When apprised of Schadone's comments, he issued this statement: "It is appropriate to have a closed Democratic caucus to allow party members to freely discuss issues for the coming year.''

He also noted his leadership teams plans to hold what he is calling an "economic forum'' on December 1 "that will be open to the public, the press and all 75 House members."
House members interviewed in recent days have been unclear on the agenda for the caucus, and how far it might stray from the stated reason for the discussion scheduled to begin at 4 p.m. in the House lounge.

In a letter informing the House Democrats of his plans for the caucus, Murphy wrote: "The purpose of the caucus will be to hear your input and freely discuss some potential plans of action for the current fiscal situation. Because of the economic morass the state is in...I want the House to be fully prepared for action regardless of whether the Governor adheres to the mandates of when his budget must be presented.

"I believe this caucus will be a significant first step in helping the House of Representatives organize a forward thinking plan of action,'' he wrote.

The House leadership did not respond to a question about why the meeting would be closed to the public.

But a number of legislators said they believed some of their colleagues would not feel free to talk openly about what they think the legislature should do in public.

"Maybe some people need (closed meeting) to hash out whatever is on their minds,'' remarked Rep. Joseph Almeida, D-Providence. Almeida said he is not one who generally feels that need, but he agrees "we need to have a meeting and correct ourselves...and stop acting like a bunch of actors on the House floor, so I think that is a sense of professionalism that needs to be spoken about.''

Almeida did not name names, or attribute the behavior that troubles him to the members of any one political party. He said: 'It's everybody... I think we need to come up with a better idea of how to make a plan, a financial plan for the state of Rhode Island, and I don't think we should be acting foolish in front of cameras and reporters.''

But House Minority Leader Robert Watson, R-East Greenwich, said he told Murphy "I thought it was a mistake to exclude the six Republicans'' who, over the years, have championed some of the municipal-cost saving ideas now gaining traction at the State House, such as relief from state mandates.

"I don't see why they need a secret meeting to discuss that,'' Watson said. In fact, "I see no reason why the Democrats should feel they need to go behind closed doors if they are trying to come up with good ideas. That's something they should be able to talk about in the open and not be embarrassed. ''

But Watson said he suspects the discussion will, in some way, reflect the political maneuvering around Murphy's announced plans to leave the rostrum sometime after next January.

And he suggested other scenarios, such as: "If they need to talk about how they are going to deliver binding arbitration, oh yeah, I can imagine why they want to do that in secret. If they want perpetual contracts, I now know why they would want to do that behind closed doors.''