The ProJo’s angry man (continued)

Achorn’s stock-in-trade, though, remains ominous dispatches about what he sees as the maladies affecting state politics: "Be wary of House leaders" (February 11, 2003); "Still waiting for RI reform" (April 24, 2003); "Legislators’ contempt for citizens" (June 24, 2003); "The abnormal Ocean State" (September 2, 2003); "RI’s tolerance for mediocrity and sleaze" (February 10, 2004); "Governor Montanaro and a rigged game" (April 6, 2004); "Boss Montanaro plays public for dupes" (May 24, 2004); "RI feudal model fails citizens" (June 8, 2004); "Chaos at the sausage factory" (June 22, 2004); "Anatomy of a sick democracy" (July 13, 2004), and so on.

Although certainly not a Republican, I happen to enjoy reading Achorn’s column and believe that his distinctive voice and crisp writing represent an asset for the Journal. Still, even though Whitcomb does a good job of presenting local and distant op-ed contributors with a wide range of ideological views, the absence of a steady countervailing view from the other side — the local equivalent of someone like the New York Times’ Paul Krugman — means that other points of view are, in effect, shouted down. And while Achorn might fully represent the underlying thinking of the upper management of the Journal, which was acquired in 1997 by the Dallas-based Belo Corporation, his steady laments about the tyranny of one-party rule distance the paper, or at least its editorial pages, from the views of a large part of its readership.

When the most aggressive Republican drive in a generation to gain legislative ranks produced meager results last November, Achorn blamed "the Las Vegas gambling interests" seeking a local casino and "the public-employee-union bosses." But, says one ProJo insider, "He’s the guy who refuses to see the role of democracy in all this. People aren’t Republicans in this state."

FOR SUPPORTERS OF REFORM and members of Rhode Island’s modest GOP minority, Achorn’s clarion calls about State House intrigues and subterfuges are a godsend.

"I have to say that Ed Achorn, in my opinion, has been a breath of fresh air in Rhode Island," says Robert Arruda, chairman of the good government group Operation Clean Government. "I think he has been instrumental in furthering reforms in state government," including separation of powers. When so many legislative elections go uncontested, Arruda says, Achorn plays a valuable role by helping to stimulate discussion about important issues.

Patricia Morgan, chairwoman of the Rhode Island Republican Party, says she and her acquaintances read and discuss Achorn’s columns religiously. While the Journal routinely offers prominent news coverage of many of the same issues that he writes about, "I think anytime we can add another voice that explains the ramifications of these actions, maybe 10 more people, maybe 100 more people, will say, ‘OK, now I’ve got it,’ and it’s important that there be an informed electorate."

Along with a handful of other states, Rhode Island has a reputation as a historic hotbed of corruption, and the Journal has done its share over the years in rooting out wrongdoing by public officials, winning a 1994 Pulitzer, for example, for exposing corruption in the court system. Indeed, a fair number of people would say that Achorn is close to the mark in writing critically about topics such as the need for pension reform and stronger economic infrastructure, and how the representation of Lincoln Park by the law partner of John B. Harwood when Harwood was speaker, and more recent rules changes in the House, were problematic

Boosters say Achorn’s repetition of familiar themes drives his message home. Critics, though, say he makes state government sound much worse than it actually is.

Although his column has found a better footing in recent months, says Maureen Moakley, chairwoman of the political science department at the University of Rhode Island, "For a while there, he became increasingly inflammatory, and I used to call his column ‘the Tuesday tirade,’ and it really smacked of a kind of yellow journalism. It was really thick with innuendo, and although it turned peoples’ heads to a level of malfeasance in Rhode Island, I think it was eventually so over the top that it became comic. I think people began to not take it so seriously, and I don’t think it reflected well on the editorial integrity of the Journal. For a while there, it became so outrageous that I was waiting to open the paper and see Achorn conjure up a conspiracy that blamed Bill Murphy and Joseph Montalbano for the war in Iraq, jokingly suggesting that the weapons of mass destruction could be found in the basement of the State House."

One union leader calls Achorn’s invective one-sided and highly selective: "He’s extremely anti-labor, at least in terms of public employees. He also engages in a certain amount of name-calling, like referring to [RI AFL-CIO president Frank] Montanaro as ‘Boss Montanaro.’ Referring to labor leaders as union bosses is the equivalent of using ethnic slurs. You don’t see them referring to [retired industrialist] Henry Sharpe as a robber baron. They don’t refer to lawyers as shysters, so why are they calling a labor leader a union boss?"

Meanwhile, a Smith Hill source — who questions whether Achorn has stepped into the State House — faults him, in contrast to political columnist M. Charles Bakst, for not making a routine effort to interview Democratic legislators. "You would think that at least he would pick up the phone every now and then," the source says. "You know, ‘This story looks outrageous — can I ask you a few questions about it?’ " The source says most Democratic legislators have never met Achorn, and adds, "By the way, this is a complaint that I’ve heard from within the Providence Journal as well."

Asked how the amount of corruption in Rhode Island compares with the depiction in Achorn’s column, Brown University political scientist Darrell West notes the corruption-related convictions over the last 10 years of former Providence mayor Cianci and former governor Edward DiPrete. "I think it’s fair to say that there’s an ethics problem in the state," says West. "I think most of the legislators are honest and hard-working. I think the biggest problem they face is sometimes being out of touch with the public. They do things that make people outside the legislature scratch their heads and wonder why they’re doing that," like acting slowly in implementing separation of powers.

The overall extent of the influence of Achorn’s column remains a subject of debate. Laffey, the GOP Cranston mayor who is a favored subject of the op-ed writer, says, "I think it has had a very wide impact. Some days, when he writes about these [State House] things, as far as the people I hear from, it becomes the front page . . . They’re very serious issues and he digs down deep." But Democratic consultant Guy Dufault, who has been skewered by Achorn and dismisses him as "nothing more than a mouthpiece of management interests," says polling has shown fewer than five percent of Rhode Islanders read the Journal’s editorial pages.

"I think he’s probably got a small vocal group of devotees," says a Journal insider, likening Achorn to a conservative former WHJJ-AM radio talk-show host. "To me, what he is, is a John DePetro with a library."

Brown’s West, though, thinks Achorn’s influence varies with different columns. "I think that when he personalizes the subject, there’s the risk that people will get upset with that and miss the larger point he’s trying to make, because he’s written columns going after specific individuals," he says. "I think that is different from addressing a problem."

For his part, Achorn shows no signs of changing his fundamental focus. After expressing more exasperation in the past, he pronounced himself "bullish on RI politics" in a column after the November 2004 election, citing "bubbling beneath the ice," and predicting, "Healthy change is coming to the Ocean State, whether politicians like or not." Time will tell whether Achorn’s hope for a more competitive two-party state is moving any closer to fruition, and perhaps whether his role as a polarizing figure is ultimately more salutary or hurtful.

Ian Donnis can be reached at idonnis[a]phx.com