- [Tim] We are trying to put rational thought to an irrational person, and that is a fool's errand.

I don't think we'll ever be satisfied with whatever answer to the why there is.

- [Ed] For the vulnerable Rhode Islanders, the safety net hospitals are Roger Williams and Our Lady of Fatima.

- Anybody watching this or listening to it right now that's been to an emergency department in the last six months will know just how devastating it would be if those two hospitals were to close.

- It would be a tsunami of patients going into other hospitals.

It would affect everybody in Rhode Island.

(upbeat music) - And welcome into our first episode for 2026.

I'm Jim Hummel, it's great to be back with you.

This week, we are joined by "Target 12" investigative reporter, Tim White, and "Boston Globe" reporter, Ed Fitzpatrick.

The first day of each legislative session is like baseball spring training, a lot of optimism, but also questions about how the long season will ultimately turn out.

And this year's session may ultimately be determined by factors beyond lawmakers' control.

Ed, let me begin with you.

Those factors are the federal cuts.

Going back to the bill, Joe Shekarchi, the house speaker, talked a little bit about that last year.

This year is the year that the rubber's gonna hit the road.

- Yeah, that optimism is definitely tempered this year by the federal cuts and policy changes that are gonna affect Medicaid, the healthcare coverage of Rhode Islanders, SNAP benefits, and they're concerned that that One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act is really gonna have an impact on Rhode Island.

And they're going in also with a $101 million budget deficit projected for the FY 27 budget.

- Which seems pretty manageable compared to the last couple of years, right?

- Not too bad, but you add to that all those federal cuts and they're very concerned, and it's got people thinking about things they haven't considered before.

We just interviewed Governor McKee yesterday, and he was talking about the likelihood of having a budget proposal that includes the millionaires' tax and that is something he's opposed in the past, but those Trump cuts have got him reconsidering that stance.

- You know, it was funny, I was listening to your open there and you said it's kind of like spring training and there's optimism, and I'm going, "Is there?"

Is there really optimism up at the State House right now?

- It depends on what team you're on.

- That's true, and right now they're on a team maybe that feels like they might not have a great year.

But I'm sure a lot of state houses across the country feel that way because of how you set it up, which is the uncertainty that is coming out of Washington right now.

Sure, it's a $101 million budget deficit right now, but that is a moving target for these lawmakers.

And oh, by the way, this is an even numbered year, right?

So this is an election year, and that is hanging over the State House kind of like a cloud because you have a lot of big-ticket items that they're gonna have to be talking about.

I'm sure we're gonna be talking about it, too.

To me, number one on the list is healthcare, which not only includes the Medicaid cuts that are affecting tens of thousands of Rhode Islanders because of what's happening in Washington, but also, two hospitals that are on the brink of collapsing at the moment.

And then there is a lot of discussion about changing how we fund K through 12 public schools in Rhode Island.

And I am not convinced at this moment that that is something that this general assembly is gonna- - I don't think they have the appetite for it.

In an election year?

- Well, and also- - [Jim] And it takes a lot of time to figure it out, right?

- Speaker Joe Shekarchi, who has been kind of, I think he's 50-50 on whether or not he's gonna run for governor.

Is he really gonna want to tackle a school funding bill that's gonna- - [Jim] Alienate some people, right?

- Well, you know, say Newport could potentially, if it goes with the plan that came outta the Rhode Island Foundation, could lose a lot of money.

Is that something he's gonna wanna do?

Or are they gonna wanna prioritize the hospitals?

- Yeah, they've been pretty non-committal about dealing with that education funding formula this year.

I think the more immediate concern are those two hospitals.

- Yes, I agree.

- I mean that that's for the vulnerable Rhode Islanders, the safety net hospitals are Roger Williams and Our Lady of Fatima, where my mother used to work.

And that's what Senate President Lawson called the fire and they need to put it out.

I mean, it's in the courts.

It's not totally up to them.

It's not clear if they would put state money into it right now or need to, but that is the immediate priority.

- We had your colleague, Ted Nesi, on, and he's covered the hospitals.

(cross talking) - [Tim] That's his beat, yeah.

