Hot air- the 87th District GOP debate

As I did with the live radio debate on WBCH, I offer to you my take on the recent forum for the 87th District State Rep. GOP primary inside the sweltering Thomas Jefferson Hall in Hastings on July 27, 2006. I figure I might as well start at one end of the table as they appeared that night and work my way down.

Mark Doster — I know some people disliked Doster’s appearance, considering he wasn’t even there to ask for anyone’s vote, but I felt different. While it was bothersome Doster took up valuable time in the forum if, as he even admitted, he’s not in the race to win, I was glad he showed up because at times he gave interesting perspectives and offered a sharp contrast between himself and the other candidates. Doster even had a “Jimmy Stewart moment” or two, especially when discussing the effects of poverty and lack of education and how it results in crime and a continued cycle of social neglect. If Doster really was in this race, I’d have to consider giving him my vote just for his understanding that the education system is a key ingredient in which we need a level playing field where we try to give each student the same tools to function in this society. To maintain our democracy, we must continue to fund this essential element. Too many of the other candidates fail to grasp this basic concept. Which brings us, most notably, to...

Tom Lower — While I found myself actually liking his understanding of the need for regulating farms as well as some statements on other issues, it was the cringe-inducing moments that lost me, like the several occassions when Lower cribbed his answers from the right-wing Mackinac Center and suggesting he supported “life from the moment of conception to natural death.” While I don’t argue anyone’s genuine belief in any particular faith, I have to wonder exactly where the rubber meets the road when a candidate says stuff like this. Obviously he means that he is against abortion and euthanasia, but also I would imagine Lower not supporting use of tax dollars to fund research using embryonic stem cells. Lower was but one of the people continually talking about “high taxes” and a bad business climate in Michigan while ignoring the fact that if Michigan continues to impose restrictions on medical and scientific research our economy can’t expect to see much improvement or advancement in the health sciences sectors the governor has been courting for the last few years. It’s another sign that a large number of Republicans wish to impose their own views of life and death on other citizens in his democracy as we saw when the national GOP shed all illusions of “natural death” when it sought to artificially extend the “life” of Terri Schiavo, a women who had been in a vegatative state for years and whom an autopsy confirmed had ceased any real kind of natural state of living many years ago when her brain filled with spinal fluid. The real gem came when Lower was challenged on his assertions in favor of private school vouchers. Though Hastings Banner editor David T. Young was rather boorish in his calling Lower on his ignorance, Lower was obviously shaken when confronted on his specious arguments in favor of public money for private schools. Indeed, as Young argued the reason private schools cost lesss per pupil to educate kids is that they can refuse special needs children, recent immigrants who can’t speak English, and others who require special attention. Also, private schools also don’t need to maintain the amount of facilities that public schools do since they don’t offer the same programs, and because of their smaller size, many private schools don’t need much in the way of administration which is often where bloated salaries can start to have an effect on the budget. Even more disturbing to me, was how many people I’ve talked to since that were impressed by Lower’s appearance. Maybe Calley doesn’t have the “lock” on Ionia some people have indicated here and elsewhere. After all, a certain amount of the local GOP primary vote is actually looking for a guy who thinks the way Lower does- let's hope they are a minority or they split their vote among the several wingnut candidates vying for this seat.

Brian Calley — He had a good performance and that was all I'm sure he thought he really needed — to not stumble or say something so horribly wrong as to cause a meltdown of his campaign — but Calley left the contest a bit more bruised and battered than before. Lower and Wade Trombley had a good tag team effort that seemed to take the perceived “front runner” down a peg or two. At times it was almost hard to see Calley sitting there but some of that may have come from being sandwiched between two of the larger people at the table or perhaps he was trying to avoid being noticed so as to not draw any more fire from his opponents. Calley also suffered from an unfortunate tendancy to “filibuster” and use each question to tackle a dozen issues, though in this regard he wasn’t as insufferable as Susan Vlietstra. And while Calley certainly gave some good answers — I think his answer on 911 was the best of the night because he noted that even if a State Rep can't legislate a solution to a problem he can at least play a role in getting both sides to come to the table— he also gave some horrible ones. Calley seems intent on killing the DEQ and was scornful of the need to regulate corporate farm pollution (his rather insane notion that pollution is economically unsound is a bit silly when you consider that it’s always cheaper to throw garbage in the ditch than it is to dispose of it properly- just ask anyone who has old tires or engine oil they need to dispose of). But he followed the Farm Bureau company line wonderfully and no doubt earned a treat from his masters in trying to claim he was looking out for small farmers when it’s the large corporate farms who have him at the end of their tight leash. Calley came off as a bit bothered that he was being challenged on all his PAC endorsements and his tactic to “take the high road” was a transparent attempt to deflect criticism of his big money backers as ”negative campaigning.” Lower even shoved the knife deep when he pointed out that Calley’s endorsements have come chiefly as a result of his loans to himself, which give the perception he has raised a lot of money, which helps fuel the perception of a winner, a bit like a bird who puffs up his chest to scare off the other birds.

Jim Bailey — At times Bailey seemed to be genuinely apologetic in the way he handled himself as County Board chair and came across as a sensible choice, but then at other times he came off as a typical right wing GOP loon. He endorsed the unpopular school voucher scheme rejected by Michigan voters just a few years ago, he seeemed intent on cutting taxes beyond the pale which is one reason Michigan is in the financial mess it’s in now. As Brian Reynolds correctly pointed out, quality of life is a big issue to companies relocating to other states and often plays bigger role than the base tax rate. Bailey’s continued attempts at convincing the audience of his notion that all Michigan needed was to lower our taxes even more was similar to a medieval doctor who sees the symptoms the patient has and prescibes a “cure” that will only kill the patient.

Wade Trombley — I just can’t understand why Wade considers himself a serious candidate in this race. Without some more meat on the bones of his campaign, he can’t ride this whole “I’m not a politician” schtick to Lansing. I’m not even sure it’s enough to get him home from Grandville. As with the others, I cannot support any politician who wishes to rob public education to set up a parallel system of private school madrassas which seek to educate kids about stuff they can easily learn at Sunday school. Michigan voters said loudly they saw the voucher system was a way for state Republicans to kill the teachers’ union (who just so happen to be a fairly reliable base of support for Democrats) and for religious fundamentalists to counteract the evil effects of a liberally biased education system which dares to teach children about evolution or that the Earth revolves around the Sun. Unless a new argument is drafted or opinion polls sway dramatically, this discussion is pretty much over. The most troubling thing about Wade is that despite his perpetual claim of not being a politician, he continually acts and sounds like one. In his Battle Creek Enquirer interview, Trombley stated "None of the other candidates have a clue what it means to make payroll and what it takes to make a business succeed," ignoring Brian Reynolds, who owns a local surveying company — part of a weird pattern where Wade seems distinctly focused on belittling or downright ignoring the Reynolds campaign. Even in his answer on why he ran, Wade ignores that Reynolds was already in the race and as anyone who has seem him can attest, Reynolds can certainly fill the bill as an atypical politician.

Susan Vliestra — At times, Vlietstra came off as intelligent, serious and credible but at other times she seemed to “green” and rambled on her answers in an unfocused way that would often seem to contradict her original statement. While Vlietstra did a good job on many questions (her handling of Fred Jacobs’ questioning of her campaign issues as listed on her original web site was succinct and damning, as it showed that whoever wrote that question probably had their opinion formed by reading my original criticism of her campaign when the filing deadline passed and had not visited it since or perhaps not even looked at it at all). Should Vlietstra be able to shorten her answers a bit and polish her resume a tad more, she could seriously contend for this seat down the road. And as one of those who has reasons to loathe Debbie Smith, I note that Vlietstra would surely make an excellent County Clerk and shouldn't wait for a retirement and the likely anointment that might alienate her from voters.

