R.I. ethics oversight debate resumes

R.I. ethics oversight debate resumes

01:00 AM EDT on Wednesday, March 24, 2010

By Katherine Gregg

Journal State House Bureau

PROVIDENCE — The governor, lieutenant governor and secretary of state have all sent letters urging the House Judiciary Committee to let voters decide, in November, whether they want to exempt state legislators from the Ethics Commission scrutiny that applies to every other public official in Rhode Island, from councilmen to cemetery commissioners.

In her letter, Lt. Gov. Elizabeth H. Roberts called ethics legislation introduced by new House Speaker Gordon D. Fox early in this year’s legislative session essential to restoring “the public’s faith and trust in government.”

State Treasurer Frank Caprio came to Tuesday night’s Judiciary Committee hearing on the bill in person to urge lawmakers to plug the so-called “Irons loophole” created by a dome-rattling Rhode Island Supreme Court decision last June.

The focus of their remarks was the Fox-sponsored bill to let voters amend the state Constitution, in November, to restore the Ethics Commission’s jurisdiction over the 113 General Assembly members.

But one after another, the lawmakers themselves raised concerns about having an “unelected body” looking over their shoulders.

“I’ve been here a year and a half now,” said freshman Rep. Scott Pollard, D-Foster. “There aren’t any corrupt people in the building … you smile, but I know them and you don’t, OK?

“And if you do know them to be corrupt then I suggest that you call the attorney general’s office and seek [to have] them prosecuted because the people who serve, at least in my chamber, are good and honorable people.

“And this steals away the vote and the expertise that people bring to the room,” Pollard told spokesmen for the Rhode Island Tea Party and the citizens’ advocacy group Operation Clean Government, who had come to the State House to lobby for the bill.

Steven Brown, executive director of the Rhode Island Affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, also voiced concerns about giving the Ethics Commission “virtually limitless authority to decide what constitutes a ‘conflict of interest’ or ethical misconduct when it comes to both legislators’ votes and their participation in the legislative process.”

As an example, he cited Republican Governor Carcieri’s effort four years ago to make “it illegal for a lawyer-legislator who performs criminal defense work to vote on just about any criminal justice legislation. … In practical terms, legislators could be barred from discussing or debating any of the issues about which they have the most expertise.”

Fox’s legislation was prompted by a June decision by the Rhode Island Supreme Court that dismissed ethics charges pending against former Senate President William V. Irons based on a novel reading of the state’s “speech in debate clause.”

Irons had been accused of using his public office to obtain financial gain for pharmacy giant CVS — a “business associate” — while collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars in insurance commissions from Blue Cross on a health-insurance policy for CVS employees in Rhode Island.

Irons’ lawyer argued — and the Supreme Court agreed — that the “speech in debate clause” insulates lawmakers from Ethics Commission scrutiny for any “core legislative act,” including “proposing, passing, or voting upon a particular piece of legislation.”

No vote was taken Tuesday on the fix-it legislation crafted by the citizens advocacy group Common Cause that Fox introduced on Feb. 4. Asked why he did not seek a vote, Fox said, through a spokesman: “I want to make sure that the language is correct before we ask voters to consider a Constitutional amendment. I want to review the testimony that will be offered tonight, both pro and con, and make sure we get it right.”

But some version of the ethics legislation appears headed for passage after more than a year in which the Ethics Commission has told lawmakers it can no longer give them even advisory opinions.

Most recently, Fox’s newly appointed House Labor Committee chairwoman Anastasia Williams asked the panel if her membership on the executive committee of the AFL-CIO and her chairmanship of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement posed a conflict.

On March 5, the Ethics Commission’s executive director Kent A. Willever wrote back: “Absent a Constitutional amendment to clarify the original intent of the 1986 Ethics Amendment, the Ethics Commission is without apparent authority to respond to your request for independent advice.”

Speaking for Common Cause, lawyer and onetime congressional candidate Kevin McAllister said the proposal is not aimed at giving the nine Ethics Commission members any more power than they “exercised from the period of 1986 to 2008.”

RI lawmakers debate giving ethics panel more power

By Eric Tucker Associated Press Writer / March 23, 2010

PROVIDENCE, R.I.—Rhode Island's Constitution should be amended to allow the Ethics Commission to prosecute lawmakers for their votes, elected officials and advocates for good government testified on Tuesday.

