Coming Soon to a Ballot near you, Part II: Proposals

Welcome to Part II of a post-2010 election, pre-2012 election miniseries here on Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott, titled "Coming Soon to a Ballot Near You." Part one, on candidates who may make a comeback, can be found here.

Michigan residents have voted on 19 statewide ballot proposals since 2000. These proposals have legalized medical marijuana and stem cell research; banned gay marriage and affirmative action; and restricted eminent domain, felons serving in office, and pay increases for lawmakers. Voters have also blocked mandates on education funding, mourning dove hunting, the elimination of the 'straight-ticket' voting option, and school vouchers.

Despite Michigan's recent history with controversial ballot proposals, the two that appeared on the 2010 ballot garnered very little attention - and the results of each were decisive. Proposal 1, the proposal for a Constitutional convention which appears on the ballot every 16 years, was defeated by a 2-1 margin, while Proposal 2 passed by a 3-1 margin, thus preventing certain felons from holding elective office until 20 years after their conviction.

The lack of controversy from last year's ballot proposals may have contributed to the low turnout in this year's gubernatorial election. Nearly 570,000 fewer voters showed up at the polls in this year's gubernatorial election compared to 2006 - despite nicer weather and the fact that an unusually high number of seats were open.

But with the 2012 campaign starting to warm up, activists on all sides of various issues are getting ready to collect signatures to put various proposals on the 2012 ballot. Debate surrounding ballot proposals often influences the debate surrounding offices on the ballot. Recall, for instance, the considerable debate surrounding Bush, Gore, and vouchers in 2000, as well as Bush, Kerry, and gay marriage in 2004.

With 3,226,088 people having voted in the 2010 election for Governor, a ballot proposal would need the following number of signatures to get on the ballot, depending on the type of proposal:

• For a Constitutional amendment: 322,609 signatures


• For an initiative statute: 258,088 signatures


• For a referendum on a bill passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor: 161,305 signatures

So the bar has been set a little lower due to the low turnout in the gubernatorial election, meaning this could be the best chance supporters of a certain issue have to get a proposal on the ballot. Result? 2012 could be the busiest year, proposal-wise, that Michigan has had since 1996.

What issues could be the topics of ballot-proposal discussion in 2012?

Mining: Supporters attempted to get a proposal on the 2010 ballot that would have severely restricted mining in Michigan. They say they will try again for the 2012 ballot.

Healthcare: Opponents of President Obama's healthcare law failed to get a measure on the ballot that would have apparently stopped the healthcare law from taking effect in Michigan. A similar measure passed in Missouri last year.

Term limits: This is one of those that is often talked about, but hasn't been on the ballot since the current limits were enacted in 1992. Since then, individuals have been eligible to serve three 2-year terms in the House and two 4-year terms as a State Senator, Attorney General, Lieutenant Governor, and Governor. Petitions were circulated in 2010 to eliminate term limits, but it didn't make it to the ballot. A group is trying to get it on the ballot in 2012; their proposal also calls for the elimination of the state Senate.

Rights of state employees: The same group attempting to get the term limits/get-rid-of-the-Senate proposal on the ballot is also pushing for three ballot proposals that would curtail the rights of working Michiganians. These proposals would ban collective bargaining by our hard-working state employees; make Michigan what I call a "Work for Less" state; and repeal the Public Employment Relations Act. The Legislature is considering bills that would do these things, thus possibly making these efforts irrelevant. However, if such bills are passed and signed into law, don't be surprised if labor groups unite to force these issues onto the ballot via referendum.

Casinos: Following the passage of Proposal 1 in 2004, new casinos may only be opened following a statewide vote to approve such casinos. If the group Michigan Is Yours gets their way, we could have seven new casinos opening across the state after the 2012 election.

(Historical fun fact: Another provision of the 1992 proposal had limited members of the US Congress from Michigan to six 2-year terms in the House and two 6-year terms in the Senate; however, like other term limits laws affecting members of Congress, the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to invoke restrictions on serving in Congress beyond what is already in the Constitution (being of a certain age, living in the US a certain period of time, and living in the state you wish to represent in Congress).)