- He and Nancy Lavin from "The Current" were talking about it, and he said something that really stood out.

When Memorial closed in Pawtucket, 50,000 annual emergency room visits had to go somewhere.

So they went to.

Some went to Roger Williams, but it's a lot to Miriam and Lifespan.

- Anybody watching this or listening to it right now that's been to an emergency department in the last six months, especially at Rhode Island Hospital, will know just how devastating it would be if those two hospitals were to close.

And they would have to absorb the incoming into those emergency departments.

I mean, it is a five-alarm fire right now in those ERs on a good day.

And so there's a lot of concern that if Fatima and Roger Williams close, those hospitals, can they even absorb that incoming, let alone the inpatient beds that would have to be taken care of?

- Yeah, one executive told Alexa Gagosz it would be a tsunami of patients going into other hospitals.

It would affect everybody in Rhode Island.

- And Rhode Island doesn't have two nickels to rub together.

So this whole deal about, oh, do we get involved, does the state get involved?

That ultimately is not the answer.

The state, in effect, props up a lot of healthcare, but in terms of direct infusion of cash, maybe during the COVID years as a one-time thing to get you over the hump.

It doesn't look like.

I don't think the house is gonna have much appetite for that, do you?

- Well, I mean, they haven't ruled out providing some kind of state revenue if it's needed to solve that crisis.

- Yeah, I mean, do they have a choice?

- I mean, they can't let it fail.

I think it, 'too big to fail' is not the right word, but it's too important to fail.

And in addition to all that, those two hospitals who's also got the shortage of primary care physicians in Rhode Island, there's a crisis.

Healthcare is definitely top of the priority list.

- It's interesting, we talked about the millionaires' tax, and I think Joe Shekarchi kept that in his breast pocket last year.

They figured out how to balance the budget as they always do.

I was filling in on WPRO early this week and had Mike DiBiase from RIPEC.

He and Laurie White co-wrote an opinion piece that said, look, this is a gimmick.

And it was interesting that they.

I mean, Mike's a kind of a reserved guy, but it's getting kind of outta control.

He says, "We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem."

- Right.

And listening to how speaker Joe Shekarchi, his five favorite words, "Everything is on the table."

And he said that in this case as well.

- We'll give it due review, right?

- Exactly.

And Mike DiBiase and Laurie White also framed it, not you think of the Millionaires tax, and a lot of the progressive side of the Democratic Party likes to talk about the people who live on Ocean Drive, and that's who we're taxing.

They're trying to frame it as no, no, no, no, this could affect small businesses because that's also how they file their taxes, so you need to think of it that way.

And again, as I said earlier in our conversation, this is an election year, and I'm not sure that lawmakers are necessarily gonna wanna put forward and support a bill that at a very high level increases taxes.

Yes, you could talk about we're increasing taxes for $1 million, but I don't know if there will be the appetite for that this year.

We'll see.

- Yeah, I mean, it's gonna be a battle up at the State House over the millionaires' tax because you've got Senate leaders are behind it.

You've got labor organizations behind it.

You've got RIPEC and the Chamber of Commerce fighting it.

So it's gonna be interesting.

And Governor McKee is also gonna be proposing to eliminate the income tax on Social Security benefits.

- That's probably an easy one.

- And that's an easy one, but if that's paired with the millionaire's tax, I think you're gonna hear him saying more people would be in favor of that menu than not.

- But it was interesting.

In that opinion piece, DiBiase and Laurie White said it's really a gimmick because it may get you through one budget cycle.

We've gotta look at revenues versus spending.

And so whatever the percentages are, our revenues are going up 2 to 3%, we're spending at 4 to 5.

So you raise that money, but then what happens in the out year when again, it's only gonna get you a bridge so far?

They've gotta look at the revenue side.

- Yeah, but the people that support the millionaires' tax might point up north.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts passed something similar, and my understanding- - [Jim] And the world didn't come to an end?

- Well, right.

Massachusetts didn't slide into the Atlantic Ocean, they would say.

And as a matter of fact, it raised a lot of money up there.