A resolution introduced by House Speaker Gordon Fox would authorize a constitutional amendment to strengthen the quasi-judicial ethics panel so that lawmakers could be prosecuted for their votes and other legislative acts. The amendment would be decided by voters in a ballot question and, if approved, take effect next January.

The House Judiciary Committee heard testimony on the resolution on Tuesday.

The state Supreme Court -- in a decision upholding the dismissal of an ethics complaint against former Senate President William Irons -- last year shielded lawmakers from being prosecuted when they propose, debate and vote on bills or otherwise do their legislative jobs. The opinion relied on a constitutional provision known as "speech in debate," which reads: "For any speech in debate in either house, no member shall be questioned in any other place."

The resolution proposes adding the words, "except by the ethics commission," to the provision.

Critics say the Supreme Court's ruling weakened the commission's ability to police legislative misconduct and to target lawmakers who illicitly vote to advance their own interests or those of a business client.

"There is a loophole that has been exploited and that should not be allowed to stand," General Treasurer Frank Caprio, a Democratic candidate for governor, told the committee.

Other elected officials, including Lieutenant Governor Elizabeth Roberts and Secretary of State A. Ralph Mollis, released letters in support of restoring the commission's power.

But some lawmakers said they were concerned the amendment would give too much power to the Ethics Commission, an unelected, appointed body with power to prosecute public officials and hold trial-like hearings over alleged ethics violations.

"If a representative does something wrong, the strongest power against him is the ballot box," said Rep. Scott Pollard, a Coventry Democrat. "To turn over authority of your building to an unelected body that probably 98 percent of the public doesn't know by name, doesn't know by face -- I think it's a dangerous concept."

That criticism was echoed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which said the proposed amendment was too broad.

"It affects speech, it affects debate," said Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU state affiliate. "It is not just the vote."

The Ethics Commission emerged from a 1986 constitutional convention and was an effort to tighten ethics oversight of elected officials. Lawyers for the commission and other supporters say they believe the amendment that created the panel created a narrow exception to the "speech in debate" clause by making all state lawmakers subject to the ethics code.

"If the intention of creating the Ethics Commission was to govern the ethics of all public officials, then certainly the legislature's a significant chunk of all public officials in this state," John Marion, executive director of Common Cause of Rhode Island, said in an interview before Tuesday's hearing.

The commission still has oversight of wrongdoing, like nepotism and financial disclosure violations. But leaving it unable to prosecute public officials for votes could have hampered some of its highest-profile cases, like the one against former Sen. John Celona, who in 2006 was fined a record $130,000 after admitting to ethics violations that partially involved his votes.

Poltical Scene: Ethics debate

Political Scene:

07:18 AM EDT on Monday, March 15, 2010

By Katherine Gregg and Randal edgar

Journal State House Bureau

Ethics debate

Are Rhode Island’s lawmakers capable of policing themselves in the absence of oversight by the state Ethics Commission?

Sen. Frank A. Ciccone III, vice chairman of the Senate Committee on Government Oversight, thinks they are.

The Providence Democrat has sponsored two bills that would spell out conflicts of interest and improper use of office and give the Senate Rules Committee the power to “investigate and make recommendations” on possible violations that are outside the purview of the Ethics Commission.

Ciccone says the bills would allow senators to “police ourselves until such as time as the Ethics Commission can.” But they drew opposition at a Rules Committee hearing last week.

Robert Benson of Operation Clean Government said, “Ethics oversight of a body by a body doesn’t work.”

John Marion, executive director of Common Cause, questioned how “the Senate could go about doing this in an evenhanded manner” without an independent body handling the investigations.

The debate stems from a June decision by the Rhode Island Supreme Court that effectively removed Rhode Island lawmakers from Ethics Commission scrutiny.

In a case involving former Senate President William V. Irons, the court said the “speech-in-debate” clause in the state Constitution gives legislators immunity from prosecution by the Ethics Commission for “core legislative functions” such as voting and speaking.

Rules Committee members voted to hold Ciccone’s bills for further study, meaning they are going nowhere unless Ciccone asks for further consideration, said committee Chairman John Maselli, D-Johnston.

Maselli said the next step is to see what happens with a bill sponsored by Sen. J. Michael Lenihan, D-East Greenwich, that would give voters a chance to close the hole in state ethics law. House Speaker Fox has introduced a similar bill.