Government reform: In 2008, a number of Michigan Democrats tried to get a detailed proposal on the ballot that was called "Reform Michigan Government Now. Among other things, the proposal would have reduced the number of state lawmakers and judges; curbed state lawmakers' retirement benefits; mandated a paper trail for all elections; prohibited election officials from being involved in campaigns for elections they directed; and established a commission to conduct redistricting. Each of these issues could be placed on the 2012 ballot separately, although the one on redistricting may wait until later in the decade.

So what should progressive Democrats like us do?

Given that Republicans control the entire Legislature, there may be a lot of bills passed by the Republicans in Lansing that end up being both bad politics and bad policy. In addition to the anti-worker efforts mentioned above, there is also a bill to eliminate the Earned Income Tax Credit. Forcing these laws onto the ballot by referendum could prove to be a very worthwhile strategy.

Ah, but there's a catch. See, any bill that includes an appropriation of some sort is not subject to a referendum. That was the reason the state Supreme Court blocked a referendum on the controversial concealed weapons law of 2001. If referenda on destructive Republican legislation are prohibited by such appropriations, we could still reverse these laws through the initiative process.

Either way, promoting our stances on issues via ballot proposals is an effort Democrats should definitely undertake. Win or lose on the proposal itself, this strategy would give otherwise apathetic voters - many of them Democrats/Obama supporters - a reason to vote.

And if 2010 taught us anything, it's that they sure do need a reason to vote.

MDP Announces Five Potential Ballot Proposals for 2010

What goes on with the races for Governor, Secretary of State, AG, Congress, Education Boards, Legislature, the judiciary, and local races will be important in 2010. Just as important, however, are what ballot proposals will appear. They often affect voter turnout and can even determine the outcome of other elections.

Well, at least one proposal will appear on the ballot in 2010: Voters will be asked (as they are at least every 16 years) if we should have a Constitutional Convention. But the the Michigan Democratic Party is considering putting one of five other proposals on the ballot.

And the nominees are:

• Mandating all employers to provide affordable health care for their employees and dependents or pay a penalty.
• Raising the minimum wage from $7.40/hour to $10/hour and covering all workers with no exceptions.
  
• Increasing unemployment benefits by $100/week, making all workers eligible and adding six months to the time one can receive benefits.
• Cutting utility rates by 20%.
• Imposing a one-year moratorium on home foreclosures.

Sounds good, right? Well, unfortunately, they probably won't be able to put them all on the ballot. They only have so much in terms of resources, and it takes hundreds of thousands of petition signatures to get it on the ballot.

At any rate, Brewer opted not to mince words:

“While the greedy corporate CEO’s of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Detroit Regional Chamber, and Detroit Renaissance are worried only about their selfish interests, the Michigan Democratic Party is focused on helping all the people of Michigan get through these tough economic times.”

“The corporate special interests are using these tough times to advance the same tired old agenda – cut jobs, wages, and benefits; reduce services; and shift taxes onto the middle class and the poor,” observed Brewer. “These proposals put people first and will help millions of Michigan citizens.”

Hot damn! Here's a guy who knows how to stand up for what it means to be a Democrat! I wish he had more company among the Blue Dogs in Congress!

My election recap, ten days later

I've been pretty busy over the last few days, and it's taken a while to collect all of my thoughts toward this election. But, here goes!

Surprises
The biggest surprises of the election:

1. Diane Marie Hathaway unseating Cliff Taylor. It is considered all but impossible to lose a race for state Supreme Court when you're the incumbent. I figured Taylor had it in the bag - and quite handily, I might add.

