Glenn Anderson to run for Congress

State Sen. Glenn Anderson (D-Westland) will announce tomorrow morning that he is running for Congress in 2012.

Anderson served in the state House from 2001 until his election to the state Senate in 2006. Before that, he served nine years on the Westland City Council. Anderson worked at Ford starting in 1972 (where he joined the UAW) and is also a licensed Realtor.

If Anderson is elected to Congress, it won't be the first time he's pulled off such an upset. In order to win his election to the Senate in 2006, Anderson had to defeat an incumbent, Laura Toy. Anderson and Jim Barcia are the only two Democrats in the past 21 years (perhaps longer) to win a Republican-held State Senate seat. Renowned political analyst Peter Bratt called Anderson's 2006 campaign "one of the best I've seen in Michigan politics."

Anderson will run in the 11th District for the seat currently held by Thaddeus McCotter. No word yet on whether McCotter plans to run for re-election, but another Republican - State Sen. Mike Kowall (R-White Lake) - is running. Like the old 11th, the new 11th is not the friendliest for Democrats, but in the old 11th, McCotter only won by 6% in 2008 against a little-known Democrat. Said Democrat, Joseph Larkin, actually won the Wayne County portion of the district.

Anderson is a well-respected, tenacious, blue-collar Democrat who knows how to win and of whom we can all be proud. Republicans have a huge fight on their hands.

Howard Wolpe, Congressman and Diplomat, 1939-2011

Howard Wolpe - Congressman, professor, diplomat, and 1994 Democratic nominee for Governor of Michigan - has died. Wolpe, 71, was preceded in death by his wife, Judy (1944-2006).

From his obituary on Mlive.com:

Wolpe was first elected to Congress in 1978 and represented the Kalamazoo area for seven terms.

A native of California, Wolpe moved to Kalamazoo to teach at Western Michigan University. He was an expert in African political systems.

He served on the Kalamazoo City Commission from 1969-72, when he was elected to the Michigan House of Representatives.

Wolpe also served as Director of the Africa program for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Here's some of his recent work on Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and other Africa-related issues.

There are politicians, and then there are public servants. Wolpe was a public servant.

May he rest in peace. May his family and friends find comfort.

My banished words submissions for 2011

For the past few years I have been submitting words for inclusion in Lake Superior State University's List of Words Banished from the Queen's English for Mis-use, Over-use and General Uselessness.

This year my submissions (followed by reasons for banishment) are:

• Absolutely free – As opposed to ‘somewhat free?’
• Free Gift – Thank God for free gifts! I was getting sick of paying up to $10 for a gift.
• Jeggings – Why not just say ‘jean leggings?’ Or better yet, why not just get rid of ‘leggings’ and say ‘pants?’
• Totally unique – As opposed to ‘somewhat unique?’
• Screwed – Used to mean that something has been fastened into something else. Now it usually refers to being in a precarious position – and something more risqué.
• Shared sacrifice – Usually used by a politician who wants other people to share in the sacrifice so he/she doesn’t have to.
• We have a lot of work to do – If there’s a lot to be done, then do it!
• We need all the help we can get – Then get the help you need!
• We have our work cut out for us – It actually sounds nice – “Hey, someone cut out our work for us so we don’t have to!” But it usually means a lot needs to be done.

Spending Money Wisely - or, In Defense of the MDP

With the success of Wisconsin Democrats' recent efforts to recall Republican lawmakers and replace them with Democrats, a number of progressives in Michigan have called on the Michigan Democratic Party to seek to recall Michigan Republican lawmakers.

The MDP's recent request for support in defeating recall attempts against Democratic lawmakers provoked the ire of one blogger on Blogging for Michigan. What follows is my response to his post, which I have chosen to repost here.

---------------

Frankly, I remain unconvinced that the MDP should be spending – rather, wasting – members’ hard-earned dollars on the remote possibility of electing Democrats just months before the entire State House will be up for election anyway.