Brian Reynolds — As anyone who has been here before knows, I’ve already voiced my support for his campaign (and some of you supporting other candidates are no doubt sick of hearing it). Like the Lansing State Journal in their endorsement of Reynolds, I see Brian as the one guy who will go to Lansing with new ideas and new answers and who won’t be taken hostage by the various factions that seem to replace local citizens with pod people who do the bidding of the big money power brokers and get government to jump through hoops to further their agenda while ignoring the people who sent them there. We had this for six years with Gary Newell and it’s time for a change. That said, I was a bit disappointed that the Brian I’ve met face to face never seems to show up in these public forums. As anyone who has met him can attest, Reynolds is a vibrant personality with an infectious laugh who knows Michigan political history as well as anyone and who has a fierce passion in trying to improve government and make it work for people. Alas, what we saw on display was a Reynolds who perhaps wanted to set himself apart with short and sweet answers that after the night wore on only helped to give more time to others to ramble on at length. Reynolds impressed me the most as someone to support for his answer on the SBT. As I said before, the tax structure of Michigan is in the middle of states around us and is NOT a major factor in our current economic woes. As Reynolds correctly stated, should Michigan keep cutting taxes, we will end up being like Arkansas, unable to bring new business because no one wants to live here. The recent location of Google to Ann Arbor shows that liveable cities with highly educated workers and walkable streets with low crime are the biggest incentive to the businesses this state needs to attract to flourish. In fact, Ann Arbor’s high tax rate entirely disproves the notions advanced by candidates like Jim Bailey and his Citizens for Tax Reform agenda. We need someone like Reynolds who understands this. And, like the Lansing State Journal editorial board, I may not agree with all of Reynolds’ proposed solutions, but he’s the one I trust most to fix the problem and not be a part of the problem.

Having heard from all the candidates during two forums and having reviewed the campaigns, I think the voters of this district should take their best deal and vote for Brian Reynolds.

That's my opinion, now feel free to offer yours by joining the discussion in the comments section...

Here Comes the Sign King

“King James” Bailey has made a lot of enemies in his five campaigns for political office. He’s run for and won three two-year terms as chairman of the Barry County Board of Commissioners between 1994 and 2000 and he’s run for and lost in a bid for state representative in 2000. In this, his fifth attempt, he’s managed to piss off a whole new group of people by placement of his campaign signs wherever he wants and what he has, or doesn’t have, on them.

Stories have been told to me about people who’ve found "Bailey for State Representative" signs on their property, placed without their permission. According to one lady, the candidate himself told her that because she didn’t own the house she was living in, she’d have to get the owner to have his sign removed. According to my understanding, if a renter rents the entire premises they are allowed to decide if signs are placed there- despite the candidate's assertion to the contrary. Bailey thinks these aggressive tactics are a sign he can "get things done" in Lansing- I think it's another sign that he's a bully, and if he thinks trying to intimidate little old ladies is the way to win then I think he's going to get a wake up call August 8th.

Apparently Bailey thinks he can place a sign anywhere he had a sign in 2000 unless explicitly told no by the owner or renter, and even then he uses intimiditation and coersive means to get what he wants. Bailey seems to think he is owed all the support he got in 2000 but he seems to be forgetting that people have more choices this time around and many simply choose not to back the guy who let Gary Newell in for three terms and fat pension from you and me (on top of his other two). Bailey also seems to forget than 2000 was a Presidential election year with a contested GOP primary- the votes he receives this time around probably won't match what he got before but he seems to base his campaign strategy around this fallacy. Once again, I believe he's in need of a wake up call.

There have been other similar tales in which King James has shown arrogance in placing signs wherever he wants them, particularly if they’re in a strategic location. Sometimes they show up on public property and a sighting was reported recently in Hope Township on land I believe is owned by Barry County Telephone Company (the northeast corner of Cloverdale and Kinsgbury Roads in Hope Township, section 22- the owner of which is not listed on the BarryCounty.gov parcel map). I’d be surprised if a rural phone company agreed to allow placement of a political advertisement on its land. Other candidates are known to be placing signs in what they think are "no man's land" but it is the fact that Bailey is no political novice that shows this to be yet another disturbing example of his arrogance and is certainly not just an honest mistake or accident.

This matter has been brought to a new level recently with the discovery that Mr. Bailey’s signs are illegal because they do not include a proper disclaimer, a statement of who is paying for the advertisement, in this case a sign. The disclaimer, according to the Michigan Elections Bureau, must contain the name of the committee (to elect so-and-so candidate), its address and zip code. While Bailey’s does name the committee, it does not include address and zip code, which the State Elections Bureau says is a violation of current campaign finance law. Kelly Chesney of the bureau said the penalty for this kind of violation is up to $1,000 per complaint registered by the public. The penalty is not tied to the number of signs, but rather the number of complaints. So, does this mean if 20 pissed off citizens call the bureau at (517) 373-2520, Mr. Bailey will have to pay up to $20,000 in fines for violating campaign finance laws? Perhaps a few blog readers would like to find out.

There is no question complaints about theft and vandalism of campaign signs occur every year, so while I abhor such activity, I find it difficult to prosecute unless the perps are caught in the act. However, when a five-time candidate doesn’t know or play by the rules, no matter how insignificant, it raises questions about whether he is fit to be a state legislator. Some might think this is a small matter (and I admit that there are obviously larger issues in the race), but I’m sick and tired of politicians showing us they think the rules somehow don’t apply to them, just everybody else. I think it’s time to raise a stink.

‘Wall of Blue’ protects 911 director

The “Wall of Blue” has been circling the wagons around Barry Country Emergency 911 Director Charlie Nystrom this summer, and with good reason. This “wall” generally refers to a fraternity of police officers that takes care of one another when under threat or siege. Sometimes, like with too many labor unions, the one getting the protection may not deserve it.

Rumors and stories about Charlie Nystrom are about as old as the Barry County 911 system itself. The most common raps against him over the years have been that he’s abusive toward employees, is rigid in his style of leadership, has a lousy attitude toward women, doesn’t accept criticism without getting mad and getting even, plays favorites with dispatchers and is gone from his duties far too often. A couple of the more interesting charges were that Nystrom commonly called one female employee “shit for brains” and mocked another’s son’s behavior, though the child was suffering from a debilitating disease. There also were stories that Nystrom, a former state cop, was allegedly asked to retire from the force because of habitual troubles with alcohol and with abusing women physically and emotionally.

Until recently, I treated these stories as just that — stories. But like Bill Clinton’s penchant for oral sex, Charlie has shown a disturbing pattern of behavior that leads me to suspect there’s more to this than just idle gossip.

Six years ago Charlie promoted the tawdry rumor that a female writer from J-Ad Graphics was having a sexual affair with State Rep. candidate Jim Bailey. The rumor was started by misinterpreting a comment made that the two were “in bed together,” in a political sense, not in the Biblical sense. Nystrom was a strong supporter of Bailey’s opponent in that primary election, Gary Newell, himself (what a coincidence!) a retired state police commander.

Not long ago, he took an angry telephone answering machine message from Hastings Banner Editor David Young and distributed it to all government units in the county for their listening pleasure. This one should be remembered because it’s part of a pattern of how Charlie tries to get even.

