Petition to Recall Rick Snyder Has Finally Been Approved

**313WX** · February-08-16, 10:17 PM

"LANSING, MI --A petition to recall Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder was approved by the Board of State Canvassers Monday after more than 100 citizens attended the meeting in anger over the Flint water crisis.

The petition approved aims to recall Snyder for creating the State School Reform/Redesign Office. Another nine petitions more directly related to the Flint water crisis were rejected [[full list below.)

The approved petition is valid for 180 days after approval at the Board of State Canvassers level. To move forward it must collect 789,133 signatures in a 60-day period within that 180 day window. Doing so would then put a question before voters statewide, most likely on the state's Aug. 2 election."

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/...chigan_go.html

**Gistok** · February-08-16, 11:07 PM

Based on some of the rejected petitions spelling errors... a lot of education problems started a long time before Snyder took office....

**michmina** · February-09-16, 12:10 AM

I was extremely dismayed earlier tonight when watching the news and discovering that higher lead levels in older people can predispose them to Parkinson's and Alzheimer's dementias. Having taken care of my mother through Alzheimer's, I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Too late to find out now, but I've always thought my mother's dementia was due to some environmental exposure, since she began showing signs in her late 50s and was dead by age 70.

**ridgeabilly** · February-09-16, 07:54 AM

Where do I sign?

**Scottathew** · February-09-16, 09:04 AM

I've been a Snyder supporter and voted for him twice, but I certainly would give a recall effort considerable thought.

My big question that I want answered is what did Snyder know, and when did he know it? If he knew about the lead long before the government started doing things to warn residents, then I would vote yes on a recall effort.

I also want to see huge, sweeping changes at the MDEQ and EPA. Based off of testimony at the congressional hearing, I think that some folks in the MDEQ and EPA ought to be held criminally responsible for covering up, ignoring, and even hushing the whistle-blowers.

**Wesley Mouch** · February-09-16, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by 48307

I've been a Snyder supporter and voted for him twice, but I certainly would give a recall effort considerable thought.

My big question that I want answered is what did Snyder know, and when did he know it? If he knew about the lead long before the government started doing things to warn residents, then I would vote yes on a recall effort.

I also want to see huge, sweeping changes at the MDEQ and EPA. Based off of testimony at the congressional hearing, I think that some folks in the MDEQ and EPA ought to be held criminally responsible for covering up, ignoring, and even hushing the whistle-blowers.

I completely support an investigation into Snyder, Flint's Water Board, the DEQ and EPA. Yet I caution against this being a blame-fixing effort. I think we'll find that water quality in all our major cities isn't what we think it ought to be. Finding and punishing the bureaucrat or administrator who 'broken the camels back' might be fun -- but in the end we don't need the EPA to become more bureaucratic and defensive -- we need it to be more engaged and willing to admit failure.

**Honky Tonk** · February-09-16, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

I completely support an investigation into Snyder, Flint's Water Board, the DEQ and EPA. Yet I caution against this being a blame-fixing effort. I think we'll find that water quality in all our major cities isn't what we think it ought to be. Finding and punishing the bureaucrat or administrator who 'broken the camels back' might be fun -- but in the end we don't need the EPA to become more bureaucratic and defensive -- we need it to be more engaged and willing to admit failure.

If water is bad in all our major cities, I'm not sure all our major cities have water with lead contamination in it, causing irreparable brain damage to their citizens. Though reading some of the posts here, you might be right.

**Scottathew** · February-09-16, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

I completely support an investigation into Snyder, Flint's Water Board, the DEQ and EPA. Yet I caution against this being a blame-fixing effort. I think we'll find that water quality in all our major cities isn't what we think it ought to be. Finding and punishing the bureaucrat or administrator who 'broken the camels back' might be fun -- but in the end we don't need the EPA to become more bureaucratic and defensive -- we need it to be more engaged and willing to admit failure.

The Flint situation is more than breaking the camel's back. It's about the government knowing about the health crisis, and doing NOTHING about it other than denying and minimizing.

If you haven't done so, watch the congressional hearing on the subject. It was very eye opening to see how people setting off the alarms were punished and silenced.