There will be something in November 2012 called a ‘general election.’ If a Republican can’t be ousted in November 2012, they probably couldn’t be ousted in a recall election either.

Of course, many of us believe that in those rare cases in which a recall SHOULD be attempted, the petition-gathering stage of such an effort should be done on as grassroots a level as possible. Whatever your views on that, let’s be practical here: Is it worth it for the MDP to spend our (members’) money on getting petition signatures just for the ever-so-slight possibility that someone might be recalled in a couple months and possibly – just possibly – be replaced by a Democrat six whole months (i.e. 1/4 of a state House term) later, and just before the term is to expire anyway? Especially when it would take eight successful recalls just to bring Republicans down to 55 House seats?

Now if we had a recall system like they do in Wisconsin, I would be more likely to support MDP involvement in the petition-gathering stage. Consider the differences between Michigan and Wisconsin: There, once the petition is filed, the countdown is on for a general election to be held between the two major-party nominees (and if needed, a primary takes place beforehand). And that election can take place within a couple months. Here, OTOH, after petitions are filed, the next step is for an election to determine whether the person should actually be recalled in the first place. THEN there’s a primary, THEN a general election after that which would take place six months after the original recall vote (and about nine months after petitions are turned in).

Suppose petitions to recall a Republican lawmaker were turned in tomorrow. The recall vote would happen in February, which is not an ideal time for Democrats, since that is the date of the Presidential primary (in which most voters will be Republicans, thus likely shellacking a recall attempt against a Republican by a wide margin). In the highly unlikely event that the lawmaker IS recalled, the primary to succeed him/her would be May 8. The general election would be August 7 - also not ideal since Republicans will have another statewide primary that day, this time for US Senate. Whether or not many Democrats vote will depend on whether or not Democrats have competitive primaries for different races in that state House district. Not to mention how confusing the ballot would be for those unfamiliar with the primary process - "Okay, so I could only vote for Republicans in that section of the ballot, so I guess I'll have to vote for the Republican in this state House race too." In the unlikely event that a Democrat is elected in August, guess what will happen just three months later? The general election.

Oh, but the MDP doesn't have the money to keep them in office or to help carry Michigan for Obama. Thus they who were elected in August lose just three months later. Plus we're stuck with President Perry, Senator Durant, and the scorn of Michigan once again being the scapegoat in the Democratic Party. All because the MDP was spending money trying to get people recalled so others could replace them for three months.

Suddenly, it seems pointless for the MDP to be spending all that money, doesn't it?

Now if the MDP had enough money to throw around, maybe it would make more sense for MDP leaders to support the petition-gathering stage. But as we all know very well, the DeVoses are not Democrats, and the MDP is not the richest entity known to humankind.

As to fighting Republican attempts at recalling Democratic lawmakers? Republicans are infamous for using every dirty trick in the book to get Democrats recalled. Witness (1) the 2007-2008 recall campaigns against lawmakers who voted to raise the income tax; (2) the tricks used to get Wisconsin Democrats recalled; and (3) the effort to get the affirmative action ban on the ballot in 2006. In all of these cases, deception was used to get signatures from people who wouldn’t otherwise support their efforts.

If any of these campaigns against Democratic lawmakers are able to get the necessary petition signatures, guess when the recall election would be? February 28. I already mentioned above that most of those who vote on February 28 will be Republicans, who would be much more likely to vote ‘yes’ on a recall question against a Democrat. Result? These Democrats would be VERY likely to get thrown out of office. In other words, this (the petition-gathering stage) IS the election, so to speak. Whether or not folks like Brandon Dillon stay in office for the rest of their terms could very well be decided more by the success or failure of the Republicans’ petition-gathering efforts, with the February 28 election being a formality.

That’s why this needs to be fought NOW.