J-Ad Graphics Vice President Fred Jacobs took Charlie to task for running a 911 department with a lot of leftover cash, about 80 percent equity, so he can buy fancy frills such as a GPS tracking system that would make Barry County the envy of the state. Jacobs even suggested the 911 Board he’s supposed to be answering to is packed with people loyal to him, therefore he is accountable to virtually no one. Nystrom got a nice 4.5% salary raise, bumping him up to $61,000 a year and making him one of the higher paid 911 directors of Michigan counties comparable in size and population. His raise was larger than almost all other county employees this year.

Then came the story of Judy Wooer, who had been on the 911 Board since its inception in 1991, but was retired from her position while she was on vacation last spring. Charlie protested that Rutland Township Supervisor Jim Carr did the honors and not him, but it’s interesting to note Carr is a dispatcher who works for Nystrom. Carr defended the move by saying it’s time to get new blood on the board, yet the other board member, Don Boysen, was reappointed even though he’s been on the board just as long as Wooer. What a coincidence it was that Ms. Wooer constantly refused to sign Charlie’s vouchers before meetings and insisted on examining them. It was suggested in black and white long before she was not reappointed that Charlie would have her removed.

Memo to Messieurs Carr and Nystrom: Don’t pee on taxpayers’ shoes and then tell them it’s raining.

Most recently there have been allegations that Charlie has had a high old time on the public’s dime, supposedly spending a casino weekend in the Upper Peninsula to attend the funeral of a fellow 911 director, turning in vouchers for hotels he did not stay at and irregularities with gasoline charges. Whether true of not, this is the kind of stuff that cost former Caledonia School Superintendent Wes VanDenburg his job. Yet those who bring up questions and suspicions about Nystrom pay a price.

Not long after Jacobs mentioned at the County Board forum that allegations against Charlie have been turned over the prosecuting attorney, a couple of public officials received mysterious mailings charging them with youthful indiscretions that could be made public. Sounds like the same kind of game played against Young.

And now the 911 Board, led by Chairman Ron Neil, a retired state police commander (surprised?), is sending letters to all county commission candidates essentially saying Jacobs and Young are out to get Charlie and all these rumors are unfounded. This came after County Board Chairwoman Clare Tripp, Administrator Michael Brown and Neil met privately last week to discuss the mounting stories.

It is difficult to get to the truth when there is a firewall, a “Wall of Blue” that won’t let you penetrate to the inner core. Some have been trying, but they eventually get discouraged by the many roadblocks thrown in their way. At higher levels, the state attorney general’s office has refused to look at the issues and Jacobs and others have been told “don’t go there” with these allegations.

The word is that unless there are changes in at least two County Board seats in the Aug. 8 primary election, nothing will ever be done and Nystrom will continue to enjoy his insulation from examination and criticism. Charlie’s best friends on the board right now might be Tripp and Tom Wing. He needs them to win. Otherwise, there may be a true inquiry. And we can't have that, can we?

House of cads

Polls can be useful tools at times in tracking public opinion, but too often they can be worthless.

The most recent example of the latter for me is the one that consistently shows the approval ratings of members of the U.S. Congress below 30 percent, leading the reader to false hopes there actually may be sweeping changes for that august legislative body in early November. Sorry, folks, but I’m here to tell you the chances of another New Deal-style revolution like 1932 or Contract With America-style overhaul like 1994 aren’t particularly good. Turnout for the earlier primary contests in other states have been depressingly low and there's no reason to assume Michigan's August 8 primary to be much different and, despite hotly contested battles for Governor and US Senator, I doubt if November's participation rate is much better.

One reason was summed up by the unknown voter who was rumored to have said, “I don’t like those politicians on Capitol Hill in Washington, they’re a bunch of scalawags. But I still love my own scalawag.”

A secondary and nearly just as important reason is very simply the fear of change.

The application of this premise shows up in the question: Which of the following area Republican Michigan congressmen and women, given these sorry overall approval ratings, is in danger of losing his or her job — Joe Schwarz, Peter Hoekstra, Vern Ehlers, Mike Rogers, Candice Miller, Fred Upton? Answer: None of the above.

Voters have a tendency to really dislike the collective lot of do-nothing rubber stamps for George W. Bush, but individually they’re well liked and regarded as celebrities. The result of this schizophrenia from voters is the return of most of these corrupt and incompetant lying pigs to the trough of federal government (where they enrich their friends while sticking you and me with the bill) and a continuance of the neurotic and useless public bitching about slick politicians while marching to the polls to send them back for another term.

Of the sorry lot mentioned above, the ones closest to home deserve a few choice remarks:
• Joe Schwarz, the Battle Creek Republican who somehow earned a reputation as being a member of that rare club these days known as a moderate. He was elected to the job after right-wing rich farmer Nick Smith retired, and since going to Washington he has marched to the drumbeat of Bush and the Neocons. Like his buddy, John McCain, he plays moderate on one or two issues but is a consistent member of the conservative side of the aisle. Once upon a time he may have been more moderate but the pressures of partisian politics and the GOP House leadership have turned Joe into another rubber stamp for Bush and Cheney- look at how conservative leaders are flocking to help him in his primary fight against Tim Walberg.
• Vern Ehlers, like Schwarz, he has earned a reputation as a moderate in the tradition of Gerald Ford and Paul Henry, but Vern, you’re no Paul Henry. He occasionally has bucked the Bush Administration on some environmental votes and has boasted he told the Big Three years ago they should embrace new technology, like hybrids. Speaking of boasting, I can’t recall any public appearance he’s made in Hastings in which he hasn’t reminded everybody he’s a “nukular physicist.” Sorry, Vern, but anyone who can’t properly pronounce what he does is no better than the dumbest and most incompetent president in U.S. history, the current occupant of the White House. Ehlers is famous for showing up once a year in Hastings and saying some awful things he gets away with. Here are three gems as examples: In 2003, he said he couldn’t support the president on the invasion of Iraq if no weapons of mass destruction were found. In 1995, just after the Oklahoma City bombing, he said he was more frightened by the far left than the far right. This past spring he admonished George Williston by declaring George W. Bush definitely is not the worst president in American history. Talk about damning with faint praise. We're still wondering for Vern to tell us who could actually be worse than the international embarassment currently in the Oval Office.
• Peter Hoekstra is a guy who has spent far too much time in corporate board rooms and not enough time understanding working people, but he doesn’t have to in his district. Not long after he came on the scene by unseating 26-year incumbent Guy VanderJagt, he showed a little independent thinking by calling a flag burning amendment futile in that you cannot force patriotism nor respect for the flag. Yet this year he reversed himself and supports a flag burning amendment to the Constitution. Hoekstra was acclaimed by the Grand Rapids Press as courageous in speaking out against the Bush Administration’s secrecy, yet he has defended the warrantless wiretapping and he joined in on the recent “discovery” of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, an assertion the White House wouldn't even join him in making. He's finally making noise about Congressional oversight but not only is it too little too late but it also appears to be case of getting back at the White House for failure to back his bogus claims of finding WMD in Iraq.

We’ve got a solid bunch of bozos representing us in Washington D.C., almost as bad as the clowns we send to Lansing. But, in the words of Pete Seeger, “We elect ‘em again and again.” We still hate slick politicians so much we send ‘em packing their bags for Lansing and Washington. Some might joke that's a fitting punishment but getting bad government from gerrymandered districts is no joke. This is a third reason that not one of these guys is likely to lose their perch in Washington despite massive voter anger over the direction of the country.

