Government officials take an oath of office to preserve the constitutional rights of their constituents. However, in Rhode Island, school board officials who approved agreements with special-interest public employee unions have effectively hidden those rights from their employees via unconstitutional collective bargaining provisions that are in direct defiance of the Supreme Court Of the United States (SCOTUS).
In 2018, the highest court in America ruled that public employees must retain power over their own paychecks. Yet, since then, many government unions in Rhode Island may have unlawfully collected dues from employees by propagating misleading language that overtly shields them from knowledge of their rights.
The landmark June 2018 US Supreme Court decision in the Janus v AFSCME case opened the door to worker freedom in America. But some of the old political machines were taken aback, especially government employee unions at the state and local level. SCOTUS ruled that no longer could a public employee be mandated to pay union “dues”, “Association fees”, “agency fees”, or “shop fees” as a condition of their employment.
Under the weight of this ruling, most public employee unions across the country, reluctantly realizing the great financial and legal risk of non-compliance, immediately amended their policies and subsequent contract agreements to comply with the new law … such that any dues payments could only be collected once the employee affirmatively provided clear authorization … but not so for many unions in Rhode Island.
According to the Mackinac Center in Michigan, one of nation’s top legal and public policy experts when it comes to government unions, Rhode Island’s rate of non-compliance with the Janus ruling looks to be among the highest in the country. The extent to which blatantly anti-Janus-constitutional provisions still exist in many teacher union Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) is alarming.
An initial review of about three dozen collective bargaining agreements with local school districts in Rhode Island reveals an alarming number – eleven (more than 1 in 4) – that were signed or put into effect after the Janus ruling, contained dues or fees mandate provisions that clearly defy the Supreme Court’s ruling … provisions that are legally unenforceable.
Types of language clearly violating the Janus Supreme Court ruling that were found in the eleven Rhode Island CBAs with local chapters of the NEA, AFT, AFL-CIO, and AFSCME … unlawful provisions that remained in effect for years after 2018 … can be summarized as including passages that:
- Require automatic deduction of dues or fees from employee paychecks without their expressed consent
- Require payment of dues or fees as a condition of employment
- Limit the union opt-out time-window for employees
The table below summarizes the unlawful language of offending school districts (supporting details appear as an Appendix at the end of this report:)
As an example of what a properly worded CBA should look like, post-Janus, we look to provisions in the agreement between the Glocester K-5 school district and the Glocester Teachers’ Association for the time period July 2019 to June 2022:
The Glocester school district maintained the above Articles 20 and 21, post-Janus, but appropriately REMOVED the following provision that appeared in the district’s pre-Janus CBA:
As national examples of how post-Janus federal court cases compelled government unions to appropriately modify their dues/fees collection policies, what follows is language from two related US Third Circuit cases:
LaSpina v. SEIU Pennsylvania State Council, 985 F.3d 278, 282 (3rd Cir. 2021). After the Supreme Court decided Janus, the Union abandoned its agency-fee setup. The day the Court issued its decision, Steve Catanese, president of SEIU Local 668, wrote to Jack Finnerty of the Scranton Public Library “that the Supreme Court has ruled in Janus” and has “held public-sector employers may no longer deduct agency fees from non-consenting employees.” Supp. App. 69. Catanese’s letter instructed Finnerty to, “effective immediately, please discontinue fair-share fee deductions.” Id. (emphasis in original).
“Therefore, under Janus I, Pennsylvania’s public sector agency shop law was no longer constitutional.” Diamond v. Pennsylvania Educ. Ass’n, 972 F.3d 262, 268 (3rd Cir. 2020). Circuit law directly on point.
Other Supreme Court precedent illustrates what must be done to demonstrate employee consent. The Court has ruled that, to demonstrate consent to a waiver of constitutional rights, there must be evidence that the waiver is a “knowing, intelligent act … done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences.” Brady v United States, 397 U.S. 742, 748 (1970). “It must also be done with “a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it.” Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 421,421 (1986) …
Per the SCOTUS ruling, before employees can consent to financially supporting a public sector union, they must know both what their rights are and the consequences of waiving those rights.
Yet, not every school district in Rhode Island was as careful to follow the law as was Glocester, as many districts continued to allow overtly unconstitutional language to remain in their post-Janus CBAs, without providing employees with the required notification of their rights.
One of the most blatant examples of such an unconstitutional provision appears in the September 2018 Westerly Teachers’ Association CBA:
How did this happen? Elected school committee members were either complicit with teacher unions in allowing such “unlawful” language to remain, or they were unwitting victims of malfeasance or ill-advice by their school committee solicitors, who are highly paid to provide accurate legal guidance.
The fact is, that for over three years, many teachers and other school district staff in Rhode Island may have been fraudulently deceived into paying union dues or association fees because of the unconstitutional language in their respective CBAs. These employees likely had dues automatically deducted from their paychecks without ever understanding that their First Amendment rights – that they could not be forced to pay part of their paycheck to their union – had been restored in 2018.
Indeed, as compared with opt-out rates nationally, Rhode Island teachers and other public employees are choosing to “opt-out” of paying union dues at rates far lower than their counterparts in other states. While states like California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Massachusetts are seeing more than 15% of workers opt out of paying money to their unions, we estimate that less than 5% of Rhode Island union members have opted out. Now, we may know why.
In the majority Supreme Court decision in 2018, Justice Alito was noted that billions of dollars were likely collected by government unions nationwide in recent decades. Much of this money came from employees who never wanted to pay union dues in the first place but were forced to, because of prior legal precedent.
However, over the past three and a half years, Rhode Island unions may have similarly, yet unlawfully, collected millions of dollars in dues from employees who may have chosen to opt-out … had they not been deceived by clearly unconstitutional language.
Obvious questions must be asked, including:
- How many teachers and school staff would not have paid union dues if they had been appropriately advised of their rights? How much money was fraudulently collected by unions?
- Why do so man teacher union CBAs in Rhode Island contain such unconstitutional language?
- Why did Rhode Island school committees and teacher unions engage in such non-compliance so much more than any other state?
- Did school committee members knowingly turn a blind eye towards this malfeasance, or were they completely ignorant of these obvious violations?
- How can high-paid school committee solicitors allow such obviously unconstitutional language to be included in recent CBAs?