As an MDP member, I expect Party leadership to act in ways that will help us elect Democrats and keep current Democratic elected officials in office. Every dollar that is spent on an effort that is highly unlikely to succeed is a dollar that cannot be spent helping to re-elect our President, re-elect Senator Stabenow, and take back the US House, the State Supreme Court – and, by the way, the State House.

Snyder recall effort fizzles; focus must shift to winning in 2011 and 2012

No surprise here.

Two newspapers report an effort to recall Republican Gov. Rick Snyder is fizzling.The Detroit Free Press on Wednesday cited an e-mail from campaign spokesman Tom Bryant saying "the recall effort will be coming to an end."

Organizers tell The Livingston County Daily Press & Argus the effort will fall short of making the February ballot.

The Associated Press called numbers listed on the group's state finance registration but didn't reach anyone actively involved in the recall effort.

We can debate until the cows come home about whether or not it was worth it to try to recall him. Everyone knew the odds were stacked - only two states have ever recalled a governor. But since we all know that this recall campaign is done with, there is no reason - none - to waste time looking behind and asking, 'What if...?'

What needs to happen now is that those who were involved in the effort to recall Snyder need to continue - rather, expand - their efforts to keep this progressive movement going. Sure, not all of us Democrats/liberals/progressives were on the same page when it came to recalling Snyder. But we ARE on the same page in opposing the emergency manager law, efforts to make Michigan a Work-for-Less state, and the many other fronts in their War on People.

So if you live in Michigan, get involved in the fight to repeal the EFM law. Write/call your elected officials. Donate to a favorite candidate before the Friday night deadline (if I could find a full-time job, I certainly would make a contribution or two!). Volunteer for candidates running in this November's elections. Help make the Democratic Party more progressive by taking part in Engage Michigan.

In addition to local races in 2011, there's a plethora of activity on the 2012 ballot with races for President, US Senate, US House, State House, State Supreme Court, countywide offices, county commissions, and so much more. In addition to the likely EFM referendum, we'll probably see another ballot initiative or two.

Hanging together is so much more fun than hanging separately.

Tom McMillin seeks to violate the Constitution of the United States; should he be expelled?

Michigan Messenger reports that conservative state representative Tom McMillin has introduced a bill that would ignore federal law and allow incandescent light bulbs to be manufactured in the state of Michigan.

McMillin's bill claims:

An incandescent lightbulb that is manufactured in this state without the inclusion of parts, other than generic or insignificant parts, imported from outside of this state and that remains within this state has not entered into interstate commerce and is not subject to congressional authority to regulate interstate commerce.

First of all: How does one define "generic or insignificant parts?"

Second - and more importantly - McMillin is attempting to supersede a federal law, the Energy Independence and Security Act, which phases out incandescent light bulbs.

McMillin's bill is bad enough in that it would undermine America and our energy security.

What makes it worse, however, is that McMillin is openly violating his oath to "support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of this state" as required by Michigan's own Constitution.

Article VI of the Constitution of the United States is clear:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

So, by merely proposing this bill, Tom McMillin is violating the oath of office provided for under Michigan's Constitution by failing to uphold the United States Constitution and instead seeking to violate it.

Tom McMillin is breaking the law.

For the sake of the rule of law, Tom McMillin needs to be expelled from the Michigan House of Representatives.

Not that they'd do that to a fellow Republican, but you know they would try that if a Democrat did this.

Never forget.

Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give it to you. Do not let your hearts be troubled or afraid. - John 14:27

These past ten years have been unlike any decade in American history. Of course, the road hasn't exactly been smooth. We have been through a LOT - two wars, two recessions, racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, and countless scandals affecting corporate, governmental, and even religious entities. My grandfather died in 2004.

Nonetheless, we have also had some bright moments. Shortly after September 11, we learned about the heroism of our police, firefighters, and troops. The election of our current President was one of the most inspiring moments of my lifetime. I graduated from high school in 2005 and from college in 2010.