Schwarz's 7th District is the closest of the lot with only a 58%-36% advantage in 2004 (the rest on the list tending to be more in the range of 60% and over)- if anyone takes him out it's more likely to be his wingnut opponent supported by anti-tax zealots the "Club for Growth." Safely partisian districts lead to comfortable politicians that only need to keep one side happy enough to avoid serious primary fights. That's why we're getting a sudden rash of Congressional votes on gay marriages, flag burning and stem cell research (that one was set up so the rubber stampers in Congress can separate themslves from an unpopular president). American elections are quickly becoming as useless as those in banana republics. And we're getting the leaders to match.

A fourth reason is that the opposition party still isn't acting as such. Until the Democrats give voters a clear choice, don't expect the public to reward them at the polls in large numbers. 2006 may give us some changes in the political map but it doesn't appear so far to be like 1994- a tidal wave of change, more like a rip tide sucking our democracy further out to sea...

Calley in the dog house with Ionia voters?

Anyone who thinks Brian Calley has a lock on the voters of the Ionia County doesn’t know the situation on the ground. Just as Jim Bailey and the courthouse gang in Barry County got into trouble by dragging their heels and forcing a group of citizen activists (one of whom today is another candidate for the 87th district seat, Brian Reynolds) into raising funds for and building a new animal shelter, Brian Calley has alienated his own constituents by refusing to do what he said he’d do for several years as an Ionia County Commissioner.

Last September, after public pressure from citizen activists enraged at the deplorable conditions of the local shelter, Calley promised that he would get at least $100,000 allocated for a new animal shelter. A few months afterward, Calley promised to get land for the shelter that was former state property (about 200 acres), given to Ionia County. This was something he has worked on with Alan Cropsey's office stooge Craig Starkweather (if the name rings a bell, it’s because he was one half of Small Government Consultants, the group that seems to have schemed thousands of taxpayer dollars from Barry County’s coffers for virtually nothing in return under the incompetent management of former Chairman Jim Bailey). They promised to form a committee for a new shelter. They dragged their feet in the formation of this committee into the next year.

Since then the committee has met, but it’s been all talk and no action from Calley. It seems as though he’s making a career out of what turns out to be empty promises. Calley now seems to be looking past his constituents and onto a potential career of making empty promises from his new office in Lansing should he win the primary election for the 87th district.

A few days before the last Ionia Commissioners meeting of Monday, July 10, Calley once again was informed of extremely poor conditions of the present animal shelter as the dogs and cats have been suffering for lack of proper ventilation in the harsh summer heat.

Many dogs are being put down for lack of room, cats are dying like flies. The shelter finally had to put down all the cats, 80 in total, because of a virus. Kennel cough was present in the entire dog population. Dogs have been maimed and injured digging underneath fencing.

Imagine how much this neglect has cost taxpayers’ money in having to try to save the injured animals harmed by the indifference of a slimy politician who has time to come to every church and township meeting to shake hands, kiss babies and play the piano, but not enough time to care for his constituents or the defenseless animals dying in the sweltering summer heat in the Ionia shelter. Brian Calley promised that he would have the agenda of the next meeting of July 10 amended and that he would seek to have a resolution adopted to do something immediately to correct this problem.

At the July 10 meeting, Calley offered a resolution attaching more strings to the $100,000 allocated (sounds just like the same roadblocks Jim Bailey and company put up in front of the citizens taking matters in their own hands), spending almost 20 minutes to get this resolution passed. Calley mentioned nothing about his promise that something would be done immediately to relieve the current and ongoing suffering of the animals at the shelter. At this point the new animal committee has not even decided the size of the building.

If you think this is a just an isolated incident of Brian Calley being out of step with the citizens of Ionia County, let me correct you. Calley was also on the wrong side from the vantage point of voters in his own district two years ago when a zoning referendum was on the ballot in Ionia County. Calley loudly supported the measure, which was soundly defeated by a 2 to 1 margin. Anyone who thinks Calley has a cakewalk in his own territory doesn’t know the lay of the land- this could turn into an interesting fight on Calley's home turf, leaving the race open for someone who can take advantage of Calley's neglect for the needs of the people, and the animals, of Ionia County.

One of the reasons I support Brian Reynolds for the open seat in the 87th district is because I saw up close the passion and keen intellect he displayed during those fights with Chairman Jim Bailey and the Barry County Board of Commissioners, who promised much but delivered almost nothing. In fact, it seemed like they tried to fight the citizens at every step.

Now Calley seems to be taking lessons from the Jim Bailey School of Government Ineffectiveness, Indifference and Incompetance. Do we need more politicians who promise us everything we want to hear but don't deliver? I don’t think so. I think we need more citizens like Brian Reynolds, Mark Englerth and all those people in Barry and Ionia County who get together and do what needs to be done.

While Brian Calley schmoozes with the power brokers who can write their $1,000 checks and give him endorsements which fool the sheep into thinking he’s the one to beat, homeless dogs and cats swelter in the summer heat, suffocating and dying because Calley has dragged his heels for too long offering empty promises instead of urgent action. Is this the guy you want to be protecting your family in Lansing? Not me. I think he’s a snake. And if this is how he cares for animals, then how much can we expect him to care for our jobs and our families? We've seen during the Hurrican Katrina disaster what indifference and incompetance on the part of elected officials can do to make a bad situation worse- your vote on August 8 will send someone to Lansing who needs to be looking out for the needs of voters (and the animals) of this state and this district.

These are the facts as I understand them- as always, I welcome your comments

Endorsed from Reality

‘Tis the season for endorsements, fa la la la la, la la la la.

And to virtually nobody’s surprise, Brian Calley, the boyish good-looking Portland banker rich enough to campaign full time on a leave of absence, has been raking them in like poker chips in the 87th District. Calley has been racking up the blessings of a lot of special interest groups, such as the Michigan Townships Association, the real estate lobby, the Citizens for Traditional Values, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, and previous Reps. Bob Bender, Terry Geiger and Gary Newell. Add to that mix the precious endorsement of Right to Life and you have the candidate who is the most beholden to lobbyists and fat cats in Lansing, the very people most of us think are what’s wrong with government.

In bygone days, these endorsements were reserved exclusively for the likes of Bender, Geiger and Newell, so Calley is carrying on the proud anointment tradition which often looks like a schoolyard game of tag which each politician carefully choosing his or her successor from a field of wannabees. Anointments have not been reserved only for the Barry County Register of Deeds, Clerk, Treasurer, Drain Commissioner and a host of other so-called “county elected officials,” they have been handed down at the state legislator’s level as well. One of my favorite examples occurred in 1994 when Bender was being retired by term limits. Every summer he had a habit of being emcee at a festival in Barry County, but that year he selected Geiger as his stand-in over protests of six other candidates in the GOP primary. Some of those six also objected to Geiger winning the Right to Life blessing, maintaining they were as much or more pro-life than he was. No matter. Geiger was the anointed one and with all the machinery backing him, he outdid everyone else in the field in the primary and breezed in the general election. Fast forward to the year 2006 and we see Calley anointed by all these same groups, most from outside Barry and Ionia counties, as the guy to do their bidding in Lansing. But will he do the bidding of the people of his district? Yeah, right.

In a seven-person race, it’s likely that scoring about 25 to 30 percent of those who show up at the polls will win this thing. And primaries are notorious for attracting only about 30 percent of the registered voters. That simply means a very tiny minority of powerful people tied to special interests are able to work the system to get “their boy” in office with a minimum of public relations work.

But perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the endorsement game involves the Gun Lake Band of Potawatomis, who are working hard to get a casino compact signed. The tribe was courted personally last February by Brian Reynolds, an unabashed supporter of the cause based on economic considerations for West Michigan and Allegan and Barry counties. Reynolds later met with James Nye, the tribe’s lobbyist, from Lansing and their cordial exchanges led Reynolds to believe he had a good chance of winning the support of the Friends of the Gun Lake Indians (FOGLI). After more than a few weeks of non-responses to queries, a spokesman for the tribe finally admitted Calley also had been interviewed by Nye and had taken a surprising stance that he would do nothing to stop the plans for a casino compact. This is interesting because Calley’s personal right-wing Christian philosophy, much like Jim Bailey’s, is vehemently opposed to gambling, but he won’t stop “Sodom and Gommorah” from being placed just outside the borders of the 87th District if it might help him win a few more votes. Bailey's ads indicate he has also adopted this "stop no evil" position when it comes to gambling.

Calley has been linked with Christian right politicians such as Fulton Sheen of Allegan County and it will be interesting to see if he actually holds the line under the pressure of the DeVos-Secchia-VanAndel power cartel from Grand Rapids, especially if his party leader, Dick DeVos, is elected governor. Actually, it won't be interesting, it would be astonishing! Calley's game is all about sucking up to the Big Money Power Brokers and if elected he will follow the bidding of his leaders and turn the screws on the Gun Lake tribe once the order goes out- lest he lose all the endorsement the next time he faces the voters.

It appears the Gun Lake tribe doesn’t want to piss off the perceived winner of the Aug. 8 primary in hopes he will treat them right when the compact signing’s reality draws near. Such is the ugly world of politics. Oh, I suppose we have to tip our hats to the Golden Boy, the anointed one, the darling of special interests. Calley certainly has made a lot of the right moves. But I repeat — I’m sick and tired of people telling me they’re sick and tired of slick politicians who don’t represent the ordinary people, but do what they’re told by Right to Life, the Christian Right, the Chamber of Commerce and the automobile, insurance and real estate lobbies. These same ignorant people either stay home and do nothing on Election Day or they get snookered into choosing the guy who tells them what they want to hear.

These endorsements add up to an out of touch politician who won't represent you when he's busy doing the bidding of the big guys once he gets to Lansing. So the question is: Are you going to vote for a guy who's "endorsed from reality?"

Petition condition

The petitions are in. Some causes made it, and some didn’t.

The two most interesting reports surrounded an anti-abortion proposal and the Fire the Senate drive, both of which fell short of picking up the necessary 317,757 signatures to get the issue on the November general election ballot.

The anti-abortion proposal, to define life as beginning at conception, would have effectively outlawed all abortions in Michigan and given pro-life groups the tool to take a challenge to Roe vs. Wade to the new Supreme Court with Justice Roberts and Justice Alito potentially reversing or altering significantly the landmark 1973 decision that effectively made abortion legal throughout the United States. Yet the effort failed to get the blessing of Right to Life, arguably one of the most powerful special interest groups anywhere. What gives? I thought Right to Life always supported causes to make abortions illegal. Some have said it was a turf war between rival pro-life groups. But the real story is that it’s not in Right to Life’s best political interests to have its sole reason for existence taken away. After all, it does raise millions of dollars in funds and helps make a lot of lobbyists and politicians as well as ministers and activists rich and powerful.

Think about it. We’ve elected a heckuva lot of pro-life zealots to state and national offices over the last 25 years, and what have these anti-abortion champions produced in the way of legislation to outlaw the procedure? A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing but a blatant attempt to milk votes from gullible single-issue voters! Oh, to be sure, we saw the end of Medicaid-funded abortions for low income women and laws like the 24-hour waiting period have been whittled around the edges. But there is something to the twisted logic that Right to Life and its ilk stand to lose an awful lot if abortion is outlawed. What then happens to Right to Life? What then happens to all those pro-life politicians who’ve nailed down massive numbers of single-issue voters after winning the blessing of the Most Reverend Right to Life? It seems as though the movers and shakers behind Michigan Right to Life decided they didn't want to know. Or perhaps they realized how it could create a backlash from the majority of voters who still support keeping abortion legal that would result in a tidal wave of voter anger putting state government in to the hands of the Democrats and demoralizing the troops (and donors) in the ultra-conservative movement for years.

Meanwhile, there seemed to be some rejoicing in Lansing and in newsrooms around the state with the news Unicameral Michigan’s “Fire the Senate” campaign failed. Many news outlets that wouldn’t give Unicameral a morsel of coverage during the time volunteers were gathering signatures circled like buzzards around the movement of its untimely death Monday. There was even a time early in the effort when the much exalted Michigan Public Radio had a news report about all the state petition drives, and conspicuous in its absence was any information about Unicameral. Fire the Senate spokespersons claimed they were marginalized by the corporate media, the State Legislature and lobbyists, so it was nearly impossible to get the job done as only a grass-roots movement.

Just as the anti-abortion measure was killed by in-fighting among the factions, the Unicameral effort seems to have died not from a lack of public support, since every journalist who bothered to report on it commented that if placed on the ballot it would likely be approved by voters, but from the callous indifference of the media which acts as a gate-keeper but you're only allowed access if you belong to the club. The lesson here: You’ve got to have money, a sugar daddy, celebrities crawling all over the place and you have to do outrageous things to get noticed. Beating the fife and drum and trying to spread the word via the Internet and telephone just doesn’t cut it.

In fact, what the anti-abortion drive and the Unicameral effort had in common was that both failed to make the ballot because they couldn't afford to "pay to play." The ballot proposals that make it to the voters overwhelmingly have resulted from special interest money that can afford to pay $1 per signature to professional companies that circulate petitions. A good example is Ward Connerly's use of millions to buy his way onto the Michigan ballot with a drive to end Affirmative Action which voters will decide on in November.

There are insidious ways to stifle freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and the free exchange of ideas. The most insidious way of all is to deliberately ignore what’s going on. Another is to make freedom so expensive, the poor can't afford it. The peasants are hungry for democracy and they're not getting it from their elected officials or the gate-keepers in the media- it seems their attitude is "Let them eat cake!"

