My Rhode Island 2023 special election ballot
Vote in the Sept. 5th primary
I've always admired how blogger Scott Alexander publishes how he plans to vote before each election (see here, for example). I'd like to get in the habit of doing the same.
Just a reasonable (I hope!) person telling you how they decided who to vote for. There aren't enough resources out there to help people figure out who to vote for (especially for smaller races, which in my opinion are the most important!).
My state, Rhode Island, is having a special election this fall to send a new member to the US Congress, after David Cicilline resigned to run the Rhode Island Foundation.
(A couple rant-y side notes: 1. He's earning $650,000 a year to run a non-profit? That's got to be some kind of scam right? 2. A friend who's into politics pointed out it's a questionable move to resign in the middle of a two-year Congressional term. Now the state has to spend millions of dollars(?) to run a special election, when he could have just chosen not to run in 2022 or 2024 and it wouldn't cost the state anything extra. However, in a recent debate, none of the candidates to replace him wanted to say that he'd done anything wrong. Which is a little surprising since a few of them are campaigning on being "not the establishment"/"not a politician". But they weren't quite that willing to burn the establishment.)
The primary election is on September 5th, and the general election on November 7th. It's a blue-leaning district, so the Democratic primary is very likely the only race that matters (hence why I'm publishing this now). Given it's an off-year and the primary is in an unusual part of the year, turnout is likely to be low. A recent podcast debate is available online, and many more debates/forums are coming up in the next few weeks.
There are 12(!?!) candidates running in the Democratic primary. There hasn't been any polling in the race (as far as I can find), so we're going off of vibes and existing name recognition to determine who the serious candidates are. A recent article on the election has this to say:
There’s been no public polling in the race, but Ocean State political observers have put a handful of the candidates in the top tier: Lt. Gov. Sabina Matos; former White House aide Gabe Amo; state Sen. Sandra Cano, a labor favorite; renewable energy investor Don Carlson, who has funded much of his own campaign; and Aaron Regunberg, a lawyer and former state lawmaker favored by progressives.
Along with those names, I'm also applying the "whose name have I seen on yard signs in my neighborhood" test—I've seen signs for Regunberg, Carlson, Amo, and one more candidate, John Goncalves. Finally, I also added Ana Quezada to this list, because her website was by far my favorite in a quick browse of the rest of the candidates who hadn't already made the 'top tier'.
So let's say those seven candidates are the most worth knowing about: Matos, Amo, Cano, Carlson, Regunberg, Goncalves, and Quezada. Read on below where I've summarized their stances on the issues, according to each candidate's website.
I encourage my RI readers to share information or opinions in the comments below if you think there's anything important I've missed!
My voting philosophy
My politics are pretty liberal, with a libertarian flavor. What I mean by that: I'd generally like to achieve the same things as most of my liberal friends, but I'm more likely to think the way to do that is to have less laws. ("The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house", and all that.) The housing crisis is a pet cause of mine, and I believe the way to fix that is to make it easier to build lots more housing. (For more on why I feel that way, I suggest this article: The Housing Theory of Everything.)
Overall, I think most people who know me would say I'm a reasonable, thoughtful person—hopefully this article will be of use to you even if you don't share my biases.
Assorted thoughts on the election
To be honest, I don't think this particular election will be very important. I'm of the opinion that local politics are much more important than national politics, at least in regards to the ability of individual citizens (and individual legislators) to actually make a difference. The (main) candidates are all standard mainstream-to-progressive Democrats. It's hard to believe that replacing one with any of the others will have much marginal effect on how the US Congress votes. I don't think it much matters who you choose.
(The one exception to that is a situation where the vote gets split 6+ ways, and one of the more fringe candidates wins.)
The one thing that does make this election feel a bit more important is that whoever wins will be an incumbent next time around (unless they leave for a $650K yearly salary at a nonprofit!). With that advantage in the future, the winner of this election may represent Rhode Island in Congress for the next 10+ years.
The article I linked above pits the race as a battle of moderate vs. progressive Democrats ("a proxy battle for the ideological soul of the Democratic Party"). Regunberg, apparently, is that progressive candidate (endorsed by Bernie Sanders!), while Matos plays the role of more moderate Democrat.