People have been asking what we have learned in the past decade. If there's anything these past ten years have taught me, it's that Helen Keller was right:

Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.

And - most importantly - that overcoming of suffering begins with us.

After September 11, most of us felt a wide range of emotions: Sadness, confusion, fear, anger, hopelessness.

No two of us humans are alike, which is why we all reacted in our own unique ways. So many people, including myself, turned to prayer. Others gave money, blood, and time to help those who had been affected (though being in high school, I was only able to give a dollar or two). Unfortunately, some reacted in all the wrong ways, including taking out their fears on Muslims and Arabs.

There are many things I wish were different about the past decade, one of which is that I wish more people would have learned about viewpoints other than their own. That includes religious viewpoints.

We see the hostility all the time: Islam equated with terrorism, Christianity equated with intolerance, Catholic priests stereotyped as pedophiles, atheists accused of having no morals, religion as a whole being blamed for the world's problems.

Perhaps some of that is because the attackers ten years ago tried to usurp the name of God to justify their hatred. But it would seem to me that, whether these "bastards" (as Carl Levin called them) had been Muslims, Christians, Jews, Atheists, Agnostics, or whatever, they still would have committed these atrocities.

Either way, we all need to understand that there is NOTHING inherently violent about any of the world's religions. All are based on tolerance, love, and peace.

We all need to understand that there is NOTHING about not believing in God that makes one any less tolerant, loving, or peaceful than the Pope.

We need tolerance.

We need love.

We need peace.

Tolerance, love, and peace are the best responses to whatever challenges - natural or man-made - we as humans face.

For those of you who do believe in prayer, I offer this Catholic prayer for all those who died on that horrible day 10 years ago, and all of the troops and innocent civilians who have died in the ensuing wars:

Eternal rest Grant Unto Them, O Lord,
And Let Perpetual Light shine upon them.
May their souls, and all the souls of the departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

Amen.

Republicans demand higher taxes. No, really!

Republicans want to raise your taxes. Republicans want to raise your taxes. Republicans want to raise your taxes.

Tell your family and friends - especially the conservatives you know - because it's true.

As part of last December's deal that extended the Bush tax cuts by two years, employees' share of the payroll tax was temporarily decreased from 6.2% to 4.2% for 2011.

As most of you know, the payroll tax only applies to the first $106,800 earned per year, meaning the more you make above that cap (which President Obama has expressed interest in lifting), the less of an impact you will feel from a change in that rate (compared to the amount you actually make). If the payroll tax cut is allowed to expire at the end of this year, those with smaller incomes would be disproportionately harmed.

Naturally, that's what congressional Republicans want:

Many of the same Republicans who fought hammer-and-tong to keep the George W. Bush-era income tax cuts from expiring on schedule are now saying a different temporary tax cut should end as planned. By their own definition, that amounts to a tax increase.

We've all heard the argument from Republicans that tax cuts create jobs. It's been ten years since the Bush tax cuts (which disproportionately benefit the wealthy) went into effect, and during those ten years, five of my relatives have lost jobs (to end up with lower-paying jobs). Meanwhile, my employment at the moment consists of bartending 2-3 times per month - not a job for me.

But tax cuts for the lower and middle classes make more sense. What do those who aren't as well off do with the money they make? They usually spend it or pay off debts. Unlike those who are wealthy, they can hardly afford to save much. Thus, reducing the payroll tax and reducing income taxes on those who are less well off is more likely to help the economy than trusting in trickle-down economics - based on a theory which has failed time and time again.

But with an election nearing, and congressional Republicans making having admitted that defeating Obama is their #1 priority, said Republicans have come out in support of something they have traditionally opposed: Higher taxes!

The 12-month tax reduction will cost the government about $120 billion this year, and a similar amount next year if it's renewed.

That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said.

Yep, facing the likelihood that the President will be re-elected if the economy gets better, Dave Camp is suddenly worried about the impact that tax cuts on ordinary people might have on the deficit.