- Is anything comparable to this level of unconstitutionality occurring in non-teacher public employee CBA contracts in Rhode Island?
Why in some cases, does the AFSCME CBA have proper language regarding dues and fees, while the teacher contract over the same period in the same school district has unconstitutional language?
The main question this report raises … is whether or not certain public teacher unions in Rhode Island conspired to illicitly collect union dues from unwitting teachers and staff?
This is not the first time that a government entity in Rhode Island has exhibited such blatant defiance of the US Supreme Court’s Janus decision. In 2018, our Center’s MyPayMySayRI.com campaign triggered a public letter of warning from then Attorney General Peter Kilmartin, after our outreach initiative sought to educate government workers about their restored Janus rights. The letter from Rhode Island’s highest law enforcement official contained numerous unsubstantiated, unspecified, and false assertions of “misinformation” being put forth by our RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity, such as the bogus claim that we were mis-informing public employees of their rights not to join or pay union dues or fees.
Then, as now, the pattern of government officials in Rhode Island conducting the bidding of public sector unions – at both the state and local level – even to the extent of seeking to obfuscate the constitutional rights of its members … runs directly contrary to the public oaths they took upon entering office.
A review of non-school district CBAs will soon be conducted by the Center.
The following Appendix lists images the actual passages from post-Janus teacher-union CBAs in Rhode Island that contain language that does not comply with the US Supreme Court’s Janus ruling.
APPENDIX
Rhode Island School Districts with Unconstitutional Collective Bargaining Provisions
Burrillville: NEA Contract Period: September 2021-2024
Page-40: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=YnNkLXJpLm5ldHxob21lfGd4Ojc1NTMwZjU2M2U5MDhiMQ
Page-5: https://core-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/asset/uploaded_file/236104/CF_CBA_18-21_FINAL_FORM.pdf
Foster-Glocester: NEA Contract Period 2020-2023
Page-29: http://www.fg.k12.ri.us/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=9841126
Johnston: AFL-CIO Local 808 Contract period 2017-2020, extended in 2020 by the school district
Pages 4-5: https://www.johnstonschools.org/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=20171014
June 2020 Johnston School District Minutes
Lincoln: AFSCME Contract Period September 2018-2021
Page-4: https://www.lincolnps.org/cms/lib/RI50000681/Centricity/Domain/44/L2671-contract-2018-2021-02-07-19-FINAL.pdf
New Shoreham: AFSCME Contract Period 2019-2022
Page-2: https://4.files.edl.io/4ef8/11/15/19/153226-ac2437cb-2ef2-43d3-8fb7-ab0bbf4cb0cf.pdf
North Smithfield: NEA Contract Period 2021-24
Page-6: NSTA Collective Bargaining Agreement
Portsmouth: AFSCME Contract Period September 2018-2021
Page-2:
https://core-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/asset/uploaded_file/1355692/Council_94_Contract_7.1.18_-_7.30.21.pdf
Tiverton: NEA Contract Period; 2019 –
Page-9: http://www.tivertonschools.org/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=8558123
Westerly: NEA Contract Period September 2018-2021
Page-5: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V6e4ChNvhLkp6-Y0zqPUdieauxOzAMvm/view
West Warwick: AFT Contract Period September 2018-2023
Page-21: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NdyhtJYJb0SibVVm0BXmthzTkehxDtjU/view
Center Signs-On to Coalition Letter to Decouple RI from California’s Oppressive Emissions Policies
/in Energy, Featured, Recent Posts, Regulatory Environment, TCI Tax/by Mike StenhouseThe RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity has signed-on to a regional coalition letter to protest California’s extreme and influential carbon emissions policies, along with 28 other organizations. On March 10, the Center’s CEO participated in a press conference with other coalition partners from New England.
READ THE REGIOINAL COALITION LETTER – Click Here
Most Rhode Islanders do not realize, in addition to the costly and non-productive ‘green’ policies imposed upon them by state and federal lawmakers, that the Ocean State, along with 15 other states, is also beholden to enact emissions policies enacted by California.
At specific issue, is a California ban of the sale of vehicles with internal combustion engines (ICE), which Rhode Island must statutorily also adopt, which would dramatically drive up the cost of personal automobiles. As such, given the soaring energy costs across America, the regional coalition is recommending that member states work to “decouple” themselves from California’s increasingly oppressive and irrational policies.
The Center’s CEO, Mike Stenhouse, published an opinion piece representing many of the arguments put forth in the coalition letter, along with a link to the letter.
Have Teacher Unions in Rhode Island Been Unlawfully Collecting Dues for Years?
/in Blog, Featured, Labor, MyPayMySayRI, Recent Posts, Studies and Reports/by RI Center for FreedomGovernment officials take an oath of office to preserve the constitutional rights of their constituents. However, in Rhode Island, school board officials who approved agreements with special-interest public employee unions have effectively hidden those rights from their employees via unconstitutional collective bargaining provisions that are in direct defiance of the Supreme Court Of the United States (SCOTUS).
In 2018, the highest court in America ruled that public employees must retain power over their own paychecks. Yet, since then, many government unions in Rhode Island may have unlawfully collected dues from employees by propagating misleading language that overtly shields them from knowledge of their rights.
The landmark June 2018 US Supreme Court decision in the Janus v AFSCME case opened the door to worker freedom in America. But some of the old political machines were taken aback, especially government employee unions at the state and local level. SCOTUS ruled that no longer could a public employee be mandated to pay union “dues”, “Association fees”, “agency fees”, or “shop fees” as a condition of their employment.
Under the weight of this ruling, most public employee unions across the country, reluctantly realizing the great financial and legal risk of non-compliance, immediately amended their policies and subsequent contract agreements to comply with the new law … such that any dues payments could only be collected once the employee affirmatively provided clear authorization … but not so for many unions in Rhode Island.
According to the Mackinac Center in Michigan, one of nation’s top legal and public policy experts when it comes to government unions, Rhode Island’s rate of non-compliance with the Janus ruling looks to be among the highest in the country. The extent to which blatantly anti-Janus-constitutional provisions still exist in many teacher union Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) is alarming.
An initial review of about three dozen collective bargaining agreements with local school districts in Rhode Island reveals an alarming number – eleven (more than 1 in 4) – that were signed or put into effect after the Janus ruling, contained dues or fees mandate provisions that clearly defy the Supreme Court’s ruling … provisions that are legally unenforceable.