County Board picks

OK, for what it’s worth: My County Board picks

Just as I did in the prosecutor’s race, I held my tongue (for the most part) about who I support in the races for seats on the Barry County Board of Commissioners until after the July 6 forum. Now that I’ve had a chance to examine the candidates’ answers and other pertinent information, I hereby submit my choices in the Aug. 8 GOP primary:
1. and 2. The First and Second Districts have no primary election races for Don Nevins and Jim French, respectively. No comment.
3. The Third District. This is the contest to succeed the retiring Sandra James. Keith Ferris doesn’t sound like that bad a guy, but I have serious reservations and suspicions he’s a follower of James and the failed leadership of the current board. Ken DeMott is an outsider, not well spoken, but he’s no dummy, he was a sheriff’s detective for 29 years. I give the edge to DeMott because I think he’ll bring a fresh perspective. Ferris is too well connected and part of the old gang. Ken DeMott.
4. The Fourth District. Hoot Gibson has no primary opposition, but he’ll trample perennial loser and Democrat John Loftus in the general election in November. At least we’d better hope so. Hoot Gibson.
5. The Fifth District. Mike Callton had been a fresh breeze on the County Board, a well-spoken and thoughtful public servant. My only beef with him is his traitorous, unprincipled and self-serving support of Brian Calley in the 87th District State Rep. contest. But Callton’s a mostly terrific commissioner and he’s likely the best choice to be the next chairman of the board. Mark Noteboom has made it somewhat of a contest this time after his debacle in 2004, perhaps because of the coaching of King James Bailey, who apparently wants Callton to pay for not supporting him for State Rep. However, Noteboom has been relegated during the campaign to a lot of embarrassing “me too” positions on the issues, which gives voters no reason to make a change here. Michael Callton.
6. The Sixth District. It’s past time to give Clare Tripp the boot. She is the latest of a sorry lot of chairs of the Barry County Board, which has been woefully lacking since Ted McKelvey stepped down in 1992. Orvin Moore started the 14 consecutive years of poor leadership, followed by King James Bailey for six years, Jeff MacKenzie for four more, with Tripp bringing up the rear. This County Board needs big-time change, and this is the seat that needs it most. I have no use for Ms. Tripp’s lack of character, lack of candor, closed-minded policy making, secretive tendencies and general incompetence. She has been listed at four different addresses for where she lives in the last three years and her answers to questions why are defensive and should raise red flags about what kind of person she really is. I agree Mark Englerth is abrasive, arrogant and testy, but we’re not electing student council president here. It’s time to replace nice, insincere and incompetent with nasty, efficient and capable. Mark Englerth.
7. The Seventh District. In the words of my good friend “The Agitator,” this indeed is “a no-brainer.” Incumbent Tom Wing has worn out his welcome in public service very simply because he doesn’t take it seriously enough to show up or be on time. In the world of work, if any of us had his track record with nearly one-third absences or tardies, we would have been fired from our jobs long ago. His excuses are as lame as his attendance record. If he’s too busy with his farm and his wife’s health problems, then he should have done us all a favor and not sought re-election. Does he really think voters are that stupid? Jeff VanNortwick should win this by default. Thank goodness he’s intelligent and well spoken and has as much passion and enthusiasm as voters could hope for in their representative on the county board. His passion against corporate farms comes from his personal experience, and voters should know about his unwavering support for small and family farms. Jeff VanNortwick.
8. The Eighth District. Incumbent Wayne Adams is like Ferris, not a bad guy, but too often he lines up with the wrong crowd, the one that’s helped manufacture our current problems. We need new, not tired old solutions. Wayne is too tied to “we’ve always done it this way.” Challenger Chuck Nieves brings a lot of knowledge, savvy and experience to the job. He got screwed by the County Board earlier this year when it refused to reappoint him to the Planning and Zoning Commission in yet another secret power play where deals get done behind closed doors and yet another sincere, passionate and qualified citizen was removed from a position for not being a team player, but he gentlemanly did not trash the board during the forum. Nieves once served as planning commission chairman for a township in Wayne County. It appears he could breathe new life and ideas into a stale County Board. Serafin (Chuck) Nieves.

More than 15 years ago, county officials were accused privately of belonging to a powerful social club, “The Courthouse Gang.” Not many understood that charge back then, but it’s becoming more apparent it was and is an accurate description of Barry County government. Most incumbents’ service is to themselves and to one another, not to the people who elect them and they’ve gotten away with this for too long. Some reformers, such as Callton and Gibson, were elected two years ago and it’s time for more new thinking to join them and take seats on the top floor of the county courthouse.
Back in 1994, there was a revolution on the County Board, with a lot of new members winning elections. Their promises of change turned out to be false hooey. Now we need another revolution, this time to take back our local government.
Meanwhile, check out agitator’s County Board choices on his blog. They’re the same, for a lot of the same reasons.
These five candidates I have recommended will be advocates of change, which is sorely needed. Vote for incumbent Callton and challengers Nieves, VanNortwick, DeMott and Englerth. Tell your friends. And have your friends tell their friends. Find out what district you live in and vote in the Republican primary Tuesday, Aug. 8. It is your duty as an American to help preserve our democratic system of government, even at the local level.

What Would Agitator 3 Say?

I'm recommending you all proceed to Agitator 3's post from last week detailing his picks for the Barry County Board. He's got the races down pretty good. For those wondering, I should be posting on what happened at the County Board forum when I get a chance- hopefully sometime this weekend. If you attended and have an opinion please feel free to use the comments for this post as a discussion board for what was or wasn't said at the debate.

State Rep. Hopefuls Spar on Radio

State Rep 87th House District Candidate Forum
WBCH Radio 101.1 FM - July 6, 2006

This was done live as it happened and I’m a bad typist so please forgive spelling and grammatical mistakes, incoherant and unformed sentences. These are my interpretations of what was said and by no means meant to be a verbatim quote or transcript of the debate, but I tried to get the gist of what each was saying (or not saying). (Pol Watcher’s comments and snide remarks are inside parenthesis and belong solely to me and should not be confused for words or thoughts of politicians being paraphrased)

Introductions

I came in late so I missed the first minute or so...

Susan Vlietstra- says corporate & nonprofit and local economic development experience helps her.

Jim Bailey- brags on being respoonsible for taxpayer dollars (for what I think on that issue, see my previous post on Small Government Consultants when he was Chairman of the Barry County Board), wants to go to Lansing to emphasize jobs & economic development to make Michigan business-friendly environment and relieve tax burden through changes/elimination of single business & personal property

Doug Kahlbach- trade union member who has worked on 340 steel buildings. We do have good paying jobs in state. The problem is non-resident workers taking good jobs. He cites as example Barry County ethanol plant with out of state workers’ cars in parking lot. SBT not biggest issue with small business- INSURANCE!! kills working man. (He’s got that one right)

Wade Trombley- public service is honor and priviledge, is not part of political establishment, small business owner who runs business. Wants to change state economic focus from manufacturing to small business. Cites stat that says state ranks 46th in small business creation. Current reps have dropped ball. Election offers clear, distinct choice- let another politician whose for special interest do job or hire somebody who will fix mess.

Tom Lower- Christian, pro life, pro family, pro Michigan (as opposed to all the Anti-Michigan people in the race!), insurance one of biggest job killers (at he gets it on that issue), lifetime NRA member, farmer, pro-small business, also runs other businesses to pay bills, spent 13 years in state government, doesn’t need PAC or spec. interest money (wouldn’t get it anyway, but I admire him beating up on Calley).

Brian Reynolds- owns surveying company, encouraged to run by local Republicans, believe Gov. best run from middle of political spectrum not from ends. (Big awkward pause here- was he told time was up? I don’t know but he sure didn’t take advantage of opportunity here. He gave great answer about running from middle but then ceded mic to next guy)

Brian Calley- commercial banker most of last 11 yeears, makes loan to businesses. Issues are health care costs, energy, economy, shrinking markets (supposedly) caused by TAX policy and regulatory policy (Ugh. Ripped that anwer right from the Chamber of Commerce/Mackinac Center talking points). Michigan tax rate not different from neighboring states but type of tax is different. Tax policy rewards bad behavior, punishes good. SBT hurts by punishing companies who provide insurance
redefine govt., wants son to have same opportunity he’s had (Don’t we all! He sure doesn’t get it when it comes to SBT which surely could be tweaked to make it less of a jobs killer but like Dick DeVos he wants to kill it and do WHAT to replace it?)

Mark Doster- (he’s still running?) Lives on Doster Road in Doster, Michigan- pioneer family, plays piano, law degree from Cooley- public defender work gave him best idea of what problems are in county- drugs, sex abuse, etc. Saw underbelly of society and problems. (Then gives cute anecdote from political background but, as he often does in this debate, fails to really make any use of it besides showing a folksy charm)

First question on Unicameral (Is this the biggest issue in the race, Dave McIntyre?)

Bailey- goes first, against Unicameral, lived in Nebraska, says to compare Michigan would need another 100 legislators to have same representation percentage as Neb. Says term limits a mistake (will he do anything about it?), says Unicameral is part of same anger but not right way to send message (so WHAT is, Jim?).