Maselli said it seems likely that if the change goes to voters they would approve it. But that still leaves the question of whether something should be done in the short term.

“We have a whole legislative session that’s going to go by,” he said.

RIP to Granny D. (1910-2010), long-time advocate of campaign finance reform and relative of Common Cause Rhode Island Governing Board member Tory M.

Why the Senate shouldn't regulate its own ethics

by John Marion and Larry Valencia

Mar 02, 2010

There is a plan that has been introduced to the Rules Committee of the Rhode Island Senate that would allow that body to police its own ethics. Our groups, Common Cause Rhode Island and Operation Clean Government, will oppose that measure, and we’d like to take this opportunity to explain why.

This effort began with the Rhode Island Supreme Court’s decision in June of 2009 in the case of William V. Irons vs. The Rhode Island Ethics Commission. In that decision, the Court majority found that members of the Rhode Island General Assembly are immune from prosecution by the Rhode Island Ethics Commission for any “core legislative act.” The reasoning for their opinion rests on the idea that when the voters approved a constitutional amendment in 1986 creating the Ethics Commission, they did not simultaneously repeal the “speech in debate clause” of the Constitution that protects legislators from prosecution for these “core legislative acts.” Surely when the voters overwhelmingly passed that amendment that read in part “all public officials shall be subject to the code of ethics” they meant to include the General Assembly. While we side with the dissenting justice, Chief Justice Suttell, we have to recognize the import of the Court’s ruling: members of the General Assembly are not subject to the Code of Ethics when they are engaged in their core legislative functions. We need to remedy this, once and for all.

Immediately our groups mobilized to push for a constitutional amendment for the 2010 ballot that would allow the voters to correct what we feel was an oversight in the 1986 Ethics Amendment. Our proposed amendment would return the Ethics Commission to the status quo that existed between 1986 and 2008. That resolution is now before the General Assembly, and we hope they will pass it and let the voters decide.

In the meantime, the Rhode Island Senate appears poised to adopt a plan to avoid coming under the jurisdiction of the Ethics Commission by allowing the Senate Rules Committee (chaired by Senator Christopher Maselli of Johnston) to decide whether members of the Senate have violated the Code of Ethics. This would be done under the auspices of the discipline clause (Article VI Section 7) of the Rhode Island Constitution that allows each chamber to determine how to punish its own members. In the history of the Rhode Island General Assembly, this would be the first attempt to create such a structure.

Why do we feel this is a bad idea? To answer that question we think it is important to go back to the creation of the Ethics Commission in 1986. The Ethics Commission is one of only two bodies, besides the legislature itself, enumerated in the Rhode Island Constitution. Article III where the Commission resides in our Constitution, reads in part (from Section 7), “The people of the state of Rhode Island believe that public officials and employees must adhere to the highest standards of ethical conduct..” It goes on to say in Section 8, “The general assembly shall establish an independent non-partisan ethics commission … All elected and appointed officials and employees of state and local government … shall be subject to the code of ethics.”

This language that was passed overwhelmingly by the voters of the state calls for an independent body to enforce ethics for all public officials. The Senate proposal calls for internal oversight. This is a concept fraught with complications. How are members of the Rhode Island Senate expected to judge their peers? The term “peer pressure” exists for a reason. All legislatures are governed by rules that require comity in order to perform their business. That is why every day the Senate hears bills on a consent calendar. All members must consent to doing that day’s business. Independent ethics oversight is designed to prevent that comity from interfering with the enforcement of the Code of Ethics.

And what if a member of the leadership is accused of violating the Code of Ethics? Would a member of the rank and file, who owes their place on a committee, or their legislative grant, to the leadership be willing to find the a member of the leadership guilty of violating the Code? Would the minority party find it a useful tactic to file endless ethics complaints to sully the reputation of the majority? There are a seemingly endless number of complications with putting real ethics oversight inside the institution.

A second good reason the Senate should not adopt this role is because it duplicates what already exists in the Ethics Commission. The Ethics Commission has a staff of 12, including three full time investigators, and five attorneys. Their annual budget appropriation is over $1 million. Does the Senate intend to hire professional investigators and attorneys who don’t owe their jobs to the very Senators they’re charged with investigating and prosecuting?