2. Obama winning Kent County. I mean, hello!

3. Proposal 2 passing. In all honesty, I figured Prop 2 was toast. I saw a lot more organization from the "2 goes 2 far" folks.
4. The Democrats expanding their majority in the Michigan House. Just over a year ago, a small group of anti-tax conservatives launched recall campaigns against several Democrats (and a few Republicans) to punish them, if you will, for raising taxes. I had no clue that, a year later, Democrats would expand their majority in the state House by 9! Dems have gained 20 seats in the last three election cycles despite a Republican gerrymander, for a majority of 67-43.

What Obama overcame

A partial list of things Barack Obama overcame in order to win this election:

• Inexperience
  
• Bill Ayers controversy
  
• The Rev. Wright controversy
  
• The front-runner status of a former President's wife
• The Republican nomination of a war hero
• The standard lies about Democrats wanting to raise your taxes
• I could go on and on

America: A Socialist Country?

Not according to me. But if you ask some of Obama's fiercest critics, America would rather pay higher taxes and live under a socialist President who "pals around with terrorists" than have four years of Bush-lite. Hmm, something to think about.

Do we need 60 Senate seats?

What we need is for 60 Senators to vote to invoke cloture on a measure in order for it to pass. If the next Congress convenes with 56 Democrats, 42 Republicans, and 2 independents - which seems to be the most likely outcome at this point - cloture can still be achieved provided that a handful of Republicans cross over to vote for cloture. (Likewise, if the Dems did get 60 seats, cloture wouldn't have been certain on any bill.) And cloture votes generally receive more support than the final vote to pass a bill, the latter of which only requires 51 votes as you know.

So save for very divisive issues, the probability of Obama getting much of his agenda passed through the Senate in the next two years probably will not be hindered so much by the fact that there will only be 56 or 57 Democrats in the Senate instead of 60. No, it won't be easy. Not by any stretch of the imagination. But nothing is impossible.

My most famous professor

Congratulations to US Representative-elect Gary Peters on a ten-point thumping of Joe Knollenberg! I had the privilege of taking a class with Peters last semester. Also, congratulations to Mark Schauer for winning his race in the 7th District, despite the fact that he too voted for a much-needed tax increase in the state Senate!

2010 offers us the chance to defeat another Republican incumbent, Thaddeus McCotter, who won by only 20,567 votes over a little-known Democrat!

Thanks

I cannot begin to thank all of you who helped make Barack Obama our next President! I thank all who took the brave step of running for office, the field directors I met (Ted in Mt. Pleasant, Aaron in Kentwood, and many others), the high schoolers who helped put stickers with voting location info on door hangers, and everyone else of whatever age, gender, or race who called, canvassed, entered data, provided food for volunteers, wrote letters to the editor, etc., etc.

Thanks to you, I will have many fond memories of this campaign. But more importantly, hope has triumphed over fear, and courage has been rewarded over cowardice. May I inspire others as much as you have inspired me!

Granholm landslide highlights a great week to be a Democrat!!

As of 4:30 Thursday, here's an UPDATED look at how the election returns are shaping up according to CNN and Michigan Liberal:

Last night, the Democrats gained control of the US Senate as Jim Webb (D) beat George Allen (R) in Virginia. US Senate: 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans, 1 independent.

US House: 229 Democrats, 196 Republicans, 10 undecided seats.

Governorships: 28 Democrats, 21 Republicans, one undecided race (MN; The Repub incumbent is leading by a small margin). Granholm 56%, DeVos 42%. Rougly 3.8 million people voted in Michigan. 3.4 million were expected to vote. Damn, that's awesome!

Ballot proposals: 1 passes, 2 passes (^@&#), 3 fails, 4 passes, 5 fails.

State Senate: It looks like 21 Republicans, 17 Democrats. Just a couple thousand votes in a couple seats would have tipped the balance. Grr. But hey, we did get the......

State House: 58 Democrats, 52 Republicans.

Democrats SWEPT the races for State Board of Education, and U-M, MSU, and Wayne State governing boards! Has that ever happened?

Election 2006 predictions: How well did I do?