Kahlnbach- Mentions outsourcing means less population (thought he was going to make a great point about GOP being for outsourcing workers but not themselves but he didn’t, instead I was just kind of confused by what he was trying to suggest). Says he was FOR but now can’t change (sounded like he wanted to but once again he confounded me- I think he was going for the Doster folksy charm vibe here).

Trombley- supports putting it on ballot, PRO debating it but not sure if for or against.

Lower- issues from citizens via ballot necessary- let them have voice not ruled by special interests, mentions work around House and Senate, would vote NO, need two chambers to balance out each other and kill bad bills.

Reynolds- strongly FOR due to cost savings and creating more transparency in government. Need to get rid of conference committees where real work gets done behind closed doors outside of public view but where lobbyists still get a say. (He has this totally spot on- conference committees are a democracy KILLER and people need to wake up and DO something)

Calley- Democracy good, this thing bad. Says bicameral system cuts down on more laws, if one chamber eliminated laws would be easier to pass. He wants govt. to be innefficient at passing new laws (unless they’re tax breaks or curbs on personal medical freedom in the form of abortion of family planning services).

Doster- not thrilled by Fire the Senate proposal, Founding Fathers set up two branches for a reason (I thought it the compromise to not piss off small states, but I’m not history major)- House as immediate short term reps with Senate protected by longer terms where they use own education and guidance to lead. Checks and balances important, would not save money, House would need more staff, better chance of corruption- big money could come in and buy 87th House seat (it hasn’t already? look acorss the table, Mark!), unfair to compare Michigan to Nebraska

Vlietstra- generally against- need to double size of House to compare to Nebraska, cites California and says it works well but then moves on (huh? If California works well with less reps per person then why not here?), against Fire the Senate due to fact it seeks to eliminate branch with longest term and institutional memory (does this mean she’s against term limits then?), likes consolidating services and make things lean but this is not the way.

McIntyre steps in to defend Bailey from Trombley charge but then moves on. Who’s side is Dave on? (I think we know)

Land use and farm question phrased very vaguely. Basically- should we pay farmers to not sell land to developers?

Kahlbach- has farm in Nashville but can’t afford to farm with gas prices but still sells little bit of hay, wants old developments fixed, Brownfields redone which creates jobs and doesn’t develop rural country (very good answer, Doug!), farmers need money and often have no choice but to sell little corner of weeds. Has union job to pay health ins. & retirement since farming doesn’t provide that.

Lower- He’s a farmer too. Beef and farm acreage. Farmers need retirement. Seen plans where farmer get MORE money ( is he for more subsidies? Isn’t he the Libertarian??!!!), Farmers need jobs- E85 plant is great and corn need from ethanol plant will help local farmers. From NO ZONING county- people have right to do as they wish but govt. needs to help so they don’t need money.

Reynolds- not in favor of new legislation to control development. Subdivision control act of 1969 compounded problem (finally someone cites law and has knowledge of issue and history!!! Who says this guy can’t or shouldn’t win? He’s the ONLY one who cited any previous law except Proposal A during the whole debate!). This law made defacto 10 acres as standard building site and didn’t control sprawl but fueled it. Legislation can backfire, regulation NOT answer (great answer!).

Calley- agrees with Reynolds (see, even he agrees). Legislative action by state govt. backfires. Best way to keep farm as farm can be market forces (Oh, God. Alan Greenspan is going to win this election). Energy security and food security are similar, intertwined (Hey, I agree with him on this one!). Most farmers would rather farm than to sell if they make decent living. Brownfield dev. awesome answer, cites exp. as banker BUT development is CHOICE. (Short version: development bad, government worse?)

Doster- served on Prairieville Twp. board of appeals, County planning & zoning boards- can be handled at LOCAL level, state isn’t smart enough to handle such a complex issue with competing issues- Detroit and suburbs need different answer (Good summation of problem addressing more legilation in my view). Went on farmland preservation tour out East. Property has to be assessed at highest and best use. Proposes differnt classes of agricultural land. LOWER taxes on farmland, give them a choice to put property in TRUE AG class where smallest lot is 40 or 80 acres and TAX at much lower rate. He suggests picking up revenue loss from large homes on lakes since taxes lowered must be raised elsewhere (He’s right, can we fax this to every member of the state GOP). Inheritance tax worst for farms (apparently he doesn’t know this only affects multi-millionaires, this bad answer pretty much negates the good answer he gave).

Vliestra- we do have local level working on issue here in Barry County, against special interest work to get law repealed, maintain rural environment in planning and zoning, from planning & zoning county (big smackdown to Ionia- that you No-Zoning Yahoos! Guess Vlietstra has written off your votes!)- NEED regional planning, put proper planning in place, cites Thornapple developer wanted to put in stuff at boundary needed too many services which was won in lawsuit by Twp., farmers need other options, local group of farming interests working on issue (Once again, she gave one of her best answers here- she seemed more informed on this than other issues).

Bailey- (“Jim” according to Dave McIntyre) Make farming profitable (They could grow hemp!). Still things to do. Concern with what govt. is doing. Mentions PDRs and TDRs- what happens to ground if not profitable- tax money used to reserve land that isn’t profitable and then not developable- what happens? Supports personal property rights, not anti-zoning (once again Ionia County gets disses), local county can be counter-productive in local zoning, cites previous mention size restrictions (fails to mention Reynolds- no hard feelings, eh Jim?).

Sales tax, TAXES & Prop A. Fewer dollars to schools. Solution to funding for schools.

Calley- school taxes predicated on economic growth (even if income or other tax), solution is how to get people back to work- which is to lift REGULATION (cough cough, more pollution), stop punishing business (SBT I think he means- more talking points from the Chamber of Commerce).

Doster- education probably #1 service state can provide and is currently underfunded probably due to Prop A although it was good to make taxes predictable but left schools short. Fairest tax in his opinion is sales tax (which overly affects poor but he says rich buy more so BOO HOO you poor suckers!). Sounds like he wants FOOD sales TAXED! (That will go ever real well!) Education eliminates crime (damn, right again, Mark)! Kids need good job prospects or they’ll break into your house. When children are left behind they have no future but crime. Better funding- sales tax- easiest and fairest way to do it.

Vlietstra- keep housing affordable. As local govt. official sees people needing hardship assistance due to prop. taxes. People buy new homes because realtors give them old tax figure but it gets uncapped, goes up and they can’t pay taxes. Don’t mess with property taxes- next gen can’t own houses which will hurt economy. Look for revenue- are we maximizing revenue- collecting all sales tax- Michigan is in middle of state sales tax and should not be raised, it’s tax on poor and middle class who buy STAPLES (take that, Doster). Has no solution but to look for more revenue. Make schools accountable for budgets (More pay to play!).

Bailey- (sounds like guy from fake ketchup commercicals on Prairie Home Companion- vote for the guy with lycopene!). Per student funding doubled in 10 years. He has lots (and lots... and lots) of kids so education is important. We are paying for world class education (shouldn’t we be? Huh?). How much more do we need? More spent on TRADES, less on ABCs. Must fix economy and that will fix other issues- roads, funding, etc.

Doug K- when we all make decent living wage we don’t mind taxes to pay for police, fire, programs for weak and defenseless. Can see where taxes go but not INSURANCE premiums. Tax breaks go to factories which STILL CLOSE and go to China. (GREAT ANSWER!)