While the Rhode Island Senate may feel it is the prerogative of the body to police itself, we believe there are a whole host of reasons why this is inferior to the system that was in place for 22 years in the State of Rhode Island. All our groups are asking is that the people of the state be allowed to determine what they meant by “all public officials” back in 1986.

John Marion is the executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island, and Larry Valencia is the president of Operation Clean Government.

Political Scene: With Fox in power, the shuffle of chairmanships begins

By Steve Peoples, Randal Edgar and Katherine Gregg

Journal State House Bureau

Rep. Anastasia P. Williams offered an eloquent endorsement of Gordon Fox to the House chamber last week.

By the end of the night, Fox was the speaker and Williams had been named chairwoman of the House Committee on Labor.

A Providence Democrat, Williams later acknowledged that her philosophy differs substantially from the more conservative former chairman Arthur J. Corvese, D-North Providence.

She also acknowledged that she has been a longtime member of the executive committee of the Rhode Island AFL-CIO, the largest coalition of labor unions in the state.

Her page on the legislature’s Web site lists various associations and memberships, but excludes the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, for which she serves as the chairwoman.

We confirmed Williams’ unpaid service as an AFL-CIO board member in the organization’s most recent tax filing.

The House Labor Committee reviews legislation that affects workplace issues, including binding arbitration and the state’s minimum wage.

“I have no idea if it is a conflict,” Williams said of her AFL-CIO connection, adding that she would seek the guidance of the state Ethics Commission.

“If it is in any way shape a conflict, I will certainly remove myself [from the AFL-CIO board] immediately.”

Malik loses out

Rep. Jan Malik has been stripped of his role as chairman of the House Committee of Environment and Natural Resources, apparently for backing the losing candidate in the House speaker’s race.

Malik, a Warren Democrat and liquor store owner, held the chairmanship for more than two years. But he backed Rep. Gregory J. Schadone, the losing candidate in the speaker’s race, and even seconded his nomination on the House floor Thursday evening.

“I understand that this is how the political game is played,” Malik told Political Scene.

Still, he conceded that he’s not happy.

“He’s got his chance now. Prove me wrong,” he said of Fox. “Not putting stuff in for Common Cause and looking like a knight in shining armor for one day, and then all of the sudden he gets rid of people, not just me, who don’t support him. People are tired of that kind of leadership. Why should anyone up there get punished for voicing their opinion?”

While Fox repeatedly urged cooperation in his first speech to the House chamber as speaker, his spokesman Larry Berman later declined to respond to Malik’s criticism.

Malik’s replacement will be Rep. Arthur Handy, D-Cranston, who voted for Fox.

“I think that’s maybe why I was picked. But I had already decided to support Gordon before this was discussed with me. It wasn’t something I had to do on my end. It wasn’t a trade for me,” Handy said.

He continued: “Rep. Malik chose not to support Leader Fox, even after he knew what the conclusion was. ... It’s the way it’s always been done. In business, you certainly wouldn’t put somebody in charge of something you didn’t trust.”

Another Caprio

Also voting for Gordon Fox was the lawmaker who is the son of Providence Municipal Court Judge Frank Caprio and the younger brother of state Treasurer Frank Caprio.

State Rep. David Caprio, D-Narragansett, claims both those titles, and as of last week, he also has a new title.

Fox chose him to be chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, a post that had been held by fellow South County Democrat Donald Lally.

First elected to the House in a 1999 special election, David Caprio, 42, is a first-term member of the House Finance Committee and has also held seats on the House Corporations, Labor and Judiciary Committees.

He said he told Fox, who is currently the House majority leader, that he “would be happy to serve him in whatever capacity I could serve him best.”

While he works with his second-cousin Anthony Caprio out of the Caprio family law offices just beyond the arch at the gateway to Federal Hill, Caprio said he would actually describe himself as a sole practitioner with a general practice that includes a lot of family law.

Lally, who voted for Fox, also received a promotion of sorts, becoming the deputy majority whip.

Mayors’ PR

Mayors and town managers, not generally shy about communicating their feelings about the governor’s plan to cut local aid, have begun an organized effort to speak with a unified voice.

A group of about 15 mayors and managers has taken to issuing its own collective news releases, with the help of True North, a Providence-based communications firm led by longtime PR man Bill Fischer.

The mayors and managers –– from places ranging from Cumberland to Providence to Westerly –– have dubbed themselves the Coalition of Communities Improving Rhode Island.