I think Snyder has done well, but bottom line, if he knew about the lead situation and was part of the cover-up, I'd vote for him to be gone.

**michmina** · February-09-16, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

I completely support an investigation into Snyder, Flint's Water Board, the DEQ and EPA. Yet I caution against this being a blame-fixing effort. I think we'll find that water quality in all our major cities isn't what we think it ought to be. Finding and punishing the bureaucrat or administrator who 'broken the camels back' might be fun -- but in the end we don't need the EPA to become more bureaucratic and defensive -- we need it to be more engaged and willing to admit failure.

Yes, I'm far less interested in the punishment aspect than I am in finding out if the water in the major systems is okay and if not, fixing the problem.

If there's an issue with lead or any other substance in water, it can be a huge burden to the state - specifically in Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, unless you're extremely wealthy the disease process goes on so long and takes so much out of the family [[free) caregiver, the patient usually ends up on Medicaid in a facility. HUGE drain on the system and it often takes family caregivers out of the income [[and tax)-generating mode to provide supervision and care in the home.

**GPCharles** · February-09-16, 12:34 PM

When is his term up? Isn't it 2017?

If he is recalled doesn't the Lt. Governor take office?

**SDCC** · February-09-16, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by GPCharles

When is his term up? Isn't it 2017?

If he is recalled doesn't the Lt. Governor take office?

I was wondering this as well, I'll assume the necessary signatures will be garnered. Then Rick heads down the highway to that ranch in Washtenaw county.
But then the Lt. Governor assumes the helm?

**313WX** · February-09-16, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by SDCC

I was wondering this as well, I'll assume the necessary signatures will be garnered. Then Rick heads down the highway to that ranch in Washtenaw county.
But then the Lt. Governor assumes the helm?

Unfortunately, that's may be the best option at this point.

Otherwise, we'll still have to deal with Snyder doing more damage until 2018 or if/when the feds indict him. It'll also show the world that the citizens of Michigan, collectively, tolerate people who oversee the poisoning of thousands of innocent people.

**gnome** · February-09-16, 01:15 PM

I half-jokingly think the companies who are hired to get petition signatures are behind the majority of recall efforts.

at best they would be able to shave 10 or 11 months off of Governor Snyder's term. Really?

i say ride that man to get Flint fixed. Beat him. Hound him. Make him pull in every favor he has. Bleed him fish-belly white, then kick his beaten ass to the curb.

A recall means his pals will have to fight against it thereby taking time away from solving our problems.

**Honky Tonk** · February-09-16, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by gnome

A recall means his pals will have to fight against it thereby taking time away from solving our problems.

And money.....

**Hypestyles** · February-09-16, 06:18 PM

if the recall is successful, then what? 3 years of Bryan Calley? Has he been anything but a supporter of his boss? I don't see any kind of drastic policy break from him. Resignation from Snyder is kind of the easy way out.

**Wesley Mouch** · February-10-16, 12:09 AM

Originally Posted by Hypestyles

if the recall is successful, then what? 3 years of Bryan Calley? Has he been anything but a supporter of his boss? I don't see any kind of drastic policy break from him. Resignation from Snyder is kind of the easy way out.

It doesn't really matter what happens after. The humiliation is the goal of a recall anyway. And in this case, its just further proof that this has nothing to do with water quality and Flint residents and everything to do with political gamesmanship.

Flint residents are, IMO, pawns now in this game. A recall is a political game designed to score points. It can only have a negative effect on Flint residents, by distracting from the real problems.

**KJ5** · February-10-16, 02:52 AM

Name: IMG_20160207_232138.jpg
Views: 781
Size: 71.9 KB

You're doin a heckuva job, Ricky.

**JBMcB** · February-10-16, 09:13 AM

Yep, if Snyder steps down or is recalled, the Lt. Governor steps in.

Then, in 2018, the Democrat's nominee gets to run against an incumbent, which is an uphill battle.

This is why most local Democrats aren't clamoring for a recall, it's mostly out-of-state pols and grassroots groups.

**macster1** · February-11-16, 04:50 AM

Originally Posted by JBMcB

Yep, if Snyder steps down or is recalled, the Lt. Governor steps in.

Then, in 2018, the Democrat's nominee gets to run against an incumbent, which is an uphill battle.