But yeah, I think this is gonna be a big debate on- - Yeah, you heard Senate President Lawson say, 'Hey, Hasbro went up to Massachusetts, moved up to Boston from Pawtucket, despite the millionaires' tax."

But Speaker Shekarchi, said, "Well, no, it had a lot of.

Those were not the factors that prompted Hasbro to leave.

They had other concerns."

- We did our year-end show, and it seems like every, the last two years, what are your top stories?

Well, clearly the Brown shooting, which we'll talk about a little bit later, was, but the Washington Bridge is the gift or the albatross that keeps on hanging around people's necks.

And I wonder did Peter Alviti, I thought that the hearing was good.

Is that the end or is it just the beginning in your mind?

In terms of legislative oversight?

Are we gonna see more of that?

We have reporter oversight, and we're gonna continue to report in 2026, but is the legislature like, all right, we're done, let's move on?

- Yeah, they might feel like they put on that big show.

They brought in former US attorney Zachary Cunha, who I thought- - [Jim] I thought it was a good move.

- He did a really good job in that moment and held Peter Alviti's feet to the fire.

He was under oath, which is something that the General Assembly has been reluctant to do so far.

So I kind of felt like the gloves came off a little bit on this.

We are also hearing more and more state officials, including the House speaker saying we should move on from the RIDOT director.

It'll be interesting to see if that's the next shoe to fall.

But then again, if you're in the governor's shoes and you get rid of Director Alviti, you have to be wondering, well, who is going to replace him?

And who's going to want that job with all this turbulence?

- [Jim] And is it a political move because you're- - Everything's a political move, and that's kind of my point throughout our entire conversation.

It's 2026, it's an election year for the general assembly, all lawmakers.

And oh, by the way, there's a governor's race going on.

- Yeah, I thought that that hearing Zach Cunha really set up the menu for the legislature to decide that we need to change something about RIDOT, that we are relying too much on the consultants, don't have enough in-house expertise.

But I haven't heard legislative leaders talking about doing anything like that.

It is more of an executive branch function, and I haven't heard the governor making any changes like that.

So we'll see if anything comes out of that.

One thing I think everybody agreed on is that the signs on the Washington Bridge are just ticking people off.

Thank you for your patience.

- While we keep you safe.

Thanks, Dad.

- They're still there.

- Senate President Lawson.

- Yeah, what gives?

Is nobody getting the word over on Smith Street that that's kind of ticking people off?

- Yeah, Frog & Toad's got the coasters that say, "Welcome to East Providence, just an hour from Providence."

- (laughing) That was good.

- But yeah, Senate President Lawson said she sees that sign every day and she finds it patronizing.

- We should see some.

The demolition is done now though.

- Yes.

- And the construction is gonna begin.

And the thing that heartens me is this company that they've chosen, it's not Schmo Bridge Building from (indistinct).

They've done major projects.

So you gotta figure, I'm probably the only one in the world who thinks this when they said November 2028, I think they're underselling it.

I think they're gonna finish sooner.

Unless there's some crazy.

No?

Yes, no?

- Well, who knows?

But my point is- - [Jim] But their financial incentives.

- Are they gonna be done in November 2026?

- No.

(cross talking) - That's the point.

- Right.

- Now, to your point- - That's the albatross.

- That's right.

And I think maybe there will be visual signs of real progress and state officials can point to that as we're done with the demolition, now they're gonna start building things.

And you're right, that is maybe will be a good mental shift for people that drive over the Washington Bridge a lot.

- Yeah, one sign.

Another sign that I wrote about was on time, on budget- - Yeah, those went up and we haven't even begun yet, right?

- Right, and the time and the budget have changed since, so.

- And that sign, by the way, that sign does not include the emergency budget to take down the demolition.

They were over price on the tow trucking, overprice on the police details.

All of that's necessary; no one's arguing that.

But that sign is only reflecting moving forward from that point and sort of ignores the money that had already been spent, I think.

- Exactly.

One other thing that you guys, you're both members of the First Amendment Coalition, and access to Public Records Act, everybody thinks that's an insider reporter thing.

It's clearly for everybody.

You guys have spoken eloquently on this.

