|
|
Michigan Democratic Party 
Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 13:03:57 PM EST
|
Straight from today's 'Letters to the Editor Section'
Well-within AG's role
In response to your Nov. 4 editorial, "Snyder needs to keep big GOP majority on target":
When did the Free Press decide that Michigan's newly elected attorney general will not hold a policy-making office in this state? In pushing his tough-on-crime agenda, Attorney General-elect Bill Schuette is acting in the tradition of all his predecessors of the past 50 years.
The state attorney general is a constitutionally elected officer and possesses all the inherent powers of an attorney general. As the Official Record of Michigan Constitutional Convention stated: "The activities of the attorney general's office range over the entire breadth of state government. His scope of interest is as great as that of the governor."
Prisons, public safety, taxes and many other issues are important to the citizens of Michigan, and they need a strong attorney general to weigh in.
Richard D. McLellan
A member of Bill Schuette's transition team, Lansing
[Emphasis Added]
More background below...
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 69 words in story)
|
|
Tue Sep 16, 2008 at 21:08:25 PM EDT
|
|
CROSS-POSTED FROM MICHIGAN YOUTH POLITICAL ALLIANCE Democratic presidential candidates have had the advantage in our state since 1992, when Bill Clinton won our state and made the climate favorable to Al Gore and John Kerry. Surprisingly however, while all three previous presidential candidates had leads 5-6 points higher than the national margins, Obama leads our state with only a 1-2 point margin. Why isn’t Obama doing as hot as the other previous candidates? After all, McCain is the one who scorned our embattled struggle to revitalize the auto industry, and it’s Obama who shows a more genuine concern for the common people of Michigan–those stuck in their foreclosures, suffering from escalating heath care costs and hopeless from job loss. From the viewpoint of a young Michiganian, I think this standstill will quickly change in the upcoming weeks.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 2014 words in story)
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 19:44:04 PM EDT
|
(Well, it's official. - promoted by ScottyUrb)
Well, apparently it's happened, Mark Brewer and the Michigan Democratic Party were unable to accomplish the basic task of holding an election for our delegates to the National Convention in Denver. The leadership of the MDP has proven itself completely incompetent -- no election, no campaigns, no discussion of Michigan issues, no movement to change the primary calendar. With or without delegates, this is a complete and total failure. So, it's time to head to your county clerk office, pick up a form and run for MDP Precinct Delegate so you can vote at your County Party Convention and the State Party Convention against Brewer, Dingell, and anyone who sat on the Central Committee during this farse.
The AP report:
Michigan Democrats are expected to decide Friday against holding a do-over presidential election, The Associated Press has learned.
The state party's executive committee is expected to hold a meeting by phone to vote on a statement saying any kind of election to replace the results of the January 15 primary no longer is possible, according to Democratic leaders who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions so far have been private....
Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton supported holding a second election so the delegates could be seated, but rival Barack Obama feared problems [meaning, squashed all attempts at democracy in Michigan -- pgb].
State Democrats now hope the two campaigns can agree on a way to split Michigan's 128 pledged delegates so they can be seated at the Aug. 25-28 convention in Denver....
The state Democratic Party already has pushed back the date for choosing national convention delegates to April 19, hoping the matter can be resolved before delegates are chosen.
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and four top Michigan Democrats who have been trying to work out a way to get the delegates seated are expected to put out a statement Friday after the executive committee vote.
In the statement, they're expected to say the DNC is committed to seating Michigan's delegates at this summer's convention as long as any agreement is supported by the party's two presidential contenders....
A sad day for Michigan Democrats. We've lost an opportunity to reunify the MDP through a mulligan primary or caucus (blame: Obama), because this unity was harmed by the January 15 strawpoll powerplay (blame: Hillary, Granholm, D. Dingell, Levin and Brewer's weakness). And what will be the harm? Unenthusiastic activists, unmobilized voters who didn't get a chance to get excited by a primary campaign and hear the Democratic brand, and fewer memberships and donations. And this all leads to an opening for McCain to win Michigan (remember Kerry won by a mere 3% and for all McCain's faults, he isn't George Bush), harms our chances of retaining the State House, and prevents any coat-tail tidal wave at the county level because of low Democratic turnout.
Someone must stand up in opposition to Brewer-Dingell. Anyone listening?
|
|
Discuss
:: (126
Comments)
|
|
Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:02:37 AM EDT
|
Disclaimer: in case you didn't know already, I back Obama
Barack Obama
should endorse the current June 3 Michigan primary proposal.
Why?