While trying to absorb budget cuts, the local officials are willing to pay True North about $200 per press release, said Cumberland Mayor Daniel J. McKee, who stressed that the company is not being paid on a retainer basis but only for each job.

The most recent release, issued Feb. 3, highlighted a new report that calls for Rhode Island to adopt a school funding policy that is “child-centered, equitable and accountable.”

Trillo’s fame

State Rep. Joe Trillo has made national news.

Sort of.

The outspoken Warwick Republican was among a handful of conservatives interviewed for a special report that aired last week on Comedy Central’s “Daily Show” with Jon Stewart.

The segment was hardly complimentary of the Republican National Committee’s decision to host its winter meeting in Hawaii.

“This is not a vacation, this is a working meeting, it’s our working meeting, we’re here to do the business of the party,” RNC chairman Michael Steele says, wearing a Hawaiian shirt with a red lei around his neck.

Roughly two minutes into the segment, the Daily Show reporter is shown outside the Hawaiian hotel alongside a penguin. “This is a party with their finger on the pulse of Main Street,” he says.

It’s a few seconds later that Trillo appears on camera: “They’re out of touch, they’re totally out of touch,” Trillo says of Democrats.

Trillo, the Rhode Island Republican Party’s national committeeman, defended the location when contacted by Political Scene, saying the annual meetings are held in different spots each year — preferably in states with Republican governors.

Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle, a Republican, spoke at the recent event and “delivered an excellent talk,” said Trillo, who noted that the national Republican party held its Northeast regional meeting in Newport last fall.

Trillo said he paid all his expenses for the Hawaii meeting, including travel and accommodations.

“Not one penny did I spend of my campaign money or get money from the party,” he said.

GOP primaries

Members of the Republican party’s State Central Committee succeeded last week in keeping alive their goal of closing the party’s primaries, but should they be closed, it won’t happen this year, says party Chairman Giovanni Cicione.

True, Cicione allowed supporters of closed primaries to read a motion to that effect at last week’s central committee meeting, but he said the soonest the issue could be discussed would be at the next central committee meeting, in April. That would be too late to allow a rule change this year, he said.

Cicione, who faced a movement to oust him as party chairman over this very issue, said he does not oppose the change, per se, but does oppose the push to do it during an election year, when “individual candidates” can try to influence the decision.

“I don’t think it’s fair to candidates or people who are thinking of being candidates to change the rules at this late stage,” he said.

He pointed to a rules change during 2006 that allowed the party to support then U.S. Sen. Lincoln Chafee in his primary campaign against Cranston Mayor Stephen P. Laffey.

“It allowed a national committee to fund Chafee’s campaign prior to the primary, rather than allowing voters to decide who … to put up,” he said.

Laffey, viewed as a potential candidate for governor in 2010, is one of the Republicans who supports the move to close the primaries, which would block non-registered Republicans from voting.

Republican boost

The state Republican party is getting some much-needed help in paying its full-time staff of one.

State Central Committee members learned at last week’s meeting that the national Republican party has agreed to pay for a staff member in each of the 50 states.

The move comes at a good time for Rhode Island Republicans, who had about $2,000 in the bank as of Friday, said party Chairman Giovanni Cicione.

The low figure is not unusual, Cicione said.

“Our fundraising programs are probably not as consistent as the Democrats’ are,” he said.

The party does not plan to let its account go to zero. Cicione said a mailing that seeks donations is in the works.

Fox is House speaker

By Katherine Gregg and Steve Peoples

Journal State House Bureau

PROVIDENCE –– Gordon D. Fox became the state’s first black and openly gay House speaker after West Warwick Democrat William J. Murphy relinquished the helm on Thursday.

A lawyer, former nightclub owner and state lawmaker since 1993, Fox, 48, trounced his more conservative opponent Gregory Schadone, D-North Providence, on a 51-to-14 vote with another 5 votes going to the token candidacy of House Minority Leader Robert Watson, R-East Greenwich.

In his first speech as House speaker, Fox said “Change is absolutely necessary. We cannot continue [to conduct] business as usual. We must think anew and act anew.”

With the state facing a massive deficit and one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation, he promised his highest priorities would be to “get Rhode Islanders back to work,” by exploring tax credits for small businesses that create jobs. He pledged action on a “fair and equitable” education-funding formula this year.