My question is, they're putting together, they're putting forth the same bill with the 48 changes or whatever it is.

Would you be better to focus on a couple of main things and not try to get the whole pie in one year?

I mean that's a tactical thing, and I know, I think we all agree we would love to see all of these changes, but it's been unsuccessful the last three year.

And the same governor, by the way, is in the seat who's opposed it.

- Yeah, the headwind has really come from the McKee administration on a reform to the Access to Public Records Act.

- Having every cabinet member write, "This is why this is bad legislation."

- Yes, correct.

So look, those are conversations that happen for stakeholders that are looking to reform the Access to Public Records Act.

Should we choose this, this, and this and put this off to the side?

Who knows, Jim?

I mean, you just don't know what the session is going to bring in all of that.

And by the way, you put a bill in with 48 proposals and changes, and then it goes through the meat grinder- - Sub A.

- Sub A and 20 of 'em are gone.

So that is still on the table.

- So it could, yeah.

I mean, Senator De Palma, who's championed this legislation for the past three years, is it gonna put it forth again?

And Speaker Shekarchi said he's looking for compromise.

He wants the advocates and the opponents to get together and find something they can both live with.

So we haven't seen that yet.

We haven't seen the governor propose any alternatives.

And I asked the candidates for the governor where they stand.

McKee- - I'm really happy you did this piece, by the way.

It was excellent.

- To make it an issue in the campaign.

Governor McKee reiterated his concerns about the legislation and a couple of his opponents said they support this legislation and think it's needed.

And now you've got the candidate, one of the candidates for attorney general, Rep Knight is gonna introduce the legislation in the house.

- And why that's important real quick, Jim, is because- - [Jim] They're paying your bill.

- Well, the attorney general's office in Rhode Island, it's different in other states, they're really where the rubber meets the road in disputes over public records.

- Just before we finish up, if they came to you and said, "What are the top two things that you would like to see?"

If you could only choose two out of that bill, what would you take?

- Well, I think cost is a big one.

I'd like to see.

The thing that drives me bananas is we'll put in a public records request and they'll say, "Okay, we will give that to you, but we need."

- [Jim] $5,000.

- We need 850 bucks or whatever.

And I was like, "Well, the last time I checked, we already paid for those documents that we're requesting as taxpayers," so on and so forth.

I think that the cost to obtain information is really used to have a chilling effect on trying to obtain it.

So that's probably number one on my list.

And I don't wanna say number two just yet because I have so many favorites after that.

But one of the things I would like to see is in Rhode Island only police arrest reports are considered public record, not incident reports.

And I know that sounds like in the weeds, but it is important 'cause a lot of the work police do is not necessarily an arrest.

- Yeah, I think a lot of the police narratives and the police records, the body camera, all that is very important.

That's a lot of where you get the friction in the pursuit of public records.

And one issue that has always seemed very clear cut to me is the Department of Transportation not releasing the crash data to tell you where the dangerous intersections are.

- To protect yourself legally, right?

- Yeah, and giving it to some private organizations, not giving it out publicly.

That, I hear, might be broken out as a separate piece of legislation this year.

We'll see if that happens.

But that's a clear cut thing that should happen.

They're setting some federal laws and preventing them, but it doesn't prevent other states from providing that information and it's good for the public.

This isn't for journalists, this is for the public.

- My number one?

Getting access to the 911 calls.

(cross talking) - Florida, states like that have access to 911 calls.

- Lynn Arditi, "Public's Radio" has done a lot of work in that area.

- Yeah, there's a lot to like in that bill.

- All right, so we see as the session goes forward.

The fallout continues in the wake of last month's campus shooting that left two Brown University students dead, nine wounded, and a gunman who took his own life a few days later.

Tim, we haven't been on the air for a while here on Lively, and a lot has happened just in the last week.

We've had the FBI transcript of some videos that the gunman made.

But more importantly to me, let's start with Hugh Clements being appointed as the chief at Brown.

We know him very well.

Talk about how significant that is.

- Oh, it's a big deal.

And I think Christina Paxton, the president of Brown University, knew very well.