Governor/Lieutenant Governor:
Granholm/Cherry* 51%-47%
Actual: 56-42% (better than I expected)

Secretary of State:
Land* 58-41%
Actual: 56-42% (better)

Attorney General:
Cox* 53%-46%
Actual: 54-43% (worse)

US Senate:
50 Republicans. 49 Democrats
Actual: 50D, 49R, 1I (better than I tought - woohoo!!)

Michigan:
Stabenow* (D) 55-44%
Actual: 57-41%

US House:
Democrats: 219, Republicans: 216
Actual: 230-196 (with 9 undecided)

MI-3:
Ehlers* 61-38%
Actual: 63-35%

MI-4:
Camp* 58%-41%
Actual: 60-38%

State House:
56 Democrats, 54 Republicans
Actual: 58-42

District 72:
Steil* 78-20%
Actual: 66-32%

District 75:
Dean 52-48%
Actual: 51-47%

District 99:
Caul* 64-36%
Actual: 58-42%

State Senate:
19-19 plus Lt. Gov. Cherry's tie-breaking vote
Actual: It looks like 21-17 Repubs.

District 29:
Hardiman* 49.7-49.1%
Actual: 53-46%

District 33:
Cropsey* 59-41%
Actual: 54-44%

State Board of Education:
Weiser*, Turner*, McMillin, Ulbrich
Actual: Ulbrich, Turner, McMillin, Weiser

U-M Regents:
Brandon*, White*, Darlow, Brown
Actual: White, Darlow, Brown, Brandon

MSU Trustees:
Perles, Porteous*, Cook*, Owen
Actual: Perles, Owen, Cook, Porteous

WSU Governors:
Dingell, Driker*, McLemore, Akouri
Actual: Dingell, Driker, Akouri, McLemore

Supreme Court:
Cavanagh*, Corrigan*, Beckering, Shulman
Actual: Cavanagh, Corrigan, Beckering, Shulman

Kent County Drain Commissioner:
Byl 58-42%
Actual: 58-42%

17th Circuit Court:
Brinkman 50.2-49.8%
Actual: Trusock 51-49%

Ballot proposals (in tems of what percentage of voters vote yes):
Proposal 1: 61%
Proposal 2: 46%
Proposal 3: 41%
Proposal 4: 64%
Proposal 5: 41%

Actual: 82%, 58%, 31%, 80%, and 38%, respectively

Election 2006 Predictions

These predictions are mine and mine alone. Percentages often do NOT add up to 100% to account for third party performance.

Governor/Lieutenant Governor: Jenny is peaking at just the right time. Unlike the last two Dem governors (Swainson in 1962, Blanchard in 1990), Jenny won't lose for re-election.
Granholm/Cherry* 51%
DeVos/Johnson 47%

Secretary of State:
Land* 58%
Sabaugh 41%

Attorney General:
Cox* 53%
Williams 46%

US Senate: Didn't expect this one to bbe within reach. That said, I don't want to be too optimistic.
50 Republicans
49 Democrats

Michigan:
Stabenow* (D) 55%
Bouchard 44%

US House: A lot of people say they expect Democrats to win control of the House. Even Bill Ballenger predicted Dems would hold a 220-215 advantage! I've convinced myself that it won't happen. That way, if it doesn't, I won't be disappointed. But now I'll say it: I predict Speaker Pelosi come January.
Democrats: 219
Republicans: 216

MI-3: Rinck has name recognition, which is unusual for Ehler's oppoonent. Plus, it's a bad year for Repubs, so he won't do as well as usual. (He usually gets 67% or better.
Ehlers* 61%
Rinck 38%

MI-4: More people know Huck in '06 than in '04... but they still like Camp!
Camp* 58%
Huckleberry 41%

State House:
56 Democrats
54 Republicans

District 72 (Kentwood, Cascade, Caledonia): I'm stuck with Prop 2 supporter and minimum wage opponent Steil for another two years.
Steil* 78%
Hinton 20%

District 75 (part of G.R.): This is an open seat, where the Dem challenger got 48% in '04 after barely campaigning.
Dean 52%
Doyle 48%