But to be quite honest, that seems like a bit of baloney. The female immigrant from the Dominican Republic who wants to enshrine Roe v. Wade as federal law and create a public option for healthcare is the moderate? While the rich white guy who recently graduated from Harvard Law is the progressive option? All the "serious" candidates in this election seem pretty progressive to me. (A friend who's a bit of a political insider told me that they think Regunberg is "as politician as they come" and "in it for his career", which matches the feeling I got.)
The best of the rest
Very quick summaries of the remaining candidates who I don't examine in more detail further below:
Stephanie Beauté has an long section on her site about cybersecurity ("With my extensive career in cybersecurity, I bring a wealth of expertise and passion to the table."). She seems like a pretty serious candidate, I feel a little bad that she didn't meet my arbitrary requirements to get a longer blurb.
Walter Berbrick splits his issues into three categories: Rising Costs, Rising Seas, and Rising Division.
Stephen Casey is a firefighter, and fittingly the longest issue section on his site is about support for veterans/first responders. This YouTube video was linked in the article above, with the description that he "supports additional restrictions on abortion and believes government 'shouldn’t be in your gun safe.'" (I have not watched it through to confirm.)
Spencer Dickinson is going for the curmudgeon vote (or perhaps I should just say the "actually a Republican" vote?), leading off his website with: "The Democratic party is on a path to self-destruction", and following that up with "First Action: Close The Border. If the President won’t do it, then the Congress must. Use the Army if necessary."
Allen Waters is the only candidate that didn't have an Issues page that I could find (and has previously run as a Republican in other elections).
The Republicans
Terri Flynn seems pretty moderate politically, but her best qualification is being on the Middletown Town Council, and the "Top Issues" section on her page says only: "Under Construction". Doesn't seem like a very serious candidate.
Gerry Leonard is a US Marine and a "13th generation Rhode Islander"(!), according to his website, which also lacks an "Issues" page.
The ‘top tier’ candidates
Here's a quick summary of what you'll find on the websites of the rest of the candidates, with a few other comments sprinkled in. Bullet points are generally ordered in the same order they appear on that candidate's website, to try to give you a feel for which issues each candidate values the most.
I generally don't discuss the candidates' backgrounds, but they all seem clearly "experienced enough" to be reasonable choices for the position, whether their experience is in state government, federal government or business.
It's refreshing how many candidates are themselves immigrants or the children of immigrants (as Amo is). Amo worked in the Obama & Biden administrations, my insider friend says that he's the "technocrat" option (among his Endorsements are the mayors of cities in Illinois, Florida, and Missouri).
His issues:
Ban assault weapons
Protect Social Security and Medicare
Ensure access to safe, legal abortion
[A variety of reasonable-sounding bullet points about the economy]
Fight climate change
Protect our veterans
I'm not a fan of Goncalves because he is proud of not letting Brown University build as much housing as they wanted to. (And at the same time he says in the recent debate that we need to "focus on housing"). I believe we need housing abundance to solve the housing crisis—if the Brown students could be housed in Brown dorms, there would be less of them trying to live in the neighborhood, leaving more living options available for the rest of us.
While all the candidates are pretty progressive, Goncalves seems to be the one with the strongest 'social justice' flavor to that progressivism, for example see this quote from his Issues page on Climate & Environmental Justice:
Climate changes are undeniably entwined with economic and racial justice in the world today. Rhode Island must take action to reduce the threat of these changes, reduce the related economic issues, eradicate the race-based wage gap, and dismantle systemic racism in all offices and organizations.
Here are a few of his other stances on the issues:
Bring federal funding to RI
Supports Universal Pre-K and The Pay Teachers Act
"John supports enacting the most aggressive climate legislation in our history and a federal Green New Deal"
Medicare for All
To the extent that there's been scandal in this race, it's this:
The low-profile race got a jolt last month, when election officials flagged some of the nominating signatures submitted by the Matos campaign as potentially fraudulent. State Attorney General Peter Neronha is conducting a criminal investigation.
To be quite honest, I find it hard to care about this issue. First, it seems obvious that she has enough support to earn a spot on the ballot. Second, at least as far as I understood the discussion, even the other candidates who pressed her on it in the Bartholomewtown podcast (linked above) admitted that the issue was due to a hired vendor who lied to her campaign and no personal fault of her own.