I haven't asked her about it, but my guess is she knew she needed to make a change and she needed to make a big change over there.

So she put the current chief on leave.

- [Jim] Of the university police, campus police.

- Of the university campus police and brought in Hugh Clements as most people know, he's a well-respected, longtime member of the Providence Police Department who went on to work for the Department of Justice in their COPS program.

And he's someone that really knows how to bring people together, I think.

And that's what she was looking for.

And little low hanging fruit things that Hugh Clements can do.

For example, Brown University was not tied into the Providence Police Department's camera system over there.

That might be something because Hugh Clements is very familiar with Providence Police Department, something that he can make happen.

And he's just, he's a proven leader and they needed someone fresh over there.

The good thing for Hugh Clements is he has this terrible, awful tragedy is an opportunity for the university to make some changes that maybe wouldn't have been as popular six months ago: adding more cameras, adding more security, things that would've faced more headwinds six months ago are changes that he can make, and he has the opportunity to do that now.

- Yeah, I agree.

He's got a mandate to make changes there at Brown, and I did a story about how Brown had received warnings over the years that things in the Brown Campus Police Department might have needed improvement.

There was votes of no confidence from the patrolmen, there were another vote of no confidence from the sergeants, there was an editorial in the "Brown Daily Herald" saying they're not keeping us safe.

There was the DJ Hernandez situation where he was threatening UConn and Brown.

- That was Aaron Hernandez' brother.

- Aaron Hernandez' brother three years ago.

And there was criticism of how the Brown Campus police handled that situation.

So now, Hugh Clements has been brought in.

He's not only got all the experience he had as the Providence Police chief, he also did a report about how that mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas was handled.

So he can analyze a situation like this and find the solutions like the cameras, like the training that he is starting to forward now.

- We were talking about this a little bit before in the green room before we came on.

We really don't know a lot about the shooter.

I mean, we haven't had.

In the old days, we would dispatch reporters to Miami to spend a week down there and where he worked, what he did.

I mean, we know kind of the grievance, but there's so many holes.

And I wonder, is law enforcement gonna continue?

Maybe the reporters aren't, maybe they are.

Is law enforcement gonna continue to look at that?

Or is it kind of we got the guy, move on?

- Yeah, look, law enforcement, even if he were alive, motive isn't necessary for prosecution.

They have to prove two things: that the act happened and the level of intent, and that's really it.

So they're not as motivated to find out the motive.

We are.

Obviously the public is hungry for that sort of information.

I think on one hand, when a shooter takes their own life in a situation like this, there are a lot of people who think, oh my goodness, now we're not gonna get the why, the answers because we can't talk to that person.

On the flip side, what that does allow is there's no more criminal case moving forward.

So that means a lot of documentation that would normally be under seal can come forward now.

And a good example is the one that you just brought up, the transcripts of the videos that he took up in Salem, New Hampshire.

- All would've been wrapped under discovery.

- We never would've seen that.

Look, we're seeing it's coming a little more into focus that he had grievances from three years old moving on.

And I think one of the things that is really challenging about all of this, and it's not just Brown University shooting, it's all of the similar incidences.

We are trying to put rational thought to an irrational person.

And that is a fool's errand.

And I don't think we'll ever be satisfied with whatever answer to the why there is.

- Yeah, well, listening to those or reading the transcript of the videos that he made up at the storage facility just showed you he was narcissistic, he was bitter, he was twisted.

It didn't give.

I don't think it gave anybody any satisfaction or an answer.

He criticized, made fun of the students for being stupid.

It was insulting and just enraging.

So yeah, I don't know if we'll ever be satisfied with some kind of answer about why this happened.

It was just kind of disgusting.

- [Tim] But the reporting continues.

- Yeah, you think about your own college campuses; we all went to different schools, different places, kind of different settings.

And you think, oh, it can never happen to us.

Brown's interesting because it is so enmeshed with the east side.

There's not, it's not like a Dartmouth where you're in your one little spot.

I wonder the 30,000 foot view, and this really is just kind of a crystal ball, is how the atmosphere is gonna be on Brown in a semester, two semesters.

Is it gonna feel?

I mean, are there some people who are not gonna come back?

