Tag: Michigan

Categories
crime and punishment ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall

Mostly Democratic

Michigan, illegal immigrants, voting, democracy, violence

An email from Voters Not Politicians (VNP) predicts that if a certain popular ballot measure gets enough signatures “it’s likely to pass.”

Great! Wonderful to see democracy in action, eh?

Not so much for this leftwing political action committee, however. “We have to keep this proposal off of Michigan’s ballot in 2026,” the email went on.

The initiative petition in question is Michigan’s Citizen Only Voting Amendment, which (1) clearly establishes that “only” U.S. citizens are eligible voters in all state and local elections, (2) mandates that the Secretary of State check the voter rolls for citizenship status, and (3) requires photo ID to vote. 

Polls have shown upwards of 80 percent of Michigan voters support the measure. Perhaps spurred on by the noncitizens who were shown to have voted unimpeded in last November’s presidential election.

How will VNP honchos accomplish their mission of suppressing a petition for a public vote on this ballot initiative? They urge folks to “learn how to peacefully disrupt circulation.” 

“Disrupt”? That doesn’t quite go with “peacefully.” 

Last month, Charlie Kirk was assassinated speaking on a college campus. According to a recent poll,* the percentage of Democrats who believe “Americans may have to resort to violence” to achieve political goals has doubled this year. Back in April, a survey found that a majority of self-​identified “left-​of-​center” respondents agreed it was “somewhat justified to murder President Trump.” The same survey found that 15 percent found it “completely justified.”

Destroy democracy to save it? 

As chairman of Americans for Citizen Voting: We won’t let you. Stop trying to block us and others from speaking. Instead, speak out against our measure to your heart’s content. 

I also suggest looking for a rallying slogan that fits better with “peacefully.” 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* From 12 percent of Democrats saying so in May of 2024 to 28 percent this year. The percentage of Republicans believing violence may become necessary is higher still — 29 percent in 2024 and 31 percent in 2025. A whopping 77 percent of the public cited political violence as “a major concern.”

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
election law

A Nothing in Michigan

Michigan, voting, citizenship

It’s May in Michigan and Democrats have just “introduced their first pieces of legislation to respond to what they consider overly aggressive Republican proposals to improve election security,” Hayley Harding reports for VoteBeat.

Yes, the problem is those darn Republicans wanting too much election security too fast, doncha know.

“Michigan Democrats’ election proposals sidestep the noncitizen-​voting issue for now,” was how the Michigan Advance headlined the article, in which Harding explains that “the package of bills under the Michigan Election Security Act won’t close the voter registration loopholes that may have allowed at least one noncitizen to cast a ballot that counted last year.” 

Oops! That one University of Michigan student, Haoxiang Gao, is a Chinese national, who didn’t show up for court; whereabouts currently unknown. 

Since that bombshell, another 15 cases have surfaced of noncitizens voting illegally last November. Nonetheless, Harding informs us that “the bills omit the measures Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson suggested in February as a way to prevent noncitizens from casting ballots in Michigan’s elections.”

Back then Benson “didn’t provide details of her proposal,” noted Harding, but mentioned “policies that enable us to track and retrieve” those votes “cast by voters who registered the same day as the election.”

“It could be provisional ballots, it could be additional verification or residency requirements in that moment,” the Secretary of State, now a candidate for governor (whose recent campaign announcement on state government property violated state law) offered reporters. 

Sure, her proposal could have been a lot of things.

Now we see, however, that it is nothing. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Accountability general freedom government transparency

Less Oversight?

Gretchen Whitmer, Michigan, Audit, spending, taxes

There are long-​standing debates among those who oppose big government. One is whether we should promote every budget cut and any tax cut, or whether we should more-​or-​less carefully support only some cuts — on the grounds that some possible cuts might scuttle future reforms.

This came to mind upon hearing Michigan Governor Gretch Whitmer’s plan to reduce the budget of one of her state’s bureaucracies by 28 percent.

Hooray!

But wait a moment: the department to be cut is the Office of the Auditor General!