District 99 (Isabella + part of Midland): Putting it mildly, Partlo is a disaster. ICDP endorsee and 20-something Eric Welsby would break 40% if he had won the nomination. (He lost in the primary by 61 votes.)
Caul* 64%
Partlo 36%

State Senate:
19 Democrats, plus Lt. Gov. Cherry's tie-breaking vote
19 Republicans

District 29 (Grand Rapids, Kentwood): This district is split in terms of party lines. Six months ago, I would've said that Hardiman was a loock for re-election, getting around 60-65% of the vote. But LaGrand has surprised me. I predict it will be close, with the popular Hardiman edging out the also-popular LaGrand.
Hardiman* 49.7%
LaGrand 49.1%

District 33 (Isabella, Montcalm, Ionia, Clinton):
Cropsey* 59%
White 41%

The following races are listed in terms of what order each major candidate will finish in. Top two get elected.

State Board of Education: The 5-3 Dem majority remains.
1. Eileen Weiser*
2. Reginald Turner*
3. Tom McMillin
4. Casandra Ulbrich

U-M Regents: 5-3 Dems here too. Again, no change.
1. David Brandon*
2. Kathy White*
3. Julia Darlow
4. Susan Brown

MSU Trustees: For any candidate, name recognition is important. This is especially true here, and that will help Perles more than his actions at MSU will hurt him. The GOP holds a 5-3 majority. Look for an even 4-4 split now.
1. George Perles
2. Dave Porteous*
3. Dee Cook*
4. Faylene Owen

WSU Governors: Currently it's 6-2 Dems over GOP. One of the two Repubs is calling it quits, and Debbie Dingell has a lot of name recognoition for a candidate on this part of the ballot. Can you say 7-1?
1. Debbie Dingell
2. Eugene Driker*
3. Andrew McLemore
4. John Akouri

Supreme Court: When's the last time an incumbent justice lost for re-election?
Michael Cavanagh*
Maura Corrigan*
Jane Beckering
Marc Shulman

Kent County Drain Commissioner:
Byl 58%
McKay 42%

17th Circuit Court: Many judges, plus the Grand Rapids Press, are endorsing Trusock, but the all-powerful Right to Life is endorsing Brinkman. I smell a recount.
Brinkman 50.2%
Trusock 49.8%

Ballot proposals (in tems of what percentage of voters vote yes):
Proposal 1 (Conservation Trust Fund): 61% vote yes
Proposal 2 (Affirmative action ban): 46%
Proposal 3 (Allowing mourning dove hunting): 41%
Proposal 4 (Emnent domain): 64%
Proposal 5 (Education funding): 41%
So Props 1 and 4 pass, while 2, 3, and 5 are going down.

My 2006 General Election Voting Story

At approximately 12:50 AM on Friday the 13th (let it not be a bad omen), I, Scott Urbanowski, patriotic American and proud Democrat, filled out my absentee ballot for my first General election, seven hours after picking it up in the mail. (Okay, I could've voted last year, but there were literally no contested races in Kentwood.)

It took six minutes and twenty seconds for me to fill out 33 bubbles, 28 for candidates and 5 on ballot proposals.

As I voted for Jenny, I thought of a few of the people from all over the state who will join me in supporting our Governor: My parents; Lieutenant Governor John Cherry; Amos Williams; Dan Mulhern; John and many others from the ICDP; Andy and all the College Dems; Dan, Lonnie, and Mike (and a few others) from SGA; Haley and Sue from the Kent County Party; David LaGrand; Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow; John Conyers... and even a few Republicans. The list goes on and on.

And then Vietnam vet, former Detroit cop, and respected attorney Amos Williams for Attorney General. And Macomb County Clerk Carmella Sabaugh for Secretary of State.

Then I voted for Debbie. Sure, I don't agree with everything she has done, but she did oppose Roberts's and Alito's confirmations to the Supreme Court, as well as the Iraq War. Not to mention the fact that thanks to her, Canadian garbage will not be coming to Michigan for much longer. We are fortunate that Debbie and Carl are our US Senators. May we have many more years with them!