Are some parents gonna say, "I don't want you back on that campus."?

- Well, Brown University, even in the spring semester, is gonna be a very different place than it was in the fall semester.

And that's unfortunate, that's too bad.

Particularly the Barus and Holley building.

We know that's the engineering building.

They are closing that whole area off moving forward.

To me, it's broader than that.

As you just pointed out, there was a lot of discussion at the press conferences about, oh, how come they could access Barus and Holley?

People could just walk in and out.

That is true for all college campuses.

All college campuses in one way or another are open.

Is that gonna change?

And I think what we're gonna see in Rhode Island is it's not just a Brown University thing, it's a URI thing.

It's a Roger Williams, it's PC, it's RISD.

There's gonna be a lot of focus on campus safety and is there gonna be anything?

My guess is there's gonna be some sort of convening of all college leaders to talk about how do we move forward from this tragedy?

- Yeah, and I think Tim's right.

It's not just the Brown University situation.

"The Globe" had a list; we ran one of the first days of all the shootings on college campuses in the past 10 years.

I mean, when it first happened back in the 1960s at University of Texas up in the Bell Tower, everybody was like, holy cow.

And they wrote songs.

- Even Virginia Tech was relatively- - Yes.

In those 15 years, right?

- And they wrote songs about the the Texas one.

But now, it happens so often it's almost routine and bigger changes need to happen to- - [Jim] Quickly.

- Yeah, real quick.

And the big, tangible one is arming campus.

Brown University police officers are armed, but there are other colleges that aren't.

We might see a change.

- [Jim] Okay.

We will keep, and great reporting both of you guys.

- Thanks, Jim.

- Just really, really good stuff.

All right, let's go back to outrageous or kudos to end the show.

Tim, what do you have this week?

- Outrageous.

For me, it is misinformation without accountability, and this kind of dovetails with Brown University.

We saw, especially during that week, a lot of misinformation on social media.

There were people that were being named and targeted, being called the shooter.

We were getting calls in the newsroom.

Why aren't you talking about this individual?

Well, the answer to that is because it was not true.

And the deal is, if the "Boston Globe" or Channel 12 where I work, named that person, we'd be held accountable and we should be.

That person could sue us and hold our feet to the fire.

The difference is the people on X, the people on Instagram, the people on Facebook that are putting that person's picture out there, all of that, those companies are profiting from posts, but they can't be held accountable to misinformation.

Because of section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, those companies cannot be sued.

And the last time I checked, those companies have far greater reach than Channel 12 does.

But yet we're held more accountable to this type of information than they are?

That needs to change now.

- I second Tim's outrage.

That is right on point.

I also would add an outrage about how Providence College Friars should have won last night.

- Oh, my goodness.

We taking it up on Thursday.

- Thank you for making it light.

- They were up 11 points with three minutes left!

That was brutal.

- Yeah, should have beat number four, UConn, last night at the Amp.

But to dovetail off what Tim said, I'm also outraged.

I'm reading this book, "Murder the Truth" by David Enrich.

- [Tim] Great book.

- And it's right to the point that the social media platforms that put out misinformation have protection, but the newspapers and television stations that do excellent journalism don't.

And you've got powerful people from the president of the United States to celebrities, sports stars, businessmen are going after news organizations using libel law, and there's an attack on "The New York Times" versus Sullivan, precedent that protects us and allows us to hold people in power accountable.

- And by the way, we should be held accountable, Jim.

We're not arguing.

I'm not gonna speak for him, but yeah, that isn't what should change.

It should be the other side.

- That book was on my Christmas list and I didn't get it, so give it to me after you finish.

- Everybody should read that.

- "Murder the Truth".

- "Murder the Truth".

I interviewed David Enrich on "Newsmakers".

It was a great interview.

- All right, Tim and Ed, thank you, a great segment.

We appreciate you joining us.

And thank you for joining us.

Be sure and check us out on Facebook, X, Instagram, and on the Ocean State Media YouTube channel.

We'll see you here next time on Lively.

(bright music) - [Announcer] Lively is generously supported in part by John Hazen White's Lookout.