Michigan Citizens United---Thoughts on the campaign to recall Rick Snyder

**1KielsonDrive** · April-08-11, 12:50 PM

We should have a new law requiring campaign workers [[the volunteers) be paid. That way some of the tens of billions of dollars of election expenses would go to others than consultants, aides, assistants and professional, lifelong politicians and campaigners. Meals and benefits should be included. This way after you've been out working your ass off for a candidate, knocking doors, erecting signs, etc, you could get a check and a meal. I mean besides coffee and donuts. This would likely be a much bigger stimulus than anything Bush or NO!bama has ever enacted.

**Det_ard** · April-08-11, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by Vox

Within the rights of any citizen of the state. Of course no Governor has pissed as many people off at once, either.

He didn't piss me off. I wasn't sure what exactly he'd do but it was clear he had to do some major things to deal with the budget shortfall. It was also clear that billion-dollar budgets cuts will piss off whoever's on the short end of the change. No surprise there.

I don't agree with everything he's done, but he has a pretty good plan and he's showed leadership in this crisis. The recall effort is one part "tax and cut the other guy, not me" and four parts knee-jerk political opposition by democrats and unions. Typical, understandable and unremarkable reaction to needed measures. Most people understand you have to crack a few eggs to make an omlette.

**Gistok** · April-08-11, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

We should have a new law requiring campaign workers [[the volunteers) be paid. That way some of the tens of billions of dollars of election expenses would go to others than consultants, aides, assistants and professional, lifelong politicians and campaigners. Meals and benefits should be included. This way after you've been out working your ass off for a candidate, knocking doors, erecting signs, etc, you could get a check and a meal. I mean besides coffee and donuts. This would likely be a much bigger stimulus than anything Bush or NO!bama has ever enacted.

Maybe those workers should also be given a reality check... to make sure that their expectations aren't beyond the realm of what is possible in politics [[there is no Camelot, and never has been)... lest they fall into depression and disillusionment and resort to name calling of their candidate...

[[Sorry, but your incessant "NO!bama" is getting very stale!)

**1KielsonDrive** · April-08-11, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by Gistok

Maybe those workers should also be given a reality check... to make sure that their expectations aren't beyond the realm of what is possible in politics [[there is no Camelot, and never has been)... lest they fall into depression and disillusionment and resort to name calling of their candidate...

[[Sorry, but your incessant "NO!bama" is getting very stale!)

Sorry Gistok, but you're incessant regurgitating of my name calling is getting very stale. If it doesn't agree with you - ignore it. I'll do the same with your posts. Otherwise - deal with it. This is a discussion site. I haven't broken any rules.

**firstandten** · April-08-11, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Gistok

[[Sorry, but your incessant "NO!bama" is getting very stale!)

LOL!! come 2016 1KielsonDrive statement will be true.

**socks_mahoney** · April-08-11, 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by bartock

It isn't about what I like or don't like. I'm not that emotionally attached to these things.

You need to have a specific reason and I fail to see a specific reason, which is why a recall likely will not happen. I fail to see how the argument that the business tax incentives are terrible, but so was ending an "I'll pay you to be my friend" money giveaway under the guise of film incentives. I get that people are mad about the pension thing, but there is nothing to suggest that he wouldn't do something like this...[[and, I don't mind it. I'll never see a dime of the Social Security I've been paying into for 20 years).
.

How about this for a specific reason:

A constitutionally questionable Emergency Financial Manager bill otherwise known as Financial Martial Law

**Jimaz** · April-08-11, 06:58 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't one of the concerns that an Emergency Financial Manager would have the power to unseat a duly elected official?

That's ironic since that would also be the goal of a recall drive.

Of course they're not exactly symmetric because the former would be antidemocratic and the latter would be democratic.

**JTistle1** · April-08-11, 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by Vox

I'd vote for Oakland County treasurer Andy Misener in a heartbeat. Smart, and pragmatic.

