R.I. House momentum for a casino smoking ban is not enough. Unionized workers zero in on Senate.
'Please don't kill us we have families' reads the sign held by one Bally's employee during a State House rally on May 20, 2025. (Photo by Christopher Shea/Rhode Island Current)
'NO MORE SMOKE! NO MORE SMOKE!'
That was the chant from about 150 casino workers who packed the steps inside the State House Tuesday — their backs to the House chamber, but their voices aimed directly across the rotunda to the Senate floor.
It's the fourth such year they've backed the bill by Rep. Teresa Tanzi, a South Kingstown Democrat, seeking to end the Lincoln and Tiverton casinos' exemption from the state's 2005 indoor smoking ban.
'For the last 20 years, there has been a grave injustice happening in our casinos,' Tanzi told the crowd. 'These are our workers who are there day in, day out — they're doing a service for our state.'
Tanzi's proposal has yet to reach the House floor. But unlike previous years, casino workers now have some additional institutional backing. For the first time, House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi is a co-sponsor on Tanzi's legislation.
Casino workers from 11 separate unions had help making noise from yellow and purple-clad striking Butler Hospital workers who gathered at the State House Tuesday to call on House Democrats meeting for a budget caucus. The Butler workers, who are members of SEIU 1199NE, want lawmakers to prioritize any state funding intended for hospitals for wages and staffing for frontline staff.
'Workers deserve a smoke-free workplace,' Jesse Martin, the executive vice president of SEIU 1199NE, told the crowd. 'People deserve the ability to do their work free from injury, free from these types of concerns.'
Across the rotunda, companion legislation sponsored by Sen. V. Susan Sosnowski has still yet to be heard by the Senate Committee on Labor and Gaming chaired by the chamber's newest majority leader: Frank Ciccone III.
Ciccone, a Providence Democrat, has been a staunch opponent of the ban citing concern that the state would lose millions in revenue should smoking completely disappear from the two casinos.
It's the same position shared by the late Senate President Dominick Ruggerio, whom many advocates saw as the main reason smoking still remains inside Rhode Island's casinos.
Newly-elected Senate President Valarie Lawson, an East Providence Democrat, has previously stated she personally supports a smoking ban. But she also indicated that she would like to see the standard committee review process play out.
But Ciccone is instead looking to reach an agreement between Bally's and the union to expand existing non-smoking areas in the casinos. Ciccone said in an interview Tuesday that talks remain ongoing.
'If anything looks fruitful, we'll set up another meeting with everyone again,' he said in an interview Tuesday. 'Hopefully we'll get closer.'
Whether Bally's wants to expand its nonsmoking offerings — or reduce the size of the smoking area — is still being kept under wraps.
'We don't have anything to report right now on the smoking issue,' Bally's spokesperson Patti Doyle said in an email Tuesday. 'Will certainly share updates when/if we do.'
Union leaders remain adamant that a compromise won't solve the problem.
Matt Dunham, president of Table Game Dealers Laborers Local 711, told Rhode Island Current that even with a larger non-smoking section at the state's two casinos, some workers would still be exposed to smoke.
'A lot of people are going to be left out,' he said in an interview before the rally.
Dunham pointed to the 2024 non-smoking expansion at Bally's Lincoln casino, which he said has flaws.
'We still have to walk through cigarettes to get to our own break room,' he said.
Ending Bally's smoking ban exemption is also a top priority for the AFL-CIO, which commissioned a poll in February that found nearly 7 in 10 survey respondents 'strongly' or 'somewhat' supported a smoking ban at the state's two casinos.
'We're taking the lead from the workers,' Rhode Island AFL-CIO Political Director Autumn Guillote said in an interview just before the rally. 'And the demand is still 100% from the advocates.'
Vanessa Baker, an iGaming supervisor at Bally's Lincoln casino, said staff are constantly 'abused and assaulted' by the second-hand smoke that lingers throughout the two Rhode Island facilities.
'The Rhode Island casinos are allowing the safety and wellbeing of their employees and patrons at risk and showing that their employees are expendable,' Baker said.
There was a time when smoking was temporarily banned inside Bally's two Rhode Island casinos: when they first reopened after being closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. But those rules were eventually lifted by March 2022.
'And all our lives changed for the worse,' Baker said.
Philip Farinelli, a floor supervisor at Bally's Twin River Lincoln Casino, told the crowd he has dealt simultaneously with stage 3 neck and head cancer and stage 1 lung cancer, along with a heart attack, because of conditions caused by lingering smoke.