Here's where she stands on the issues:
Pass gun safety laws
Enshrine the right to abortion
Protect Medicare/Medicaid & create a public option
Address climate change
Some general housing comments: aid for people on the cusp of homelessness, bring federal dollars to RI, etc.
Overturn Citizens United
Aside from Ana Quezada (see below) she's the only candidate who specifically includes "implementing zoning reforms" as one of her housing-related policy goals.
The section on her website where she has selfies with people who've endorsed her is a fun touch:
Also, she's kind of a real-life Batman, take a look at this origin story:
Twenty three years ago, my family moved to Pawtucket from Colombia under political asylum. My father had built a great career and was able to provide a good life for our family, but that all ended when he began receiving death threats and was later kidnapped by guerilla fighters in the remote mountains. Leaving everything behind, we fled our home because it was no longer safe for my family to stay in my country of birth. I was sixteen years old.
Her stance on the issues:
Wealth tax & $15 federal minimum wage
Fight against climate change
move toward a Medicare for All model while protecting the Affordable Care Act
protections for abortion in federal law
assault weapons ban
increasing funding for affordable housing programs, expanding transit-oriented development, providing rent subsidies
Don has only 4 policy areas listed on his site: Climate Change, Gun Safety, Education, and Reproductive Rights. (Followed by a blurb at the bottom of the page: "There are so many other issues we have to tackle: racial justice, housing, political corruption, poverty…just to name a few! ..."). Honestly, I respect him for having the guts to say there's a few things he cares about the most. His goals:
Accelerating the transition to a renewable energy economy (and bringing federal money to RI to do that)
Ban assault weapons
Increase funding to schools; universal pre-K
Codifying Roe v. Wade, etc.
Regunberg has to be considered the favorite, in my mind, for several reasons. First, there's the article I linked above calling him a favorite. Second, he's the candidate that I've seen by far the most yard signs for (he has very deep roots in my neighborhood, so perhaps that doesn't actually mean anything in the bigger picture). Third, he was well ahead in a recent poll on the Providence subreddit. Again, that could easily mean nothing, but there's enough "maybe it means nothing" pieces of evidence here that I think it probably adds up to something.
Here are his issues:
Make the economy fair: passing laws to stop big businesses from price gouging; protect Medicaid, SNAP, Social Security; wealth tax; $15 minimum wage
Fight climate change: end fossil fuel subsidies, Environmental Justice for All Act
federal spending to build public housing; building zero-emission homes
expand Medicare, lower drug prices, etc
update labor laws to support unions
assault weapons ban
Ana gets points for transparency, having a big link to "Ana's Taxes" right next to the "Home" and "Issues" tabs at the top of her site. She also has a rotating slideshow of exactly which bills she wants to support (Other candidates do mention specific bills, but her website stands out here for thoroughness and presentation):
Ana has the most clearly pro-YIMBY/pro-urbanism section of any candidate website:
"I support state and local zoning reforms that encourage more dense, mixed-use, and transit oriented development. We need to create more housing supply at every income level... We need to invest in the neighborhoods by making it easier to walk, bike, and take public transportation to the places we work, eat, learn, and get well. New vehicles on the road in our cities should be mostly electric, or bikes, buses, and smaller cars."
Here's where she is on the other issues:
Universal healthcare (Medicare for All act)
Invest in climate change preparedness
make Roe v. Wade national legislation
$17/hour federal minimum wage
Harm reduction drug policies and prison reform
My Decision
I'm planning to vote for Sandra Cano. My reasoning is as follows:
All of the candidates are roughly similar.
I don't have any good strategy to reduce the risk of votes getting split among the candidates I'm OK with, leading to a candidate I'm not OK with ending up winning. So I'll just vote for who I like.
To the extent that there are differences between the candidates, Cano and Quezada stood out for being the most pro-YIMBY.
Between the two of them, I'm going with Cano because a political insider friend said that Quezada's actions as a legislator haven't always matched the issues she claims to support and Cano has been 'the most consistent with her messaging and her actions'.
Don't forget to vote! And if there's any comments you'd like to share or questions you'd like me to research further, leave a comment below.
Edit: I’d also like to point out this recent Reddit thread for having some good discussion.