Well, for one thing I still retain this quaint notion - only recently
subscribed to by Camp Hillary - that we ought to have a vote in
Michigan with more than one major candidate on the ballot.
But
here's another reason: I have $20 that says even if Obama gave the
go-ahead to this idea...it still wouldn't happen. So he may as well
cast his lot on the right side of the issue.
I'm not
necessarily saying that the Clintons and their Michigan backers are
bluffing - though the thought has certainly crossed my mind. But
there does appear to be more than a few other significant
obstacles to its enactment than just Barack Obama. Take for instance,
the terrific list offered up here
by the noble Mark Grebner last week at the instant the June 3 plan
surfaced.
The biggest problem: in order for this to
happen, both the Democratic-controlled House and Republican-controlled
Senate have to give it immediate effect. That means a 2/3 vote
of both chambers. And...unless they want to forgo their vacation, they
have to do it TODAY.
Call
me crazy, but given the
complexity of this proposal and the fact that it's never really been
done quite like this, I just don't see a 2/3 vote coming
together in
one day. And anyone who was around for the budget brouhaha last fall
knows how much our beloved legislature loves its vacations. Even with
the prospect of the first government shutdown in 50 years staring them
right in the eye, they still went on vacation. Does
anyone see Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop (R-Rochester) giving up any of his precious R
& R to pull the Dems' fat from the fire? Riiiight.
(More below the fold...)
|
|
There's More...
:: (41
Comments, 610 words in story)
|
|
Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 21:33:22 PM EDT
|
It's beginning to look like Florida is moving toward Grebner's mail-in idea. And if that happens it seems likely Michigan won't be far behind. From the AP: A consensus began to emerge Sunday that the best way to give Florida's Democrats a voice in electing a candidate for president lies with the U.S. Postal Service.
--snip--
DNC Chairman Howard Dean said a mail-in primary is "actually a very good process."
"Every voter gets a ballot in the mail," the former Vermont governor said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "It's comprehensive, you get to vote if you're in Iraq or in a nursing home. It's not a bad way to do this."
As for who pays, Dean said, "That is a problem," reiterating that the party needs its money for the general election campaign against Republican John McCain.
He also ruled out the state of Florida, where Republican Gov. Charlie Crist has nixed the idea. Dean suggested the state Democratic party might foot the bill. Florida's political parties, unlike the DNC, can accept unlimited contributions.
Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., supports the mail-in solution, comparing it to an absentee ballot process. He also pinned his hopes on the state party to pay for it.
--snip--
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., appeared to be amenable to a mail-in solution for his state, though with less enthusiasm.
Speaking on ABC's "This Week," Levin said doing the election again would be against state law. "That can't be changed, and that can't be paid for," he said. Levin also said caucuses would be difficult, with 500 potential sites.
"The one possibility would be some kind of a mail-in caucus," he said. "But there's some real problems with that, too. Not just cost, but the security issue. How do you make sure that hundreds of thousands, perhaps a million or more ballots can be properly counted and that duplicate ballots can be avoided?" I guess I'm old-fashioned in that I still prefer at least having the ability to show up somewhere (other than a mailbox) to cast my vote. That said, a mail-in election is certainly an improvment over an election with only one real candidate on the ballot...
|
|
Discuss
:: (30
Comments)
|
|
Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 08:21:21 AM EST
|
Well,
here's one
way to pay for a new primary/caucus:James
Carville, a Democratic operative and Clinton supporter, said on
CNN that he had been calling deep-pocket Democrats and pledged to come
up with $15 million to help pay for primaries in Michigan and Florida.
He challenged Obama supporter David Wilhelm, a former DNC chairman, to
match it.
"I'll guarantee $15 million and have the
Obama people put up $15 million," Carville said. "And let's go to the
polls come June 7. I've got fund-raisers that are lined up ready to go.
I think the Democratic Party is going to look absolutely absurd if they
don't have primaries and let these people in Florida and Michigan vote."
Wilhelm
said the issue needs to be solved but was noncommittal to Carville's
suggestion. Meanwhile, MDP chair Mark Brewer pointed
publicly to the Obama campaign as the immovable object standing in the
way of a
new Michigan primary/caucus. The Obama camp counters that they're still
open to
a "fair solution." This from
the Detroit News: Michigan Democratic
Party
Chairman Mark Brewer said Friday that the Obama campaign opposes a
do-over election scenario preferred by Gov. Jennifer Granholm. On
Thursday, she advocated a "firehouse primary" -- a contest that is
somewhat less than a full-blown primary but broader than a caucus. It
would be run by the party, and allow Democrats to vote at as many as
1,000 sites across the state on a Saturday in June.