'I'm still here fighting today so I can work in a healthy environment,' he said. 'We all suffer — nose running, eyes itching — it's just every day, it's terrible.'
Maegan Tikiryan, a server and bartender at Bally's Lincoln for 14 years, said she regularly deals with congestion and headaches from the casino's smoke. She's said she's seen three coworkers diagnosed with cancer and is worried it could happen to her as she begins to pursue a law degree at UMass Law.
'I don't want the smoke to kill me before I earn my degree,' Tikiryan said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
27 minutes ago
Support for solar energy, offshore wind falls among Democrats and independents: poll
Americans' support for green energy tax credits and renewable energies like wind and solar power has decreased in recent years, according to a new poll, driven by a softening in support from Democrats and independents. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that U.S. adults' support for tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels has weakened, as well as their enthusiasm for offshore wind farm expansion. While Democrats remain the strongest supporters of these initiatives, the poll reveals signs of growing cynicism within their ranks. The poll results coincide with sweeping changes President Donald Trump's Republican administration is making to regulations related to energy and climate change, including slashing the federal workforce in these departments. And although Democrats and independents have weakened their support for some green energy initiatives, there has not been an increase in support for Trump's energy policies. The poll found only about 4 in 10 U.S. adults — including only 1 in 10 Democrats and about 2 in 10 independents, along with three-quarters of Republicans — approve of the way Trump is handling climate change, which largely tracks with his overall approval rating. About 6 in 10 Democrats, 58%, favor tax credits for purchasing an electric vehicle, down from about 7 in 10 in 2022. Among independents, support declined from 49% in 2022 to 28%. Only one-quarter of Republicans supported this policy in 2022, and that hasn't changed measurably. 'As far as the pollution goes ... the vehicles nowadays put out very little emissions to the air,' said JD Johnson, a 62-year-old Democrat from Meadowview, Virginia, who somewhat opposes tax credits to purchase an electric vehicle. That's partly because he sees the electric vehicle manufacturing process as energy intensive and believes gasoline-powered vehicles have made improvements with the pollutants they emit. The decline in favoring solar panel tax credits was across the board rather than being concentrated among Democrats. 'For solar panels, in all honesty, I don't think they're that efficient yet,' said Glenn Savage, 78, a left-leaning independent from Rock Hill, South Carolina. 'I'd rather see them pour money into research and try to get the solar panels more efficient before they start giving tax breaks to the public. I may be wrong on that, but that's just my thought.' Scientists say transitioning to renewable energies and ditching fossil fuels that release planet-warming emissions are essential to protect the planet. Billions of dollars in project grants for clean technologies awarded during President Joe Biden's Democratic administration have been canceled by the Trump administration, and the offshore wind sector has been stunted by Trump's executive order that paused approvals, permits and loans for wind energy projects. Fewer than half of U.S. adults, 44%, now say that offshore wind farms should be expanded in the U.S., down from 59% in 2022. About half favor expanding solar panel farms, while about two-thirds were in support in 2022. When people are concerned about the economy and their personal finances, environmental issues are sometimes prioritized less, said Talbot Andrews, an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University who was not involved in the poll. 'I think it makes people anxious to think about increased taxes or increased spending on environmental issues when the cost of eggs are going through the roof,' Andrews said. Trump has championed the expansion of offshore oil drilling, as well as domestic coal production. Despite a decline in support for expanded renewable energies, the new poll shows that only about one-third of U.S. adults think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas should be expanded in the U.S., and only about one-quarter say this about coal mining. In both cases, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to support expanding these energy sources. Trump has sought to open up national monuments for oil drilling, but more U.S. adults oppose than support auctioning off more public space for oil drilling. Only about one-quarter of U.S. adults favor this, while 4 in 10 are opposed. Republicans are much more likely than independents or Democrats to be in support. The Energy Star program that certifies appliances, such as dishwashers and refrigerators, as energy efficient recently appeared in headlines when the EPA made plans to scrap the program. The blue and white logo is well recognized, and experts say the program has long had bipartisan support until recently. The poll found three-quarters of Democrats support providing consumer rebates for efficient home appliances, compared with 6 in 10 Republicans. Patrick Buck, 54, from Chicago, describes himself as a liberal Republican and is a fan of the consumer rebates for energy-efficient appliances. 'It seems to work in terms of transforming what people have in their houses, because a lot of people have a lot of old appliances and just can't afford new ones,' he said. The poll found only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults are 'extremely' or 'very' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of their drinking water, the air they breathe and the meat, poultry, fruits and vegetables they buy in grocery stores. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are 'somewhat' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of each of these, and about 4 in 10 are 'not very' or 'not at all' confident. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back rules and policies related to limiting pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, such as rules that limit pollution from power plants and blocking California's efforts to phase out cars that run on gas. The federal government has also cut staff at the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency tasked with protecting public health and ensuring food supply safety. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