Types of language clearly violating the Janus Supreme Court ruling that were found in the eleven Rhode Island CBAs with local chapters of the NEA, AFT, AFL-CIO, and AFSCME … unlawful provisions that remained in effect for years after 2018 … can be summarized as including passages that:
The table below summarizes the unlawful language of offending school districts (supporting details appear as an Appendix at the end of this report:)
As an example of what a properly worded CBA should look like, post-Janus, we look to provisions in the agreement between the Glocester K-5 school district and the Glocester Teachers’ Association for the time period July 2019 to June 2022:
The Glocester school district maintained the above Articles 20 and 21, post-Janus, but appropriately REMOVED the following provision that appeared in the district’s pre-Janus CBA:
As national examples of how post-Janus federal court cases compelled government unions to appropriately modify their dues/fees collection policies, what follows is language from two related US Third Circuit cases:
LaSpina v. SEIU Pennsylvania State Council, 985 F.3d 278, 282 (3rd Cir. 2021). After the Supreme Court decided Janus, the Union abandoned its agency-fee setup. The day the Court issued its decision, Steve Catanese, president of SEIU Local 668, wrote to Jack Finnerty of the Scranton Public Library “that the Supreme Court has ruled in Janus” and has “held public-sector employers may no longer deduct agency fees from non-consenting employees.” Supp. App. 69. Catanese’s letter instructed Finnerty to, “effective immediately, please discontinue fair-share fee deductions.” Id. (emphasis in original).
“Therefore, under Janus I, Pennsylvania’s public sector agency shop law was no longer constitutional.” Diamond v. Pennsylvania Educ. Ass’n, 972 F.3d 262, 268 (3rd Cir. 2020). Circuit law directly on point.
Other Supreme Court precedent illustrates what must be done to demonstrate employee consent. The Court has ruled that, to demonstrate consent to a waiver of constitutional rights, there must be evidence that the waiver is a “knowing, intelligent act … done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences.” Brady v United States, 397 U.S. 742, 748 (1970). “It must also be done with “a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it.” Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 421,421 (1986) …
Per the SCOTUS ruling, before employees can consent to financially supporting a public sector union, they must know both what their rights are and the consequences of waiving those rights.
Yet, not every school district in Rhode Island was as careful to follow the law as was Glocester, as many districts continued to allow overtly unconstitutional language to remain in their post-Janus CBAs, without providing employees with the required notification of their rights.
One of the most blatant examples of such an unconstitutional provision appears in the September 2018 Westerly Teachers’ Association CBA:
How did this happen? Elected school committee members were either complicit with teacher unions in allowing such “unlawful” language to remain, or they were unwitting victims of malfeasance or ill-advice by their school committee solicitors, who are highly paid to provide accurate legal guidance.
The fact is, that for over three years, many teachers and other school district staff in Rhode Island may have been fraudulently deceived into paying union dues or association fees because of the unconstitutional language in their respective CBAs. These employees likely had dues automatically deducted from their paychecks without ever understanding that their First Amendment rights – that they could not be forced to pay part of their paycheck to their union – had been restored in 2018.
Indeed, as compared with opt-out rates nationally, Rhode Island teachers and other public employees are choosing to “opt-out” of paying union dues at rates far lower than their counterparts in other states. While states like California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Massachusetts are seeing more than 15% of workers opt out of paying money to their unions, we estimate that less than 5% of Rhode Island union members have opted out. Now, we may know why.
In the majority Supreme Court decision in 2018, Justice Alito was noted that billions of dollars were likely collected by government unions nationwide in recent decades. Much of this money came from employees who never wanted to pay union dues in the first place but were forced to, because of prior legal precedent.
However, over the past three and a half years, Rhode Island unions may have similarly, yet unlawfully, collected millions of dollars in dues from employees who may have chosen to opt-out … had they not been deceived by clearly unconstitutional language.
Obvious questions must be asked, including:
Why in some cases, does the AFSCME CBA have proper language regarding dues and fees, while the teacher contract over the same period in the same school district has unconstitutional language?
The main question this report raises … is whether or not certain public teacher unions in Rhode Island conspired to illicitly collect union dues from unwitting teachers and staff?
This is not the first time that a government entity in Rhode Island has exhibited such blatant defiance of the US Supreme Court’s Janus decision. In 2018, our Center’s MyPayMySayRI.com campaign triggered a public letter of warning from then Attorney General Peter Kilmartin, after our outreach initiative sought to educate government workers about their restored Janus rights. The letter from Rhode Island’s highest law enforcement official contained numerous unsubstantiated, unspecified, and false assertions of “misinformation” being put forth by our RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity, such as the bogus claim that we were mis-informing public employees of their rights not to join or pay union dues or fees.
Then, as now, the pattern of government officials in Rhode Island conducting the bidding of public sector unions – at both the state and local level – even to the extent of seeking to obfuscate the constitutional rights of its members … runs directly contrary to the public oaths they took upon entering office.
A review of non-school district CBAs will soon be conducted by the Center.
The following Appendix lists images the actual passages from post-Janus teacher-union CBAs in Rhode Island that contain language that does not comply with the US Supreme Court’s Janus ruling.