Whitmer’s proposal is to take the $30 million budget and bring it down to a lean $21.7 million.

The point of an auditor is to make sure that government does not misuse the money taken from taxpayers, allegedly for the public benefit. Take that away, and what do you have? 

Waste. Corruption — a recipe for it, anyway. Maybe an engraved invitation for it.

Is there any merit to this reduction? Democrats are not known to love budget cuts. 

They say Michigan’s auditor’s office has been “too partisan” — and certainly said things about Democrat programs that don’t make those programs look good!

“If there is ever a place in Lansing where we should rise above petty partisan politics, it should be oversight and ethics,” Rep. Tom Kunse (R‑Clare) said, expressing a perspective I share.

So what’s really going on here? Well, the state is facing a $418 million surplus. That’s a lot of money to play with. What’s the likelihood that the party in charge wants to reduce the Auditor’s Office for any other reason than to reduce scrutiny of how they plan to spend that money?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall local leaders

Democratic Notion for Gotion

Ji Jinping, battery plant, protest, Michigan

One problem with American politics? Far too many decisions get made by the federal government. 

Not only is the Washington Leviathan removed geographically from most citizens, it’s also completely devoid of the direct democratic checks available to voters in most American cities and roughly half of U.S. states: initiative, referendum, and recall. 

At the state and local level, we can often respond directly to unpopular government actions with a ballot measure or a recall campaign. And these local efforts can at times impact our national government —  even international policies. 

That’s what happened last Tuesday in Green Township in Mecosta County, Michigan, when voters recalled their entire township board — sending all five remaining board members packing after a sixth member had already resigned.

Back in April, spurred on by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s cheerleading, Michigan lawmakers approved $175 million in “taxpayer incentives” [read: subsidies] to help Gotion Inc. “build a $2.4 billion electric vehicle battery plant.”

Public uproar was not merely over the subsidy but also because the company’s parent company, Gotion High Tech, is based in China.

“We don’t want it here. It’s dangerous. We’re zoned agricultural, and they’re trying to re-​zone our property,” said resident Lori Brock. “There’s nothing that’s been truthful about this.”

When it became clear that, in addition to state legislators not listening, local officials showed more interest in making a deal than being transparent with citizens, Brock filed a petition to recall the board.

And the rest is hist … well, not so fast. Township officials continue to say the deal is done. To which Brock pledges, “We’re moving forward with lawsuits against Gotion.” 

Because voters were able to express themselves, there is hope.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

PDF for printing

Illustration created with DALL-​E2 and PicFinder

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ballot access initiative, referendum, and recall term limits

Sketchiest Etching

term limits, Michigan, hourglass, sand

State legislators placed Proposal 1 on the Michigan ballot to weaken their own term limits. It would let current incumbents stay up to twice as long in a single office and allow termed-​out former legislators to return. 

Nonetheless, its elite backers insist that it makes term limits tougher.

To give proponents something to talk about other than this term limits scam, Proposal 1 also adds weak financial disclosure requirements for legislators — similar to (but weaker than) the rules that keep the U.S. Congress … so clean and honest.

“Never have so few applied so much lipstick to such a pig,” is how one Michigan term limits activist describes it.

That’s big lie #1 on the Great Lakes State ballot. 

Big lie #2 is Proposal 2, leftists’ feel-​good voting rights measure funded by $10 million (and counting) in outside dark money (which I thought they abhorred). It guarantees stuff like a ballot dropbox on every corner and free postage for mailing back absentee ballots, etc., etc., etc.

Its real purpose is to place a new right into the Michigan Constitution: The right to vote WITHOUT showing any official photo identification. In fact, no ID whatsoever. Instead, the amendment establishes that simply signing a statement that, aw shucks, you are who you say you are, is all that can be required.

With Proposal 2 making any actual voter ID requirement unconstitutional, what’s their pitch to Michiganders?

“Proposal 2 etches voter ID into our state constitution,” declares one television spot.

Another proclaims Proposal 2 puts “voter ID requirements” into “our constitution” to make elections “safe and secure.”