This is why most local Democrats aren't clamoring for a recall, it's mostly out-of-state pols and grassroots groups.

Wrong. I think most Democrats and many Republicans [[see remarks above) will sign a recall petition. It's not mostly out-of-state pols. And what's wrong with grassroots groups? Do they somehow not count?

**lpg** · February-10-16, 11:38 AM

Lead pipes leading from the main to the meter are common. I have one. Should they all be replaced statewide as a precaution ? Just asking.
I don't think the EPA is going to admit any fault. They will most likely find a underling and blame them.

**Scottathew** · February-11-16, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by lpg

Lead pipes leading from the main to the meter are common. I have one. Should they all be replaced statewide as a precaution ? Just asking.
I don't think the EPA is going to admit any fault. They will most likely find a underling and blame them.

Yes, many places have lead service lines.

However, Flint is special, because when the state's emergency financial manager forced Flint to temporarily switch to the Flint River as an interim water source, there were two issues:

- The Flint River is more corrosive than lake water
- No corrosion control was used

This caused the pipes to start leaching lead into the water. Where in Rochester Hills I don't have to worry about that because DWSD\GLWA uses corrosion control, just as every single water providing entity should.

When the whole crisis arose I remember saying, "so what, we all have lead pipes, stop whining". Then as I found more and more facts about how water gets from a source to the tap, and found out what failed to happen in Flint, I realized that this is a huge issue and those people are being poisoned.

As to the EPA not admitting fault, you're probably right.

**Hermod** · February-11-16, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by 48307

Yes, many places have lead service lines.

However, Flint is special, because when the state's emergency financial manager forced Flint to temporarily switch to the Flint River as an interim water source, there were two issues:

- The Flint River is more corrosive than lake water
- No corrosion control was used

This caused the pipes to start leaching lead into the water. Where in Rochester Hills I don't have to worry about that because DWSD\GLWA uses corrosion control, just as every single water providing entity should.

When the whole crisis arose I remember saying, "so what, we all have lead pipes, stop whining". Then as I found more and more facts about how water gets from a source to the tap, and found out what failed to happen in Flint, I realized that this is a huge issue and those people are being poisoned.

As to the EPA not admitting fault, you're probably right.

If you live in Rochester Hills, you probably do not have lead issues. Most of the homes in Rochester Hills were on individual well water and the DWSD mains and home taps are relatively new.

**lpg** · February-11-16, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by 48307

Yes, many places have lead service lines.

However, Flint is special, because when the state's emergency financial manager forced Flint to temporarily switch to the Flint River as an interim water source, there were two issues:

- The Flint River is more corrosive than lake water
- No corrosion control was used

This caused the pipes to start leaching lead into the water. Where in Rochester Hills I don't have to worry about that because DWSD\GLWA uses corrosion control, just as every single water providing entity should.

When the whole crisis arose I remember saying, "so what, we all have lead pipes, stop whining". Then as I found more and more facts about how water gets from a source to the tap, and found out what failed to happen in Flint, I realized that this is a huge issue and those people are being poisoned.

As to the EPA not admitting fault, you're probably right.

I live in Lincoln Park so my water comes from the same place as yours. But I am wondering if there are ever problems with DWSD\GLWA we will face the same problems.

**jj84** · February-11-16, 03:38 PM

The recall has nothing to do with the Flint Lead water. A person circulating petitions can only give the reason on the petition as a reason for removal of the person in office. If a petition circulator gives another reason the signatures they collect can be ruled invalid.

The reason for the recall is that Snyder should be recalled because of the moving of the State School Reform Office into the Michigan Department of Technology, Management and Budget which is under his control.

**313WX** · February-11-16, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by jj84

The recall has nothing to do with the Flint Lead water. A person circulating petitions can only give the reason on the petition as a reason for removal of the person in office. If a petition circulator gives another reason the signatures they collect can be ruled invalid.

The reason for the recall is that Snyder should be recalled because of the moving of the State School Reform Office into the Michigan Department of Technology, Management and Budget which is under his control.

None of what you say really matters.

As long as people who want Snyder out of officer know that they can petition for his recall, they'll sign regardless of the exact reason for the recall petition.