APPENDIX
Rhode Island School Districts with Unconstitutional Collective Bargaining Provisions
Burrillville: NEA Contract Period: September 2021-2024
Page-40: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=YnNkLXJpLm5ldHxob21lfGd4Ojc1NTMwZjU2M2U5MDhiMQ
Page-5: https://core-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/asset/uploaded_file/236104/CF_CBA_18-21_FINAL_FORM.pdf
Foster-Glocester: NEA Contract Period 2020-2023
Page-29: http://www.fg.k12.ri.us/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=9841126
Johnston: AFL-CIO Local 808 Contract period 2017-2020, extended in 2020 by the school district
Pages 4-5: https://www.johnstonschools.org/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=20171014
June 2020 Johnston School District Minutes
Lincoln: AFSCME Contract Period September 2018-2021
Page-4: https://www.lincolnps.org/cms/lib/RI50000681/Centricity/Domain/44/L2671-contract-2018-2021-02-07-19-FINAL.pdf
New Shoreham: AFSCME Contract Period 2019-2022
Page-2: https://4.files.edl.io/4ef8/11/15/19/153226-ac2437cb-2ef2-43d3-8fb7-ab0bbf4cb0cf.pdf
North Smithfield: NEA Contract Period 2021-24
Page-6: NSTA Collective Bargaining Agreement
Portsmouth: AFSCME Contract Period September 2018-2021
Page-2:
https://core-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/asset/uploaded_file/1355692/Council_94_Contract_7.1.18_-_7.30.21.pdf
Tiverton: NEA Contract Period; 2019 –
Page-9: http://www.tivertonschools.org/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=8558123
Westerly: NEA Contract Period September 2018-2021
Page-5: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V6e4ChNvhLkp6-Y0zqPUdieauxOzAMvm/view
West Warwick: AFT Contract Period September 2018-2023
Page-21: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NdyhtJYJb0SibVVm0BXmthzTkehxDtjU/view
MEDIA RELEASE: Ron St. Pierre Joins The Ocean State Current, New Brand Logo for In The Dugout
/in Recent Posts/by RI Center for FreedomRon St. Pierre Joins The Ocean State Current
New Executive Producer Role & Anchor of Election 2022 Debates
In The Dugout Logo Contest Winner Announced
Cranston, RI – The Ocean State Current announced today that Ron St. Pierre will join its staff and that it has selected a new brand logo for its In The Dugout video podcast.
The Ocean State Current is Rhode Island’s fastest growing all-digital news and information source. In promoting common sense policies and opinions as the media arm of the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity, The Current is quickly becoming the voice of parents and concerned citizens who seek improvement over the Ocean State’s failed status quo.
Along with its flagship video podcast, In The Dugout with Mike Stenhouse, The Current features video, text, and audio posts from citizen journalists and policy experts. An increasing lineup of content and new programming is expected in the near future, as Ron St. Pierre, popular on-air radio personality and former station president and general manager, will serve in the newly created position as Executive Producer for The Current, beginning March 1.
Beginning this week, St. Pierre will be joined by his longtime radio partner, Jen Brien, to co-host In The Dugout shows on Mondays, along with Mike Stenhouse. This special Monday podcast will soon launch a unique “talk video” format.
News & Views to Turn the Tide! The Current features a team of citizen journalists as well as prominent local and national personalities from across the political spectrum, who present a wide range of perspectives and common sense solutions … in text, audio, and video formats.
National contributors include: Stephen Moore, Chief Economist at the Heritage Foundation, Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform, Andy Bernstein, Ayn Rand expert and Objectivist, and Hans Von Spakovsky, elections expert at the Heritage Foundation.
In addition to dozens of mom and dad parental-rights advocates, local contributors include: Judge Robert Flanders, former Associate Justice of the RI Supreme Court, Stephen Laffey, former Cranston mayor and US Senatorial candidate, Anthony Giarrusso, former state Representative from East Greenwich, Tom Ward, founder of The Valley Breeze newspaper, Jen Brien, radio personality, and Tyler Rowley, religion & morality expert.
Election 2022. Ron St. Pierre will also anchor an Election 2022 debate series that will focus on upcoming state and local elections in Rhode Island. Also as part of St. Pierre’s role, The Current will also be developing premium content that will soon be available to monthly subscribers.
The Current also announces today that its new In The Dugout logo (below) was selected from a national logo contest among graphic artists and was the clear selection in a private survey. The new logo portrays both baseball and broadcast themes in a classic style, along with more contemporary elements. Stenhouse was a former Major League Baseball player in the 1980’s with the Boston Red Sox, Minnesota Twins, and Montreal Expos.
The In The Dugout podcasts, which normally air live Monday through Thursday from 4:00-5:00 PM EST, are reminiscent of some of Stenhouse’s favorite baseball memories when he and his teammates would engage in talk about all manner of issues while sitting in the dugout before or after a game. Stenhouse invites all of his guests to join him in donning a cap of their favorite team or organization.
Only on The Current. The Ocean State Current is rapidly becoming the trusted source for issues that are important to Rhode Island families … issues that the corporate media won’t cover or put forth with a false narrative. For those who are tired of the bias of the mainstream media, give The Current a look by browsing regularly at OceanStateCurrent.com
With one of the most technologically advanced websites in the industry, The Current offers text-to-audio translation for posts for easy mobile listening, automatically pulls content from select media partners, features an advanced and easy search capacity, and displays a unique Watch, Read, and Listen layout.
The Scientific Truth About Mask Mandates
/in Covid, Featured/by RI Center for FreedomFourteen Randomized, Controlled Trials of Community Masking, Published 2008 to 2021, Are Uniformly Negative, and Underscore the Punitive, Anti-Scientific Futility of Public Mask Mandates
By Dr. Andrew Bostom
Background
In August of 2021, the State of Rhode Island and the Rhode Island Department of Health implemented a school mask mandate which will extend at least into January of 2022. Subsequently, there has been much public debate and outcry about the wisdom and motives behind this heavy-handed policy, including a lawsuit brought by concerned parents.
In a November 2021 Superior Court ruling in the State of Rhode Island, presented with scientific evidence and after hearing testimony from parents, the trial judge found that the prolonged masking of children over the course of a school day caused “irreparable harm” for the children in the state who were forced to wear masks.1
Yet, despite overwhelming research against the , still, by early February of 2022, at the time of this post, Rhode Island’s school mask mandate was still in effect – even as, in recent weeks, Massachusetts, Virginia, Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, and Oregon announced they would be ending their mandates.
Worse, on February 8, House and Senate committees in the Rhode Island General Assembly advanced legislation that would allow school mask mandates to be remain in place through the end of March by extending the Governor’s emergency executive powers.
Back in August, the State cited vague guidance by the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as the basis for imposing this mandate, yet history and the most credible studies do not support a policy of universal masking within designated communities.
Between 2008-2020, thirteen negative randomized controlled trials (the gold-standard for studies of medical interventions) on masking were published.2-5 These studies conducted among ~18,000 persons, worldwide, all indicated that masking does not reduce community respiratory virus transmission.