Michigan’s Etch-​a-​Sketchiest insiders are actually promoting a prohibition of voter I.D. as a demand for that very thing. That’s the audacity of … fraud.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with DALL‑E

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Fifth Amendment rights Fourth Amendment rights

The War Against Cash Carriers

Gretchen Whitmer, MIchigan, asset forfeiture, theft, crime

Michigan’s lawmakers and governor seem determined to remind us that history is no nonstop march into the light.

In the Great Lake State, the latest confirmation is a return to virtually unrestricted legalized cash-​grabbing at the airport, reversing halfhearted reforms of several years earlier.

After those reforms were enacted, a traveler had to be toting in excess of $50,000 before officials a Michigan airport could be “justified” in confiscating his cash on a mere suspicion that it is associated with a crime.

But now, because of legislation just signed by Governor Whitmer, the threshold has been knocked down to $20,000.

Maybe you must be naïve to carry so much cash where police and other functionaries can easily get at it, but as Dan King of the Institute for Justice observes, you don’t have to be a criminal. And traveling with cash is not a crime.

Around the country, innocent persons have often run afoul of civil forfeiture laws that let authorities steal money earned by others without any showing that the money is ill-gotten.

With help from organizations like Institute for Justice, people who make the mistake of traveling with substantial cash — to buy a truck, open a bank account, whatever — just might get their money back after spending months in the courts. 

And suffering much anxiety. 

For the officials who cause the anxiety, both the thefts and any temporary judicial setbacks amount to just another day at the office.

This is open thievery by the State, turning cops into robbers.

Opposing it is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
crime and punishment national politics & policies

That Other October Surprise?

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer

Harken back to those heady days leading up to Election 2020, when six men were arrested for a scheme to snatch Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer from her home.

As with other October surprises, the case was immediately politicized. 

“Democrats on Thursday made it clear they felt President Trump was at least in part to blame for an alleged scheme to kidnap the governor of Michigan,” government-​subsidized NPR noted, “citing the president’s divisive rhetoric that has often found support among white supremacists and other hate groups.” CNN used the phrase “domestic terrorist plot” in relating presidential challenger Joe Biden’s laying of blame against Donald Trump.

Six men were charged in federal court with directly conspiring to nab the governor. Two have pled guilty to the federal charges, but on Friday the trial ended very differently for the four other would-​be abductors.

“A federal jury acquitted two men of conspiring to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, and deadlocked on the counts against two others,” reported The Washington Post, “apparently agreeing to some degree with defense claims that FBI agents entrapped the men in a violent plot shortly before the 2020 election.”

“The Whitmer kidnapping plot,” Reason’s Robby Soave explained months ago, “was extensively directed and encouraged by agents of the government.” 

This was not just a bungled prosecution.* This was the result of a wrongheaded and dangerous policy that, instead of lawfully monitoring suspected criminals to prevent violence, actively nurtures and encourages crimes. 

And breaks the story in early October of an election year.

Sure, I know the government is here to help — but even “domestic terrorists”?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* “Suffice it to say,” Soave wrote about the FBI’s handing of the case, “it’s very hard to tell the cops from the criminals in this matter.” For instance, “the government’s star witness, FBI Agent Robert Trask, was fired by the agency after beating his wife following an orgy at a swingers party.”

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
government transparency initiative, referendum, and recall insider corruption term limits

Pucker Up

term limits, lipstick, pig, Michigan

“Never have so few applied so much lipstick to such a pig.”

That’s what term limits activist Kurt O’Keefe told the Michigan Board of Canvassers last week, as it considered the official title for a citizen initiative that he argues is anything but.

The Detroit attorney points out that the proposed ballot measure — sponsored by a group named Voters for Transparency and Term Limits — actually comes from “current and future politicians” and “current and future lobbyists.”

These insiders, who’ve “never been in favor” of term limits, seek to replace the 6- and 8‑year cap now in place in the House and Senate, respectively, with a 12-​year overall limit in both houses. At the hearing, proponents argued that the ballot title should declare simply that their measure reduces the current term limits — even though it would double terms in the House and up the Senate cap by 50 percent.