Wade Trombley- system is broken, don’t tamper with Prop A or add auto-increase, cites Reagan: People aren’t taxed too little, gov spends too much. No accountability (I thought citiens voting for school board who hires administrators who hire teachers was our accountability- do we blame voters? Actually, I kind of do! How many people vote for school board?!). Sends daughter to private parochial school which spends 1/3rd what public schools spend (because they don’t have to take handicapped, special needs, non-English speaking immigrants, etc.). LOVES vouchers as cure for poor and underperforming schools (in fact it would kill them, Wade- that’s the whole point of vouchers). Schools still based on agrarian society which let kids out for summer- reform that (Actually, I agree here- summer vacation doesn’t make much sense to me unless it’s to save on cooling costs but are these much higher than costs of lights plus heat in winter?).

Lower- agrees with Wade and Bailey. School spending still increases as jobs decrease. Prop A GOOD and WORKING. Administration in schools- some of highest paid in local counties are administrators. Teachers union employees make more than teachers (bashing teachers union always a good move for the politician looking to score cheap points with public- my accountant makes more than me even though I’m “paying” him to work for me- I think the real point is anti-union which is part of same old same old crap that got us where we are).

Reynolds- PROP A doesn’t need to be altered, schools not collecting all entitled to under Prop A, resort property owners from out of state who claim homestead exemption when non entitled, find homestead exemption cheaters which will fund schools. (Once again, too short an answer- even if Reynolds thinks this is the cure to all our funding woes surely he could have rebutted some of the previous points with his time- then again, he might have been getting the wrap up sign from Dave since right after he cuts in to say time is running out).

Time almost up- Wrap up

Bailey- resident of Barry County, best interest and desire of district. Cites age and experience. (Short answer)

Kahlbach- farmer, union worker, biker, etc. Non residents not paying fair share, taking jobs in contruction of Charlotte hospital. Non residents pay 9 times more for deer permit, should pay 9 times more taxes. Businesses hiring non-citizens should pay 9 times more for unemployment insurance. (I may not like all his answers, but his populist spirit sure does score points with me!)

Trombley- Founding Fathers envisioned citizen reps., not special interests. He’s not a politician who will represent special interests. Clear choice for state rep- can elect politician or citizen.

Lower- Says that “this is a good room of people,” all represent 90% same consituents, voters needs to look at candidate who will rep them IN LANSING not special interests, go to website electtomlower.com and give money to support him.

Reynolds- Vote for me or at least just vote August 8 since primary is where action is. (Another short answer.)

Calley- brown noses candidates. system is broken due to negative partisian politics, two party discussions go through media, will break cycle of revenge and hatred, true statesmen like Bob Bender who work with other side (fails to mention Newell- distancing in progress?!). Look at how campaign is run- focus on merits of campaign (OUCH! Shot at Bailey!), won’t focus on negative or tear down others in literature (BLAM!), ads or paper. Special interests on his campaign like Farm Bureau, Right to Life PAC- proud to have help from them (easy to take high road when you’ve got ALL the money).

Doster- echo Reynolds: vote in PRIMARY not just general- primary is where vote is at for most offices locally. (Guess this explains the party switching- can’t blame him I guess)

Vlietstra- She’s an election official. Agrees with Mark on primaries. Normally 15-20% turnout in primary, ordered 75% ballots (Stuffing the box, Susan? Joking! Although, if someone wants to look into that...). Managed small business, works in local govt but just a citizen chosen by fellow citizens to manage local govt. Go to susan4rep.com and send email which she checks every day (along with cjecing to see what I had to say about her campaign that day?) or stop at office to see her. Whatever you do- VOTE.

Dave M. thanks candidates and asks people to vote August 8.
DEADLINE FOR REGISTERING FOR PRIMARY IS JULY 10!!!!!!!!

Follow the Leader Winner

On the 230th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, I want to talk about the choices we are scared to make...

“You’ve got a lotta nerve, sayin’ you’re my friend.
You just wanna be on the side that’s winnin.”
Bob Dylan, Positively 4th Street

One of the oldest political campaign tricks, the “bandwagon” effect, is something we learned about in our ninth-grade civics classes, along with “testimonials” and “glittering generalities.” Apparently a lot of us were sleeping when that chapter was studied. Still alive and even well today is the notion you’re wasting your vote unless you climb aboard the winning team express, the projected winner in the race. You’ve got to pick "the right candidate" and "back the winner." Frank Sinatra sang, to the tune of “High Hopes,” back on the 1960 campaign trail, “Everybody’s voting for Jack (Kennedy)... cause they know he’s on the right track.” This bandwagon effect is used to sucker you into thinking your guy is going to lose so why bother? It's a cheap psychological plot to get you to give up and give in.

I think voters should pick from their heart... and from their gut. They should pick the candidate they think can do the best job regardless of the deck stacked against them- in fact, I think it's all the more important when the system seems so heavily titled toward the rich and the powerful for the "little guys" to band together and take a stand. After all, It's not up to us to decide who's "going" to win. Let the pundits play that game, it's only up to us to pick who we want and let the chips fall where they may. I'm tired of people telling me that I have to go with one of the "approved" choices and that anything else is a waste of my vote. My vote is only wasted if I don't use it or I listen to others who try to talk me out of who I feel in my heart I should support.

This debate over "wasted" votes needs to be applied to the 87th House District Republican primary Aug. 8. The chatter seems to be that some candidates "don't have a chance." It's said that certain candidates haven't raised enough money from fat cat donors, that they don't look the part of slick politician or they haven't made enough back room deals with power players and PACs to stand a chance. Therefore, anyone supporting that candidate is doomed to failure and humiliation and their vote or money would be better used "backing a winner." This is yet more nonsense designed to get you to jump on the bandwagon of one the "chosen" candidates who are simply the guys willing to borrow the most money from the bank and grease enough palms and kiss enough babies to become part of the Sausage Machine in Lansing that churns out ever more putrid legislation that is slowly choking off your freedom and suffocating the democracy we were entrusted by our Founding Fathers to protect.

Now, let's pretend "Candidate A" really "doesn't have a chance of winning." In a secret ballot there is no way anyone will know who you voted for, so the chances you'll be publicly called on the carpet for "supporting the wrong guy" is nil. There's also little chance that your one vote is going to tip the balance for "Candidate B or C," so why not just go for who you'd like to represent you since you only get one chance to have your say- the winner will surely be declared in the Republican primary unless hell freezes over between August 9 and November 7. In the end, if enough people join you in voting with their heart, you may have helped elect the next State Rep. but if not, you certainly didn't "waste" your vote.

The candidate you or I support may end up losing, but that's not because it was pre-ordained by God or "fixed" in Lansing (or even Portland). It would be because a plurality of voters went for one of the other candidates in the race. So be it. But in a multi-candidate primary anything can happen and whoever wins will have surely gotten through without grabbing the majority of the vote so this is your best chance to influence who will be our next State Representative. Choose wisely but don't let anyone else tell you that person can't win so don't bother. Your vote is sacred and it belongs to no one else. On August 8 I will vote with my heart and with my gut — I will support the candidate I WANT to WIN. And if he loses, it won't be because I chickened out and went with the lemmings who flocked to the guy with the whitest teeth, the most expensive haircut or the deepest pockets.

The Founding Fathers didn't listen to the conventional wisdom that suggested no one dared to fight against the most powerful empire in the world. Surely, many of the Redcoats were the timid little weasels that infect our local politics who run around "backing the winner" so they can get their appointments and be "part of the winning team." Exactly 230 years ago this country was founded on the principle that sometimes enough is enough and you have to stand up and declare loudly that you're mad as hell and you're not going to take it anymore. I think it's time for all of us to stand up and jump off the bandwagon. I think it's time for some fireworks!