Then to US House. Vern Ehlers is pretty popular, but he voted for CAFTA and cut student financial aid. While I expect Ehlers to win by another landslide, I voted for Jim Rinck. On paper, Rinck is probably the most qualified Democrat to run against Ehlers in the 13 years Ehlers has been there, having been on the Grand Rapids school board.

And then LaGrand for State Senate. If you were to ask me six months ago if LaGrand could beat Bill Hardiman, I would've said, 'nope, Hardiman's a shoe-in.' Then I saw the crowd of supporters for LaGrand in the Kentwood Fourth of July Parade. Then he won MichiganLiberal's very first Michigan First! endorsement. Then I met David personally. Yes, LaGrand can win, and I am proud to support him!

Then on to state boards. Law professor and Army major Kathy White; Gore 's Michigan campaign manager Debbie Dingell; former American Bar President Reginald Turner; and former Michigan Bar President Julia Darlow are just a few of the fine folks who got my vote for state and university boards.

I suppoorted Brian McKay for Kent County Drain Commissioner. Having worked for the City of Grand Rapids in a similar job, he is more qualified than Republican nominee Bill Byl (though I expect Byl to win easily; Other than GR, Kent County is about as Democratic as Ted Kennedy is Republican).

Supreme Court Justice Michael Cavanagh received my support for another eight-year term. I also voted for Jane Beckering, listed in 'The Best Lawyers in America.'

As for the ballot proposals: I joined the Grand Rapids Press; both DeVos and Granholm; SGA; and many others in saying HELL NO to Proposal 2. I also opposed Proposals 1 (sounds good, but unnecessary and would place too many funding restrictions in the state Constitution), 3 (I'm unconvinced that we must kill mourning doves in order to move forward in this state), and 5 (would force the state to spoend more money that it doesn't have; more on Prop 5 in a few days). I did support Proposal 4, which would restrict government's ability to seize property by eminent domain. For more on the ballot proposals, check out http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Statewide_Bal_Prop_Status_145801_7.pdf .

Having applied 63 cents postage (a regular stamp plus a postcard stamp) and sealed and signed my return envelope, I slowly placed my envelope, ballot inside, in the mailbox in the Towers lobby.

Want more info regarding the election? Ask me, or check out www.michigan.gov/vote . Also, click here to print up an absentee request form and send it to your city clerk. (Never voted before? You must request an absentee ballot IN PERSON at your clerk's office, unless you registered to vote in person at your clerk's office.)

PLEASE do yourself a favor and VOTE! The current governor of Washington was elected by 133 votes. Bush won Florida by 537 votes in 2000. In the '80s, a congressman won re-election by four - FOUR - votes.

If you don't vote, you have no one to blame but yourself. So go vote. It's easy and quick... and the job you save may be your own.

Controversy over affirmative action ban heads to federal court

Here's an update on the Michigan "Civil Rights" Initiative:

Witnesses testified in federal court Thursday that they were tricked into signing or collecting signatures on petitions to put a proposal to ban some affirmative action programs on the November ballot.

State courts so far have sided with the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, whose proposal to ban race and gender preferences in government hiring and public-university admissions is to be put to voters Nov. 7.

Joseph Reed of Detroit testified that when he applied as a petition circulator, "I was told it was for keeping affirmative action, that they were trying to get rid of it and this was a way to keep it."

Reed collected signatures and told voters, "You're signing to keep affirmative action," he said. But after a few weeks, people began accusing him of deceiving petition signers, and he learned the proposal's true goal.

I guess the questioon is, can they prove that enough signnatures were collected wrongly to warrant its remval from the ballot? If not, then remember to vote NO on this backwards plan in November.

(Isn't it just odd that leading Republicans want the Ten Commandments posted in public places and government buildings, but shudder at the thought of actually FOLLOWING some of them, i.e. the one about not lying?)