The initiative would also allow former Speakers and previously termed-​out legislators to return like the undead to their former capitol haunts. 

“This is a trick,” warned U.S. Term Limits National Field Director Scott Tillman. “We know it is a trick. They know it is a trick. They had to sweeten it up with transparency.”

That’s the lipstick.

Yet, the transparency fix, instead of simply enacting a financial disclosure system, orders the legislature to do so. Of course, the legislature cannot be forced to legislate, so the measure encourages endless lawsuits against the legislature. 

As if to further show just how sincere these politicians are, their “voters” front-​group has raked in $5 million from “unknown sources,” according to the Michigan Information & Research Service. 

They are transparent only in their self-​serving insincerity.

Oink oink.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall term limits

Michigan Voters: Alert!

Michigan, elections, term limits, democracy

Michigan voters: Beware of a petition by the group Voters for Transparency and Term Limits, a nontransparent group working deceitfully against term limits.

Currently, Michigan state senators are limited to two four-​year terms; state representatives to three two-​year terms. The VTTL people want to bloat maximum tenure in a legislative seat to twelve years, which they call a “reduction” because the twelve years would nominally cap total service in both chambers.

A now-​familiar gambit. The old, stock propaganda against term limits just doesn’t cut it anymore: arguments about how “term limits give lobbyist ginormous power, and, uh, we already have term limits and they’re called elections” are a nonstarter these days. Term limits are too popular and have been too effective.

So enemies of term limits now pretend that they’re the best friends term limits ever had. Indeed, they wish to strengthen term limits … we’re just not supposed to notice that by “reducing” the two-​chamber overall limit by two years generally politicians will stay longer in office.

With 110 House seats and only 38 Senators, it is merely mathematics that few politicians successfully switch chambers to serve the current 14 year maximum. But, rest assured, this amendment means virtually every politician will stay in the same legislative seat for 12 years. 

Greg Schmid, author of the definitive commentary on this hoax, predicts that VTTL will pretend to conduct a petition drive for a while, then invite incumbent politicians in the Michigan legislature to refer the measure to the ballot, skipping the initiative’s expense and hard work.

If you see the petition, don’t sign. If the amendment gets to ballot, vote No.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
term limits

Legislators Turned Lobbyists Turned Altruists

Michigan, term limits,

Legislative bosses, the state’s most powerful special interests and a fake grassroots organization teamed up a month ago to figure out how best to attack Michigan’s popular term limits law. 

Now comes a lawsuit demanding that a federal court overturn these 27-​year-​old voter-​enacted limits.

“I’m just sitting here watching five former legislators, who are now lobbyists, sitting in the conference [room] of another lobbyist in Lansing talking about how the courts should rescue them from the voters,” Patrick Anderson, author of the 1992 term limits law, told MIRS.* 

Self-​serving? Not at ALL. “When you take the most experienced people out of government,” asserted John Bursch, the legislator-​lobbyists’ attorney, “it shifts the balance of power to career bureaucrats and to lobbyists.”

So, clearly, these kind, meek, caring lobbyists are altruistically rejecting more power and influence for themselves and, instead, working selflessly for the greater good. No wonder everyone loves lobbyists.

In pursuing the legal approach, Bursch did acknowledge, “We think it would be very difficult to put anything on the ballot that would be successful.”

Their legal rationale is as implausible as their putative public-​spiritedness. The lawsuit contends that term limits deny legislators the opportunity to gain law-​making competence while also listing all the wonderful legislation these legislators-​turned-​lobbyists once passed … when working under term limits. 

It’s not a legal argument, either way, but which is it?

“I’m having trouble,” offered Rina Baker with Don’t Touch Term Limits, “remembering a single moment when I wished any of the plaintiffs were still in office.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* Unfortunately, this capitol insider publication is behind a paywall, so no link is available.

Michigan, term limits,

from photo by Beth LeBlanc/​The Detroit News

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts