 'This would represent the largest cut to social services and health insurance for the poor, disabled, children and the elderly in U.S. history.' Here's a look at the changes retirees can make now to secure care and avoid benefit disruptions if the bill were to pass. Before changes go into effect, check with your healthcare providers to ensure there won't be any interruption to your care if there are cuts to Medicaid. 'Check with your healthcare provider to see if they might cut back on services or cease accepting Medicaid-funded patients, and contact any nursing home where you or a loved one may reside to find out if they will be reducing the number of patients they can support — or even [if they are] possibly planning to close,' Orestis said. Knowing this ahead of time will allow you to find alternative care providers before it's too late. Learn More: If you are reliant on SNAP, start searching for alternatives that may be able to provide food assistance in the event your benefits are reduced or cut. 'Make sure you know where there are local support services through community or faith-based organizations to replace lost access through SNAP,' Orestis said. Many retirees plan to 'spend down' their savings so that they qualify for Medicaid to pay for their long-term care. However, this may no longer be a viable option. 'If you are considering going onto Medicaid for long-term care and are preparing to engage the 'spend down' process to impoverish yourself and get below the poverty level to qualify, you may want to reconsider that strategy, and instead look to leverage private pay resources to pay for your care,' Orestis said. 'If you are on Medicaid, you will primarily be reliant on nursing homes for your care, and their ability to withstand these cuts will be very challenging and up in the air,' he continued. 'If you are private pay, you are in control and can decide where and when you will receive care, such as at home or an assisted living community not funded by Medicaid.' Strategies to stay private pay for long-term care would include long-term care insurance, annuities, a life insurance settlement, a reverse mortgage or VA benefits. Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates Clever Ways To Save Money That Actually Work in 2025 This article originally appeared on Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Would Slash Medicaid & SNAP: 3 Moves Retirees Should Make Now
Wall Street Journal
35 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
GOP Senators' Competing Demands Risk Pulling Trump Megabill Apart
WASHINGTON—Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R., S.D.) is trying to release this week a revised version of President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' But as he races to pass the legislation ahead of Republicans' self-imposed July 4 deadline, he has got about as many problems as there are GOP senators, with lawmakers battling over the additional borrowing and spending cuts that will be used to finance tax relief, plus spending on the border and military.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Tensions Flare Between Protesters and Law Enforcement in L.A.
News Analysis National Guard troops in Los Angeles on Sunday. Gov. Gavin Newsom of California has formally asked the Trump administration to remove them. It is the fight President Trump had been waiting for, a showdown with a top political rival in a deep blue state over an issue core to his political agenda. In bypassing the authority of Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, a Democrat, to call in the National Guard to quell protests in the Los Angeles area over his administration's efforts to deport more migrants, Mr. Trump is now pushing the boundaries of presidential authority and stoking criticism that he is inflaming the situation for political gain. Local and state authorities had not sought help in dealing with the scattered protests that erupted after an immigration raid on Friday in the garment district. But Mr. Trump and his top aides leaned into the confrontation with California leaders on Sunday, portraying the demonstrations as an existential threat to the country — setting in motion an aggressive federal response that in turn sparked new protests across the city. As more demonstrators took to the streets, the president wrote on social media that Los Angeles was being 'invaded and occupied' by 'violent, insurrectionist mobs,' and directed three of his top cabinet officials to take any actions necessary to 'liberate Los Angeles from the Migrant Invasion.' 'Nobody's going to spit on our police officers. Nobody's going to spit on our military,' Mr. Trump told reporters as he headed to Camp David on Sunday, although it was unclear whether any such incidents had occurred. 'That happens, they get hit very hard.' The president declined to say whether he planned to invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act, which allows for the use of federal troops on domestic soil to quell a rebellion. But either way, he added, 'we're going to have troops everywhere.' Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, posted on social media that 'this is a fight to save civilization.' Mr. Trump's decision to deploy at least 2,000 members of the California National Guard is the latest example of his willingness and, at times, an eagerness to shatter norms to pursue his political goals and bypass limits on presidential power. The last president to send in the National Guard for a domestic operation without a request from the state's governor, Lyndon B. Johnson, did so in 1965, to protect civil rights demonstrators in Alabama. Image President Donald Trump in New Jersey on Sunday. On social media, he, his aides and allies have sought to frame the demonstrations against immigration officials on their own terms. Credit... Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times But aides and allies of the president say the events unfolding in Los Angeles provide an almost perfect distillation of why Mr. Trump was elected in November. 'It could not be clearer,' said Newt Gingrich, the former Republican House speaker and ally of the president who noted that Mr. Trump had been focused on immigration enforcement since 2015. 'One side is for enforcing the law and protecting Americans, and the other side is for defending illegals and being on the side of the people who break the law.' Sporadic protests have occurred across the country in recent days as federal agents have descended on Los Angeles and other cities searching workplaces for undocumented immigrants, part of an expanded effort by the administration to ramp up the number of daily deportations. On social media, Mr. Trump, his aides and allies have sought to frame the demonstrations against immigration officials on their own terms. They have shared images and videos of the most violent episodes — focusing particularly on examples of protesters lashing out at federal agents — even as many remained peaceful. Officials also zeroed in on demonstrators waving flags of other countries, including Mexico and El Salvador, as evidence of a foreign invasion. 'Illegal criminal aliens and violent mobs have been committing arson, throwing rocks at vehicles, and attacking federal law enforcement for days,' wrote Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary. Mr. Newsom, whom the president refers to as 'Newscum,' has long been a foil for Mr. Trump, who has repeatedly targeted California and its leader as emblematic of failures of the Democratic Party. 'We expected this, we prepared for this,' Mr. Newsom said in a statement to The New York Times. 'This is not surprising — for them to succeed, California must fail, and so they're going to try everything in their tired playbook despite the evidence against them.' Image Law enforcement officers and members of the California National Guard engaged protesters in downtown Los Angeles on Sunday. Credit... Gabriela Bhaskar/The New York Times On Sunday, the governor sent a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth formally requesting that Mr. Trump rescind the call-up of the National Guard, saying federal actions were inflaming the situation. He was echoed by other Democratic officials, who said the mounting demonstrations were the result of Mr. Trump's own actions. The president and his aides 'are masters of misinformation and disinformation,' Senator Alex Padilla of California, a Democrat, said in an interview. 'They create a crisis of their own making and come in with all the theatrics and cruelty of immigration enforcement. They should not be surprised in a community like Los Angeles they will be met by demonstrators who are very passionate about standing up for fundamental rights and due process.' Republicans defended Mr. Trump's moves, saying he was rightfully exercising his power to protect public safety. 'The president is extremely concerned about the safety of federal officials in L.A. right now who have been subject to acts of violence and harassment and obstruction,' Representative Kevin Kiley, Republican of California, said in an interview. He added: 'We are in this moment because of a series of reckless decisions by California's political leaders, the aiding and abetting the open-border policies of President Biden.' Trump officials said on Sunday that they were ready to escalate their response even more, if necessary. Tom Homan, the president's border czar, suggested in an interview with NBC News that the administration would arrest anyone, including public officials, who interfered with immigration enforcement activities, which he said would continue in California and across the country. Image Protesters in Pasadena, Calif., on Sunday. Credit... Alex Welsh for The New York Times Mr. Trump appears to be deploying against California a similar playbook that he has used to punish universities, law firms and other institutions and individuals that he views as political adversaries. Last month, he threatened to strip 'large scale' federal funding from California 'maybe permanently' over the inclusion of transgender athletes in women's sports. And in recent days, his administration said it would pull roughly $4 billion in federal funding for California's high-speed train, which would further delay a project that has long been plagued by delays and funding shortages. 'Everything he's done to attack California or anybody he fears isn't supportive of him is going to continue to be an obsession of his,' Mr. Padilla said. 'He may think it plays smart for his base, but it's actually been bad for the country.' White House officials said there was a different common denominator that explains Mr. Trump's actions both against institutions like Harvard and immigration protests in Los Angeles. 'For years Democrat-run cities and institutions have failed the American people, by both choice and incompetence,' Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, said in a statement. 'In each instance,' she added, 'the president took necessary action to protect Americans when Democrats refused.'