“Bolstering our economy, creating jobs … and enacting a responsible and balanced budget will be our priorities for this session,” he said. But “we must be mindful that it is important to restore the public trust in this institution, and indeed, the public trust in their elected officials,” said Fox, urging quick action on legislation he introduced in recent days to “allow the voters to restore the authority and power of the Rhode Island Ethics Commission this November.”

As majority leader since 2003, Fox, D-Providence, was Murphy’s top deputy and chosen successor, and his election marked a victory over at least two competing Democrats in the House aligned with the party’s more-conservative flank.

Fox brushed aside criticism that he is too liberal, a charge leveled at him by Rep. Arthur Corvese, D-North Providence, in a letter explaining his reasons for resigning as chairman of the House Labor Committee.

“A Fox speakership will invariably include, but not be limited to, an increase in the state income tax, a lack of constitutionally sound state limitations on illegal immigration, an economic development policy overly influenced by environmental extremists, and of course ... gay marriage,” wrote Corvese, who has been replaced by Rep. Anastasia Williams, an unpaid member of the AFL-CIO board of directors. “I believe your philosophical stance on major issues is too far to the left for the good of the citizens of the State of Rhode Island.”

Fox refused to rule out tax increases. And he has been a passionate advocate for same-sex marriage, but said on Thursday: “It’s always a priority, but I wouldn’t call it a priority this year. I think this year’s going to be jobs and economic development.”

Fox’s partner of 12 years, Marcus LaFond, was at his side Thursday night at the State House, holding the Bible on which Fox placed his hand to take the oath of office. “When I get married, I would like to do it in my home state,” he once said.

Only the timing of Murphy’s resignation and Fox’s ascension was in doubt. Murphy served notice in late September that he might step aside as speaker before the year was out.

Unlike his own predecessor, John B. Harwood, Murphy leaves the top job untainted by scandal, insisting he never intended to remain as House speaker for more than eight years, has no new job lined up, and just wants to practice law and spend more time with his family.

But Murphy, who intends to remain in the House through this year’s session as a rank-and-file lawmaker, had the misfortune to preside during a time of huge upheaval that exacerbated the state’s growing budget crisis, and left him at the vortex of growing public anger at the state of Rhode Island’s economy, with one of the highest foreclosure and unemployment rates in the country.

In his last moments as speaker, Murphy rattled off a list of accomplishments, led by the fact that the legislature hasn’t raised broad-based sales or income taxes over the last eight years. “In this day and age, when we are getting criticized because of the national financial problem, which is also the state financial problem, I think all of you have something to go home and be proud of.”

Fox has been guarded about where he stands on some of the more volatile issues the 2010 legislature is likely to face, including a proposed referendum to turn the Twin River and Newport Grand slot parlors into full-scale casinos.

Though, at one point, he had to pay the state Ethics Commission a $10,000 fine stemming from his then-law firm’s work for GTECH, he won kudos from citizens-advocacy groups in recent weeks by introducing a bill to give voters a chance to place the legislature back under the jurisdiction of the state Ethics Commission after a late-June decision by the Supreme Court left the commission’s powers in question.

Fox becomes the 222nd House speaker since Rhode Island became a colony more than three centuries ago.

The last major changing of the guard at the State House — including the ascension of the Murphy-Fox team in 2002 — played out first in open caucuses of House and Senate Democrats.

Thursday’s vote for a new speaker was preceded by a closed-door caucus of House Democrats from which the media were barred. “It shouldn’t be like electing a pope where we wait to see the smoke coming out and what color it is,” said John Marion, executive director of the citizens-advocacy group Common Cause.

Fox is the son of an Irish father and a Cape Verdean mother, who grew up in the Mount Hope area that forms part of his East Side district. “I’m the first person of color to hold the office, first openly gay person to hold the office,” Fox said in an interview after he addressed the chamber. “I hope that somebody watching out there, listening to this, seeing me, can draw energy and strength from that. Some young person can say, you know what, that’s not now something I can’t aspire to, because someone else like me is there and has done it.”

Chimed Rep. Joseph Almeida, a former chairman of the Black and Latino Caucus said: “It’s great to know that Gordon will be taking over as speaker, not because he’s black, because he’s a qualified black man. It’ll be good for this state to finally move forward in the 21st century regarding leadership of color.”