27 minutes ago
What to know about debate over protesters and ICE agents wearing masks amid immigration crackdowns
CHICAGO -- President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly called for mask-wearing at protests to be banned and for protesters whose faces are covered to be arrested, with the most recent push following demonstrations in Los Angeles over immigration raids. Legal experts told The Associated Press there are a variety of reasons people may want to cover their faces while protesting, including to protect their health, for religious reasons, to avoid government retaliation, to prevent surveillance and doxing, or to protect themselves from tear gas. With legislative action happening across the U.S., they say it's only a matter of time before the issue returns to the courts. Protesters, meanwhile, have voiced anger over footage of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents covering their faces at immigration raids and masked officers at the Los Angeles protests, calling it a double standard. Here are some things to know about the debate over face masks: At least 18 states and Washington, D.C., have laws that restrict masks and other face coverings in some way, said Elly Page, senior legal adviser with the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law. Since October 2023, at least 16 bills have been introduced in eight states and Congress to restrict masks at protests, according to the center. Many of these laws date back to the 1940s and '50s when many states passed anti-mask laws as a response to the Ku Klux Klan, whose members hid their identities while terrorizing victims. Amid protests against the war in Gaza and the Republican president's immigration policies, Page said there have been attempts to revive these rarely used laws to target protesters, sometimes inconsistently. Trump's calls to arrest protesters for wearing masks came as federal agents were seen donning masks while conducting raids in Los Angeles and other U.S. cities. Democratic lawmakers in California have introduced legislation aiming to stop federal agents and local police officers from wearing face masks amid concerns that ICE agents were attempting to hide their identities and avoid accountability for potential misconduct during high-profile immigration raids. The issue also came up at a congressional hearing on June 12, when Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, criticized ICE agents wearing masks during raids, saying: 'Don't wear masks. Identify who you are.' Republican federal officials have maintained that masks protect agents from doxing. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the California bill 'despicable." Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor, said the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the right to free speech includes the right to speak out anonymously. But he said how it should apply to protesters wearing masks remains 'an unresolved First Amendment question.' For Stone, that raises a key question: Why should protesters and ICE agents be subject to different rules? 'The government doesn't want them to be targeted because they engaged in their responsibilities as ICE agents,' Stone said. 'But that's the same thing as the argument as to why you want demonstrators to wear masks. They want to wear masks so they can do their 'jobs' of engaging in free speech properly. The same rationale for the officers wearing masks should apply to the protesters.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Senate parliamentarian rejects GOP attempt to authorize states to conduct immigration enforcement
The Senate parliamentarian has rejected several more provisions in the Republican megabill to enact President Trump's agenda, including language authorizing states to conduct border security and immigration enforcement, which traditionally have been duties of the federal government. Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough also ruled against language in the bill that would increase the Federal Employees Retirement Systems (FERS) contribution rate for new civil servants if they do not agree to give up civil-service protections to become at-will employees. Additionally, the parliamentarian advised against a section of the bill that would allow the executive branch to reorganize federal government agencies — or eliminate whole agencies — without congressional oversight. The parliamentarian ruled these provisions violate the Byrd Rule and are not eligible to pass the Senate with a simple-majority vote on the procedural fast track known as budget reconciliation. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, hailed the parliamentarian's rulings. 'There is no better way to define this Big Beautiful Betrayal of a bill than families lose, and billionaires win. Democrats are on the side of families and workers and are scrutinizing this bill piece by piece to ensure Republicans can't use the reconciliation process to force their anti-worker policies on the American people,' Merkley said in a statement. 'The Byrd Rule is enshrined in law for a reason, and Democrats are making sure it is enforced,' he said. The parliamentarian additionally rejected a provision granting authority to agencies to unilaterally rescind funds appropriated by Congress by establishing an incentive program for federal employees to identify 'unnecessary expenditures' and transfer savings back to the Treasury Department. And she ruled against language in the bill mandating the sale of all U.S. Postal Service electric vehicles and charging infrastructure.