Conversely, the most prominent study that the CDC cited to support its call for the continued masking of children aged 2 and older in school, was not a randomized, controlled trial, had serious design flaws, and may have included factitious data.6
Gold Standard Studies
In our era, randomized, controlled trials have shown, uniformly that face masks are not effective against respiratory virus outbreaks, or epidemics. But with the onset of the coronavirus pandemic and increasing political pressure, suddenly studies appeared claiming the opposite. In reality, none of these studies were of the gold standard caliber; instead a mixture of confounded observational data, unrealistic modelling and laboratory results, and possible fraud.
Taking a look at more credible ‘gold standard’ designs, ten negative studies, focusing primarily on influenza, 2008 to 2016, were “meta-analyzed” [their data “pooled”], confirming the individual negative results.3 Independently validating these pooled findings are the results from a single large randomized controlled trial of masking among another cohort of Hajj pilgrims whose enrollment [n=6338] equaled the sum enrollment of all the 10 studies in the May, 2020 “meta-analysis.” Published online in mid-October, 2020, this “cluster randomized” (i.e., by tent) controlled trial confirmed mask usage did not reduce the incidence of clinically defined, or laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, primarily influenza and/or rhinovirus. Indeed, there was a suggestion masking increased laboratory-confirmed infections by 40%, although this trend was not “statistically significant.”4
Subsequently, Danish investigators published the results during mid-November, 2020 of a randomized, controlled study conducted in 4862 persons which found that masking did not reduce SARS-CoV-2 (covid-19) infection rates to a statistically significant, or clinically relevant extent. Covid-19 infections (detected by laboratory testing or hospital diagnosis) occurred among 1.8% of those assigned masks, versus 2.1% in control participants. Moreover, a secondary analysis including only participants who reported wearing face masks “exactly as instructed,” revealed a further narrowing of this non-significant, clinically meaningless infection rate “difference” to 0.1%, i.e., 2.0% in mask wearers versus 2.1% in controls.5
Finally, a vast (n=342,000) Bangladesh randomized trial of community masking, reported 8/31/21 as preprint, found cloth masks did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections. Odd, contradictory findings were described regarding surgical masks: they conferred a minimal, clinically irrelevant overall absolute risk reduction of 0.09%, which was somehow selectively limited only to those over 50 years old.7 However, a re-analysis of the raw data using appropriate statistical methods, found no evidence of benefit of paper masks either, in any subgroup.8
In aggregate from 2008 through August 2021, these fourteen negative randomized controlled trials of community masking for the prevention of respiratory viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2,2-5,7,8 underscore the punitive, anti-scientific fecklessness of public mask mandates
Dr. Andrew Bostom, an adjunct scholar to the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity is an academic internist, clinical trialist, and epidemiologist. Dr, Bostom was academic faculty for 24-years at Brown University Medical School, and remains affiliated with the Brown University Center For Primary Care and Prevention of Kent-Memorial Hospital.
References
1) https://www.abc6.com/content/uploads/2021/11/h/b/PC-2021-5915-decision-mask-mandate.pdf
2) “Surgical Mask to Prevent Influenza Transmission in Households: A Cluster Randomized Trial.”
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0013998
3) “Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures” https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
4) “Facemask against viral respiratory infections among Hajj pilgrims: A challenging cluster randomized trial” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7553311/pdf/pone.0240287.pdf
5) “Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers”
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M20-6817
6) ““The CDC’s Flawed Case for Wearing Masks in School” https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/12/mask-guidelines-cdc-walensky/621035/
7) “The Impact of Community Masking on COVID-19: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in Bangladesh”
https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf
8) “A note on sampling biases in the Bangladesh mask trial.” https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.01296
Center’s Chairman Files Federal Lawsuit to Overturn State of RI Ban on Caring for His Patients
/in Blog, Featured, Recent Posts/by RI Center for FreedomDr. Skoly Files Federal Lawsuit
Complaint alleges that the State’s actions barring him from caring for his patients are unconstitutional, irrational, arbitrary, and vindictive
Cranston, RI – Dr. Stephen Skoly and his legal team today filed a lawsuit in federal court against defendants Governor Daniel McKee and Nicole Alexander-Scott, the outgoing Director of the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH), seeking an order to enjoin the State from barring him from caring for his patients as well as a restraining order that would immediately restore his right to continue his practice.
Dr. Skoly, Chairman of the RI Center for Freedom of Prosperity and a highly respected oral and maxillofacial surgeon who regularly provided service to those institutionalized by the State, was ordered by RIDOH on October 1, 2021 to cease providing his critical surgical care to patients, after his request for a medical exemption for the Covid-19 vaccine was denied.
The official complaint was prepared by attorney Brian Rosner, Senior Litigation Counsel for the nationally renowned and Washington, DC based New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) and was filed today in the United States District Court for Rhode Island by local attorney Gregory Piccirilli.
“After four months of being forced out of work, I still held out some hope that all mandates might come to an end in mid February. But now, with Rhode Island’s Speaker of the House and Senate President openly planning with Governor McKee to extend his executive orders and unilateral powers for at least another two months … I am left with no choice but to file this lawsuit,” exclaimed Skoly, who for 18 months of the pandemic safely cared for his patients.
At a special breaking news event, Rosner and Skoly will address the public and the media live today at 4:00 PM virtually on The Ocean State Current in a hybrid press-conference/interview format, hosted by the Center’s CEO, Mike Stenhouse.
The 34-page complaint puts forth two primary arguments for the Court to consider:
First, the complaint claims that Dr. Skoly’s “equal protection” and “due process” rights were violated, under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which states that no State shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” In Dr. Skoly’s case, the State of Rhode Island has awarded hundreds of related exemptions to various healthcare professionals, while simultaneously denying Dr. Skoly equal consideration and failing to provide the legal due process that he is entitled to.
Second, the complaint cites that it was an “irrational and arbitrary move” for RIDOH to deny Dr. Skoly’s valid request for a medical exemption. The complaint not only documents Dr. Skoly’s naturally acquired immunity and antibody testing, but also his personal medical history of suffering from Bell’s Palsy facial paralysis, a condition that has scientifically been demonstrated to be associated with the Covid-19 vaccine … and where at least fifteen such cases have been reported in Rhode Island. Risking re-activation of such paralysis in order to continue his medical practice is repeatedly cited in the complaint as an irrational demand by the State of Rhode Island, which has caused “hardship and suffering to hundreds of Rhode Islanders” who are denied care by Dr. Skoly.