Then why did Camp and other Republicans enthusiastically support the Bush tax cuts of 2001, which were more than 10 times as costly to the government and which have contributed more to the national debt than even the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

(Of course, why did Camp and other Republicans enthusiastically support the wars in Iraq in the first place? But I digress.)

It all comes back to the sentiment expressed in Mitch McConnell's infamous statement that "The single most important thing we want to achieve" is to make Obama lose in 2012. Not to focus on job creation, not to focus on reducing the deficit (which would happen if more jobs were created), but to stop this President from winning next year.

To them, the threat of a double-dip recession brought on by woes in Europe is not as dangerous as the threat that the most successful president in decades (per Rachel Maddow) just might be given a second term by the nation that decisively voted him in three years ago.

To them, denying the Nobel Laureate a second term is more important than doing what makes economic and moral sense.

To them, stopping our freely elected President from serving our country for another four years is more important than being patriotic and doing what's best for our country.

To them, making the less fortunate suffer is okay (even though the Bible, in which they claim to believe, says otherwise) if that's what it takes to defeat this President.

To them, defeating the constitutional-law-professor-turned-Chief-Executive is worth walking back their anti-tax pledges and other 'principles.'

Amash blasts both parties, then raises money for one of them just hours later

What say ye, Congressman?

I've had enough of each party blaming the other for this debt crisis that they jointly got us into. I implore my colleagues to cut back on the partisan rhetoric and think instead about the American people, who are on the brink of ruin because of Congress' persistent refusal to act responsibly.

Interesting that Amash would say that.* Especially given that just a few hours after he posted that, he raised some cash for the Party of Palin.

Young Republicans who want to meet Calley will have a chance Monday at a $100-a-head fundraiser hosted by “The Young Party-ers,” the Kent County GOP’s new initiative to recruit young professionals.

Calley, the second-youngest lieutenant governor in state history, will be joined by U.S. Rep. Justin Amash, the second-youngest member of Congress, at the Republic Restaurant, 45 S. Division Ave.

This is probably not the first you've heard or read of the 'both-parties-are-at-fault-for-what's-going-on-in-Washington' canard. And I'm sure it won't be the last, since polls show that Americans blame Republicans for the economic mess we're in, the mess DC's in, and so forth.

But it's interesting that Amash would raise money for a Party he blames for the deficit.

*I actually agree with him on the second sentence of his status. – Congress (or at least many leaders thereof) have not done their jobs. Still, it's a heck of a stretch to say that both parties "jointly got us into" the debt.

Who Said It?

Dear Howard:

This letter is to ask for your help and support, and that of your colleagues, in the passage of an increase in the limit on the public debt.

As Secretary Regan has told you, the Treasury’s cash balances have reached a dangerously low point. Henceforth, the Treasury Department cannot guarantee that the Federal Government will have sufficient cash on any one day to meet all of its mandated expenses, and thus the United States could be forced to default on its obligations for the first time in its history.

This country now possesses the strongest credit in the world. The full consequences of a default or even the serious prospect of default by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate. Denigration of the full faith and credit of the United States would have substantial effects on the domestic financial markets and on the value of the dollar in exchange markets. The Nation can ill afford to allow such a result. The risks, the cost, the disruptions, and the incalculable damage lead me to but one conclusion: the Senate must pass this legislation before the Congress adjourns.

I want to thank you for your immediate attention to this urgent problem and for your assistance in passing an extension of the debt ceiling.

Sincerely,

Ronald Reagan

This is an actual letter that Mr. Conservative himself sent to then-Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker in 1983. Fast forward to 2011, and some House Democrats have passed it around to their Republican colleagues.

President Obama also mentioned on Friday that Reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times.

No wonder we haven't heard much about Reagan since his 100th birthday this year - tea partiers are against what he stood for, because darn it, he was too liberal!