"Obama
opposes the redo as proposed by the governor and unless we can get the
two campaigns to agree on something it's not going to happen," Brewer
said.
A statement from the Obama campaign, however,
suggested Brewer overstated its position. While the campaign is adamant
that results from the Jan. 15 primary must not be recognized -- Obama
had his name stricken from the ballot, to protest the unauthorized
early primary -- it is open to a "fair solution."
"Our
campaign will support whatever the DNC rules are, including a fair
remedy to this problem," Obama spokeswoman Amy Brundage said. "However,
allowing Sen. Clinton to change the rules and award her the nonexistent
delegates when there was no campaign in the state and Obama's name was
not on the ballot is not the answer. Whatever the resolution, we are
looking forward to building a winning campaign in Michigan in the
general election." Since no one has seen the
specific details of what's being proposed - and apparently rejected by
the Obama camp - it's hard to say for sure exactly what's going on.
Maybe they've decided they're better
off just going to Denver without
the Michigan/Florida issue resolved. What a disappointment
that would be (not to mention bad strategy for winning or
holding superdelegates).
Then again, perhaps there is some particularly onerous provision in
the "firehouse" plan that we don't know about. Maybe there's some weird
linkage to Florida. More likely in my mind is that Obama is
simply
holding out in favor of a format that's more favorable to him. I guess
that's somewhat understandable...but the clock is a-ticking. And it
would be pretty shameful if the whole thing fell apart just because
they're playing
tit-for-tat.
We'll see what tomorrow brings...
Finally,
in case you're missed it, our old friend and ML front-pager Mark Grebner
is the guest on Michigan Public TV's "Off the Record" this week.
If any
of you have ever wondered what Mark looked or sounded like, here's your
chance: watch the show here.
As
Commissioner Grebner's slogan goes: "he may be a fool, but he's OUR
fool!"
|
|
Discuss
:: (36
Comments)
|
|
Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:37:18 AM EST
|
According
to the
papers this morning, lack of money is the chief obstacle
standing in front of a new Michigan caucus. Okay...here's a
suggestion for dealing with the problem...
As soon
as possible, the MDP should put up a special website devoted to raising
cash for a new contest. Let it be known that the MDP will be soliciting
contributions for one week (either on the site or by delivering checks
to Hart-Kennedy House by mail or in person). At the conclusion of this
week, the amount of money raised will determine what sort of
contest we'll have. For example, if less than $1 million is
raised, there will be no re-vote (I'm just pulling these figures out of
you-know-where). Over $1 million, and we'll vote by mail or Internet.
Over $3 million and we have an Iowa-style caucus. $10 million and we
have a 2004-style closed primary (a.k.a. a "firehouse primary.")
It
is true that since Camp Hillary seems to be gunning for the "firehouse
primary" option, it would put significantly more of a burden on her
supporters to come up with the cash. On the other hand, if they want
the more expensive option then they ought to pony up more for it.
Another
option might be to allow people to indicate candidate preference when
they donate. The candidate with the largest total or most donors then gets to choose the
date (within certain parameters).
Of course, the
downside of both of these options is that it takes time to pull a
caucus or primary together...and time is running out. But if we could
spare a week...perhaps this is a way to settle the both funding issue
and some of the logistical sticking points in one fell swoop.
What
do you think? Any better ideas?
|
|
Discuss
:: (83
Comments)
|
|
Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:14:42 AM EST
|
(Updated! - promoted by Hazen Pingree)
UPDATE by Hazen Pingree: A source close to the negotiations has confirmed to me that the Clinton campaign is indeed giving serious consideration to a new vote in Michigan. An actual government-sanctioned primary isn't going to happen. What may emerge is a party-run primary with a large and expansive multitude of sites and opportunities for participation. Electronic voting could potentially be involved. Funding issues still need to be resolved and it's not yet clear what Obama's position will be. However, given his support for a new Michigan vote in the past it would be pretty lame if he backed away now (this coming from a diehard Obama backer).
It could be one hell of an exciting Michigan summer!
-End of update-
Gee whiz! Looks like there may be hope for my Michigan "overtime" caucus (or primary) idea after all. This from today's Detroit Free Press:Results were too close to call in Texas early today, but even before Clinton won in Ohio, her campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, said he would welcome a second chance in both states (Michigan and Florida), where Clinton won what are, for now, meaningless primaries.
"We're all for a primary in both states because we can't go into a general election and say those votes didn't count," he said. "But do-overs cost millions of dollars. It's up to those states."
Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Clinton supporter, said the victory in Ohio changes "the landscape a bit" and could open the door to a Democratic caucus -- not a primary -- in Michigan, though it would have to be privately funded and both candidates would have to agree.
Earlier this week, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said of the Clinton camp "they keep moving the goalposts, but at some point you run out of field." Well...I guess this is one way to address that problem: make the field bigger.
I guess since I'm an Obama guy I should favor a caucus...but really I can live with a primary too. Just so long as it's not paid for with tax dollars and both candidates are on the friggin' ballot.
Who knows? Maybe we get to go the prom after all?
BTW, congrats are in certainly in order to Camp Hillary for their victories yesterday (even though the overall delegate count margin remains roughly the same) and for a hard-fought campaign. For Obamarama, here's hoping we get our groove back in Wyoming and Mississippi...
|
|
Discuss
:: (65
Comments)
|
|
Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 08:10:46 AM EST
|
You won't
see either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in Michigan, but from all
appearances they are now locked in a spirited battle for our delegates.
What? I thought the Michigan "primary" happened a
month ago?
Well,
consider this...
On Monday, Hillary stumped
at a General Motors plant in White Marsh, Maryland. Flanked by Michigan
DNC member, GM lobbyist (and Hillary donor) Debbie Dingell, Hillary
declared that we're going to have the "strongest and best automotive
sector in the world" - ripped the South Korea free trade deal and
promised $22 billion in federal grants and bonds to help automakers
retool to build "green" vehicles.
Yesterday,
Barack stumped at a GM plant in Janesville, Wisconsin. In his
speech he ripped NAFTA and touted his
10-year, $150
billion plan to promote "green" manufacturing.
Interestingly,
Debbie Dingell was there too - and delivered a
kind quote to the Detroit News:"It was
significant," said Michigan Democratic activist and GM Foundation head
Debbie Dingell, who attended Wednesday's speech and toured the plant
with Obama. "When he talks about these issues, he demonstrates that he
gets it." Today, if media
reports are to be
believed, Hillary will be going to - you guessed it - another
GM
plant. This time in Lordstown, Ohio.
Gee,
I wonder if Ford's and Chrysler are getting envious?
What's
going on here?
(More below the fold...)
|
|
There's More...
:: (17
Comments, 387 words in story)
|
|
Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 15:12:31 PM EST
|
|
Reflecting his misplaced priorities, Knollenberg hires Bush/Cheney insider as Washington Chief of Staff Lansing, MI - The Michigan Democratic Party took Congressman Joe Knollenberg to task for hiring a Bush/Cheney crony as his Chief of Staff. Knollenberg named Craig Albright, formerly the deputy assistant for Legislative affairs to Vice President Dick Cheney and most recently the special assistant for legislative affairs to President Bush as his new Washington Chief of Staff. "We knew President Bush and Vice President Cheney were worried about losing one of their most loyal and vulnerable 'yes men' this cycle in Joe Knollenberg, but even we were surprised they resorted to parachuting-in one of their most trusted political cronies to try to salvage Knollenberg's fledgling campaign," said Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer. "As a thank you to Knollenberg for voting with the White House 95% of the time, President Bush has sent Michigan's 9th Congressional District a very unwated gift. Come Election day, we expect Michigan's voters to reject Knollenberg and his politics-as-usual and instead cast a vote for change." Knollenberg's previous Chief of Staff, Trent Wisecup, left Knollenberg's office last fall after having a very public and heated exchange with a local activist. This finally proves that the NRCC is scared of Gary Peters. Bye Bye Joe Knollenberg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
Discuss
:: (11
Comments)
|
|
Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 11:00:43 AM EST
|
|
The final statewide numbers (from CNN).
Clinton: 55% -- 328,151 votes
Uncommitted: 40% -- 236,723 votes
Kucinich: 4% -- 21, 708
Dodd: 1% -- 3,853 votes
Gravel: 0% -- 2,363 votes
Overall, I'm just amazed that 40% of those that voted, took the time to go out and vote for "nobody" given there was no campaign to speak of, just some small grassroots work on LTEs and email lists. Especially given that Team Hillary Michigan sent out glossy mailers and held rallies for Hillary. I also credit the media which around here and I know in Lansing, got the word out that Edwards and Obama supporters were advocating Uncommitted.
|
|
There's More...