In advancing its “equal protection” argument, the complaint discusses how N95 masking has essentially been designated by the State as an acceptable alternative to vaccination. Dr. Skoly, who has agreed to comply with required testing and masking protocols, presents no more risk to patients than the hundreds and thousands of other healthcare workers, vaccinated or not, infected or not, who are currently allowed to care for patients under those same protocols. The complaint continues that the State, in allowing masked and “infected” workers to retain their livelihoods, while barring (infection-free) Dr. Skoly from practicing his profession, is guilty of an “arbitrary and capricious distinction” that “denies Dr. Skoly the equal protection of the law” .. an “action that has the appearance of being vindictive.”
Sources have informed the Center that RIDOH staff have privately admitted that Dr. Skoly was being made an example of, in part, because of his association with “that conservative organization” … as Chairman of our RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity.
Supporting Dr. Skoly’s position, and included in the filing, are over a dozen affidavits from local medical professionals, including statements from multiple national experts on Bell’s Palsy and Covid-19, as well as citation of recent findings from the CDC and updated policies from other countries.
Also, to date, about 4000 emails have been delivered to state officials via an online petition whereby concerned citizens and can #StandWithDocSkoly . The petition, plus related documentation and links can be found on the Center’s website at RIFreedom.org/DocSkoly.
McKee Must Remake RI DOH in a New Image
/in Featured, Recent Posts/by RI Center for FreedomWhy Governor McKee Must Completely Remake RI DOH
With Someone Like Dr. Andrew Bostom, Who Got It Right All Along?
Cranston, RI – The departure of two top executives from the RI Department of Health (RI DOH), and with more resignations expected to follow, Governor Dan McKee should not seek to rebuild the failed health organization in the same image, according to the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity.
In a detailed opinion piece (Remake RI DOH) published over the weekend on The Ocean State Current, the Center’s CEO, Mike Stenhouse, chronicled the many failures and shortcomings of the RI DOH strategy from the very start of Covid-19; a politically-driven strategy that failed to take a comprehensive approach to managing the pandemic in the Ocean State.
As opposed to the status quo replacements that will likely be put forth, health professionals who continually got it wrong by denying the science, who instead succumbed to political and public pressure from the left, and who arbitrarily pushed for un-necessary lockdown measures, the Center recommends, conversely, that medical experts with a successful track record be newly installed at RI DOH.
Indeed, there have been few medical professionals who have dared to publicly challenge the government’s false narrative, who conducted their own independent thorough and open-minded research of the available Covid-19 studies and trials, and who demonstrated a proven track record of accurately interpreting the data and advocating for a more effective public policy strategy. It is this kind of health expert that should provide the foundation for the re-building of the new RI DOH.
Rhode Islanders would benefit greatly from someone like Dr. Andrew Bostom, a Brown University credentialed epidemiologist and adjunct scholar to the Center, who should be a central part of Rhode Island’s new health administration. Bostom, who gained statewide public trust and a large following from his weekly appearances on the popular internet show, In The Dugout with Mike Stenhouse; and who repeatedly and accurately foretold of issues related to various pandemic-related treatments and policies.
“Someone like Dr. Bostom, who often was many months ahead of the curve in boldly speaking out about what was allowed to be stated publicly and that we now know as fact; someone who continually and correctly analyzed emerging research data from across the globe; someone who was un-deterred by the cancel-culture that tried to silence him; someone with an appropriately open-minded and academic approach; and someone who ultimately was proven to be correct in virtually everything that he discussed on my show … that is the exact kind of someone who would bring a successful approach that is so obviously needed at the RI DOH,” advised Stenhouse.
The Center recognizes the enormous challenge that Covid-19 presented public health officials worldwide. This is why the RI DOH requires a new culture that will consider a comprehensive range of science-driven counter-measures for this and future public health challenges, as opposed to the narrow one-size-fits all approach that has dominated our state’s health department. Ocean Staters can enjoy far greater health and economic protections if the next administration at the RI DOH adopts a strategy that is on-mark, effective, and appropriate for a free society.
Ashish Jha’s Improper Comparison of Pediatric Polio and Covid-19 Vaccinations
/in Covid, Featured, Health Care/by RI Center for Freedomby Andrew Bostom, M.D., M.S., and Michelle Cretella, M.D.
Within 10 days of the 11/2/21 Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) interim recommendation for use of Pfizer’s covid-19 mRNA vaccine in children aged 5-11 years old, Dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, Dr. Ashish Jha claimed in an 11/11/21 Washington Post oped.
Hard data on childhood polio versus covid-19 disease severity, and direct juxtaposition of the polio and covid-19 vaccine trials, reveals a very different reality.
A 1957 JAMA publication analyzed polio mortality between 1915 and 1954 in U.S. children aged up to 14 years old, prior to mass polio vaccination efforts. Despite a steady decline due to the expanding development of natural immunity, the average polio death rate among these children, including the major outbreaks, was an alarming 5.7%. Rhode Island, through October 31st in 1953, alone, recorded 289 clinical pediatric polio cases, with 15 deaths, a 5.2% fatality rate.
These data stand in stark contrast to the near zero childhood covid-19 mortality, overall, and perhaps literally zero, among children free of chronic comorbidity. Rhode Island has had zero primary cause pediatric covid-19 deaths, and the American Academy of Pediatrics, per its recording system, maintains, “In states reporting, 0.00%-0.03% of all child COVID-19 cases resulted in death.” An elegant study from a national database in Germany reported concordant findings, noting,
Dr. Vinay Prasad’s pellucid commentary on the German analysis, referenced these additional salient data:
Juxtaposing the polio and covid-19 pediatric vaccine trials highlights consistent, equally glaring discordances.
The controlled (both placebo and observational controls) 1954 polio vaccine field trial recruited ~1.83 million total children, with ~1.35 million in the paralytic polio analysis. Pfizer’s Covid-19 mRNA vaccine randomized, controlled trial in 5 to 11 year-olds enrolled ~2300.