:: (30
Comments, 1165 words in story)
|
|
Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 20:56:44 PM EST
|
From the Grand Rapids Press story, Edwards backer heads to court over primary date
[Grand Rapids Democratic activist Martha Hays] will be sitting in a federal courtroom in Grand Rapids [on Monday morning], where her lawyer will argue that the Michigan Democratic Party took away her rights and the rights of other Democrats to participate in the nominating process....
Her lawyer will ask U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker to stop the statewide primary election; if not for both parties, then at least for the Democratic party.
Actually, from what I understand Hays and her lawyer will ask that the Democratic "primary" either be delayed until a court decision or that the results of the Democratic "primary" be held by the SOS and not released to the Michigan Democratic Party.
|
|
There's More...
:: (19
Comments, 253 words in story)
|
|
Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 10:51:43 AM EST
|
|
Well add renewed legislation, to the Implementation Challenge and Lawsuit, as ways to save Michigander's right to vote.
It seems that there is movement in trying to form a bi-partisan effort to dump the 15 January "primary." According to the Livingston Daily Press and Argus State Representative Chris Ward (R-Genoa Township) is working to find a way to ally with Democrats to cancel the 15 January "primary." Seems Representative Ward belives that the "potential for voter confusion, low turnout, disenfranchisement and bad publicity for the state" warrents cancelation.
Ward, a former township clerk, told the local paper:
"I have a strong concern that this is going to be a big black eye for Michigan. It looks like this is going to be an election with a lot of complaints ... it could give Michigan a black eye in looking like a Florida-type situation.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 174 words in story)
|
|
Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 13:18:08 PM EST
|
|
If, in part two, you indicated you would play in the Republican's sandbox come 1/15, in which Republican's eyes will you be throwing sand?
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 13:07:05 PM EST
|
|
If, in part 2, you indicated you were going to vote in the Democratic Primary, how will you vote? (We are on the honor system here)
|
|
Discuss
:: (5
Comments)
|
|
Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 13:03:16 PM EST
|
|
Part 2 of the poll asks what you will do if the MDP sticks to its guns and goes with the 1/15 primary date.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 13:00:05 PM EST
|
|
Ok kids, in the last week to 10 days we have flailed the horse known as the January 15th primary. All that's left is the fact that for now the MDP is sticking to its guns and the DNC has stripped us of our delegates to the National Convention. So, I though I would post a series of diaries asking questions to tabulate what this site thinks. Have at it!
|
|
Discuss
:: (4
Comments)
|
|
Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 12:54:41 PM EST
|
|
Well the majority of Demcratic Senators and Representatives have done what they can to try to end the farce of the Republican-initiated 15 January Primary, and now the Michigan Democratic Party has to finally make a decision.
As most folks know last night the MDP Central Committee vote 39-1 to submit a new Primary Plan to the DNC. Chairman Mark Brewer will submit such a plan to the DNC Committee's Rules Committee on Saturday.
Here's my take on what happened....
|
|
There's More...
:: (11
Comments, 1403 words in story)
|
|
Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 02:05:06 AM EST
|
|
Things are moving fast since the Republicans on the Supreme Court overruled both the Circuit Court and the Appeals Court and stated the Republican Senate Leader Bishop's 15 January "primary" bill was constitutional. Now there is word that House Speaker Andy Dillon (D-Redford) may have changed his mind and might be preparing to vote on House Bill 4507 that will force Edwards (and Obama, Biden and Richardson) back on the ballot but still leave us with no campaign, no candidates, no delegates, and no Michigan issues being addressed since the date will continue to be in violation of the rules of the Democratic National Committee.
There is still time to stop the 15 January "primary" and have a caucus on 9 February that John Edwards wants to campaign for and believes he can win.
But we need you to do the following things right now.
|
|
There's More...
:: (14
Comments, 1126 words in story)
|
|
Tue Nov 13, 2007 at 08:48:52 AM EST
|
|
While the "January 15 Beauty Pagaent" Republican Bill is now officially dead in the Senate and House (they won't be coming back into session until 20 November -- happy deer hunting season (or Russian sheep, whatever the case may be), the forces of Coronation will push to achieve the same result by trying to force through a caucus date before 5 February so that we'll be back to where we were a week ago and Hillary can have her newspaper story that she won a state.
So, those who agree with my earlier postings should tell everyone they know to push for a Democratic Party Caucus outside the 5 February DNC window so we can have campaigning,candidates and delegates!
At any moment The Michigan Democratic Party Executive Board can meet in person or via conference call to discuss and possibly vote on the 15 January primary opt-out (going back to a DNC-sanctioned primary where Edwards (and others I presume)will happily campaign in Michigan and be on the ballot).
|
|
There's More...
:: (12
Comments, 681 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|