516 total cases of paralytic polio accumulated in the 1954 polio field trial, and vaccination reduced its incidence by 71.1% and 62.4%, relative to the placebo and observational-control groups, respectively. The Pfizer covid-19 vaccine randomized, placebo-controlled trial in 5 to 11 year-olds recorded zero cases of severe covid-19, despite recruiting ~20% with comorbidities. Covid-19 vaccination did reduce mildly symptomatic, covid-19 by “90.7%,” based on “3 cases in the BNT162b2 group and 16 cases in the placebo group (noting the 2:1 randomization of vaccine: placebo)”. Additionally, “No cases of COVID-19 were observed in either the vaccine group or the placebo group in participants with evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
In summary, the 1954 polio vaccine trial for an order of magnitude more lethal, and crippling childhood disease than covid-19, assessed ~650-fold the number of children evaluated in Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine trial. Polio vaccination in the 1954 trial prevented 374 cases of paralytic polio. Covid-19 vaccination in Pfizer’s trial prevented 13 cases equivalent to self-limited colds. Moreover, notwithstanding overwrought concerns about pediatric “long covid,” a December, 2021 Pediatric Infectious Diseases Journal review of 14 studies of this ostensible syndrome, concluded,
Dr. Jha’s comparison equating pediatric polio and covid-19 vaccination does not pass muster. Informed, dissenting medical opinions leery of mass, indiscriminate childhood covid-19 vaccination campaigns, should not be vilified.
Andrew Bostom, M.D. MS, is an adjunct scholar to the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity. He is an academic clinical trialist and epidemiologist, who is currently a Research Physician at the Brown University Center For Primary Care and Prevention of Kent-Memorial Hospital in Rhode Island.
Michelle Cretella, M.D., is Executive Director of the American College of Pediatricians. She is a Rhode Islander who practiced pediatrics with a special interest in behavioral health for 15 years.
DLT Joins RI DOH in Persecution of Doc Skoly
/in Blog, Recent Posts/by RI Center for FreedomDLT Denies Unemployment Benefits Under Pressure from DOH
Governor and General Assembly Silent as Targeted Abuse Continues
Cranston, RI – In a shocking example of coordinated government abuse, the Rhode Island Department of Labor & Training (DLT) has apparently caved under pressure from the Department of Health (DOH) to deny benefits to Dr. Stephen Skoly, after the latter issued a compliance order that banned the longtime surgeon from providing critical care to his private and wards-of-the state patients, effectively shutting down his practice.
The RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity has obtained copies of notices from DLT to Dr. Skoly, citing “Voluntary Quit” and “potentially fraudulent activity” as reasons why his claims for unemployment benefits were “disqualified” … even though another government agency was directly responsible for Skoly’s unemployment status.
It was initially communicated by a DLT official that Skoly’s original benefit denial was in error … and would soon be remedied. However, it appears RI DOH has since over-ruled the DLT, as part of its effort to destroy Dr. Skoly for daring to exercise his first-amendment rights.
“I have always put the safety of my patients as my number one priority. But this act of government totalitarianism clearly indicates that public health is not the DOH’s top priority. In targeting me for punishment, these vengeful acts demonstrate that this is all about politics” exclaimed Skoly, the Center’s Chairman, who for decades was the sole contractor to the RI DOH to provide his specialty care. Dr. Skoly has not been allowed to care for his patients for two months and was forced to lay-off his 12 person staff, who are now collecting unemployment payments at taxpayer expense. “My attorneys are right now preparing my legal challenge.”
Dr. Skoly’s plight will be discussed in detail by Mike Stenhouse and co-host Steve Laffey today at 4:00 PM EST on the popular In The Dugout show at OceanStateCurrent.com/LIVE .
Even worse, even though Skoly has been paying into the state’s unemployment fund for decades for himself and his staff, DLT has also denied benefits to laid-off employees of Dr. Skoly’s practice.
“Outrageous; this is an obvious and corrupt conspiracy. I have learned through my sources that government officials are making an example of Dr. Skoly because of his affiliation with our Center,” said Mike Stenhouse, CEO. “It should be of grave concern to every Ocean Stater that unelected bureaucrats like Nicole Alexander-Scott can wield such vengeful and absolute power … while feckless elected officials like Governor McKee and Speaker Shekarchi just stand back and let it all be. We have truly reached crisis levels of unchecked bureaucratic tyranny.”
This is not the first time unelected and unaccountable ideologues at DOH have maliciously exerted their power over other branches of government. Shortly after DOH issued its October 1 compliance order against him, and with it becoming increasingly obvious that wards of the state were suffering because they could not receive his care, Dr. Skoly received word that Governor McKee might consider offering him a special-circumstance extension. However, in subsequent negotiations, Alexander-Scott’s staff refused to acknowledge the Governor’s offer, which was immediately pulled from the table.
Initially, after issuing its compliance order against Dr. Skoly, the RIDOH also refused to comply with the prescribed regulatory process or provide any formal hearing, as required, to consider Skoly’s unique medical exemption claim, which includes high levels of naturally acquired immunity against the Covid-19 virus.
As an oral and maxillo-facial surgeon, Dr. Skoly’s practice should be regulated by the state’s Board of Examiners in Dentistry, a legitimate and long-standing regulatory review process. However, RI DOH … recognizing the great respect Dr. Skoly has rightfully earned from this board’s members after decades of stellar service as a contractor to the State and as service provider to private patients … instead bypassed that longstanding process and arranged a sham ‘administrative’ hearing earlier this month to uphold its unlawful compliance order.
Then, in early November, the RI DOH openly defied Governor McKee … after he granted extensions to workers at two hospitals regarding their compliance with Rhode Island’s healthcare worker vaccine mandate … when it slapped violation notices on the Landmark Medical Center and the state-operated Eleanor Slater Hospital as a precursor to eventual fines and patient care restrictions.
Dr. Skoly, an oral and maxillo-facial surgeon, questions why the RIDOH refuses to recognize his naturally acquired immunity to Covid19 (and other healthcare workers’) as a legitimate medical exemption. In late September, he made public his decision to not comply with the state’s October 1 vaccination mandate for healthcare workers, a decision he based on his personal and rare medical history as well as his principled belief in individual liberty.
As the over-whelming body of scientific evidence supports Dr. Skoly’s position, the Center has for months publicly called for the DOH to include natural immunity as an allowed exemption for any Covid-19 vaccine mandate.
While the Center opposes government-imposed mask and vaccine mandates, the data clearly demonstrates that “natural immunity” is an important policy consideration; and that the existing RI DOH healthcare worker vaccine mandate, for as long as it is allowed to legally stand, must be immediately modified (as the science overwhelmingly suggests) to include “natural immunity” as an approved case for exemption.
Earlier this fall, based on analysis of state and international research data, as performed by Dr. Andrew Bostom, in support of a conclusion that has been publicly advanced by a growing host of nationally prominent immunologists, the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity (Center) called on the Rhode Island Department of Health to include “natural immunity” as an allowed “contraindication to vaccination” on the official RI DOH medical exemption form.
In the Center’s policy brief published by Dr. Bostom, an adjunct medical scholar to the Center and a Brown University credentialed epidemiologist, when assessing the benefits and risks of natural immunity to Covid-19 as compared with immunity from the vaccine, Bostom joins an increasing number of medical professionals and institutions in concluding that the body’s natural immune system provides a more robust and longer lasting protection against Covid-19 than do the currently offered vaccines.
To date, about 4000 emails have been delivered to state officials via an online petition whereby concerned citizens and can #StandWithDocSkoly . The petition, plus related documentation and links can be found on the Center’s website at RIFreedom.org/DocSkoly.
RI Must Throw In The Towel after MA Governor Baker Rejects the TCI Gas Tax
/in Featured, Recent Posts, TCI Tax/by Mike StenhouseTime for RI Governor & Speaker to Admit Defeat
Governor Baker’s Departure from TCI Dooms the Regional Compact
Providence, RI – On Thursday, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker followed the surrender to reality by Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont earlier this week by publicly divorcing themselves from the Transportation & Climate Initiative (TCI) gas tax. The rejection of TCI by the powerful two New England Governors leaves Rhode Island as the only state among the original 14 states that is still considering imposing a crushing fuel tax on motorists.
Despite the rejection by Baker, a founding member and primary driver of this plan to systematically restrict the supply of gasoline, Ocean State Governor Dan McKee and Speaker of the House Joseph Shekarchi are still on record as supporting the TCI gasoline cap-and-trade scheme.
“It’s time for the Governor and Speaker to throw in the towel and admit defeat. In no reality-based scenario could any politician support a unilateral major gas tax hike in the coming election year, especially given the historically high gas prices that we are already seeing due to misguided energy policies advanced by climate alarmists,” suggested Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity. “The defeat of TCI is a tremendous victory for the 14-state #NoTCItax coalition we are part of, which has been fighting against this job-killing initiative for many years.”
Motorists are encourage to take action and to say no the the TCI Gas Tax here.
Such a highly highly regressive gas tax, and the projected $1200 per family cost, according to research and a poll conducted by the Center, are highly unpopular among the public. A petition opposing TCI has already generated over 14,500 emails to state lawmakers.
This past March, the Center unilaterally called on McKee to withdraw from TCI. The state Senate passed enabling legislation last spring, but the House did not take up the measure. A May open letter to the Governor by the Center, listing 12 coalition signatories and a range of reasons not to join the TCI compact, can be found on the Center’s website, here.
General Assembly to Blame for Children Suffering Irreparable Harm?
/in Blog, Featured, Recent Posts/by RI Center for FreedomSouthwell v. McKee Court Ruling Puts Onus on Lawmakers
While Children Suffer, General Assembly Does Nothing
Parents Demand House Speaker & Senate President Engage
Cranston, RI – “The court finds children are suffering … irreparable harm … physical and emotional … with potential long-term medical problems … with the mask mandate.”
These were just some of the chilling findings by Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Lanphear in his ruling this past Friday, even though he denied the parent-plaintiffs the temporary restraining order they sought to end school mask mandates in their Southwell v. McKee lawsuit.
Yet for the entirety of the pandemic, General Assembly leaders have been AWOL, allowing this harm to children, as well as considerable other economic and constitutional harms, to continue unchecked and in the shadows.
In speaking for the 34 plaintiff parents, and for all concerned parents, lead plaintiff, Richard Southwell, said, “As does every parent in this state, we are concerned with the well-being of our children. We strongly disagree with the judge’s opinion that the State’s claimed risks associated with spread among unmasked children in any way outweigh the problems our children are actually suffering. The public needs to hear what we heard in court,” continued Southwell, who, along with other parents, will be guests of Mike Stenhouse on his popular In The Dugout show at 4:00 pm today at OceanStateCurrent.com/LIVE .
In ruling against the plaintiffs, the judge essentially ruled that it is not within the purview of the court to over-rule a “political” policy that does not clearly violate a constitutional right. Such a decision, the judge wrote, is a “question left to the legislative and executive branches of government.”
“In light of these deeply troubling findings, the General Assembly no longer has the luxury of watching from the sidelines. Your direct and immediate action on this issue is required. There can be no delays. There can be no more excuses,” pleaded Southwell.
For 18 months, the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity has called on the General Assembly to come out from hiding and restore more balanced governance and transparent debate during the pandemic.
In August, 32 legislators, likewise concerned, signed a letter to the Governor calling for an end to the mask mandate, while threatening legislative action if he did not, a power statutorily granted to the General Assembly. However, legislative leaders quickly shut down any follow-up mutiny and continued to refuse to show any leadership on behalf of the public they serve.
With these stunning findings of pediatric harm confirmed by the court, the suffering of Ocean State students must be addressed forthright: The Center calls upon General Assembly leaders to immediately convene hearings to determine if school mask mandates and other ’emergency executive orders’ should be contravened by concurrent resolution.
“Who is really running this state? Elected officials – the Governor, Senators, and Representatives … or unelected ideologues at the RI Department of Health,” cynically asked Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center. “Through their inaction, Speaker of the House Shekarchi and Senate President Ruggerio obviously do not want the responsibility of governing over pandemic related policies … but the judge was right, this is their job … and it’s high time they show some courage and get to work for the people. It is their duty to hold public hearings whereby all of the facts and issues can be openly debated. For too long, the Governor and RIDOH have ruled unchecked and without necessary public scrutiny.”
Earlier this morning in an email, Southwell invited Shekarchi and Ruggerio to meet with his parent group Wednesday evening, however, thus far, there has been no response.
Decisive evidence presented during the October trial, as well as the overwhelming body of national and international research, clearly show that there is no medical justification for masking children over prolonged periods of time. The Center maintains that this important information must be presented, debated, and assessed transparently in a public hearing that only the General Assembly can credibly hold.