I'd vote for L. Brooks Patterson.
<sitting back eating popcorn and waiting for the fireworks to start from that comment> LOL

**HistoryNotHisStory** · April-08-11, 07:38 PM

Why recall the govenor?

The voters knew that he was for cutting business taxes and government spending.

Why complain now!

DetroitPole · April-08-11, 08:00 PM

What gets me most about Rick was that people fell for the same old shit...again.

The people who voted for him had no idea what he stood for. He purposely concealed that. They just went for the empty "tough nerd" cliche. It was like George Bush, the Connecticut Yale man "clearing brush" on his "ranch" all over again. The voters said they'd rather have a beer with him than with Kerry, despite the fact that George was a dry drunk. Well, the same voters saw this image of some "tough nerd" almost magically "creating jobs" and look where we are.

Let's clear things up: nothing in Synder's plan stipulates anything about job creation. It is simply an arbitrary lowering of business taxes while everyone else must pay more and services are cut. These businesses, in fact, are free to cut jobs, leave the state, go overseas, or what have you - they simply are more profitable.

I don't have a problem with shared sacrifice. However, it isn't so much the pensions but the Earned Income Tax credit that strikes me as a low-blow. Hitting the poor with a cut that they would otherwise use to stimulate their local economies.

Then we come to the education cuts. Curious that no one here has mentioned that. Really, does this state have too many smart people? This goes for K-12 and the higher education cuts he is making. I think this is perhaps his most transparent ploy. Michigan is suffering from an undereducated, in fact partially illiterate populace, and the research universities have shown tremendous potential for job growth and he is cutting in these areas?

Let's move on to revenue sharing and historic preservation and brownfield credits. Basically this is a gigantic "fuck you" to the bleeding cities of Michigan. So developers are now, out of the goodness of their hearts, supposed to develop historic buildings and brownfield sites [[which exist in the countryside as well) as opposed to just sprawling out to nowhere for cheaper as we have been doing for the past 30 years? All the Republicans here are bitching about doing something different; what is different about that?

I'm all for shared sacrifice. However Snyder is predictably cutting funding in all the wrong areas - and then simply making businesses more profitable. I'm not quite sure what all of you expect from this formula, all you who scream "give it a chance!" So for the record: cut funding to education, aid to poor people, cities, retirees, and then just lower business taxes and wish, hope, and pray they will create jobs?? How superstitious are you? I can tell you that Cristal sales will likely go through the roof and corks come off in the offices of CEOs throughout the state, but don't hold your breath waiting for a drop of it to trickle down to you. Your city is bankrupt, your formerly prestigious school district is cut to the bone, your eldest can't afford college, your pension is taxed, and there are a bunch of desperate poor people not too far from you now even more desperate. Perhaps we shall see some job creation in the area of security doors and handguns.

Recall? I guess I'd sign it; I'm more pissed that you assholes who voted for him stuck us with this pile of shit to begin with.

**mwilbert** · April-08-11, 08:19 PM

I'm not so sympathetic to people who want to recall politicians because of buyer's remorse. I'm sure people didn't expect exactly the set of actions that Gov.Snyder has proposed, but they aren't out of character with what he said he would do. I don't agree with much of it; nor do I think it will accomplish what he claims it will accomplish, but I knew that before he was elected.

I will also point out that if we had a Democratic governor, we would still have a quite conservative legislature, and it is hard to know what sorts of good things would have come out of that.

**Baselinepunk** · April-08-11, 10:15 PM

Well I'm a newbie about this so ....

the way I see it sure, let's recall the Rick. Sure, but what would that leave us?

His Lt. Gov, right?

He's just as bad as the Rick; he's the cockblock.

So, go through the recall effort; have a person just as bad take his place and waste a ton of cash money only to have to go through it again.

recall the Rick, his Top Lt and both leaders of the Senate and the House.

That's real change we can all believe in.

**Gistok** · April-08-11, 11:35 PM

Sorry 1KielsonDrive... just had a bad day... no offense against you... but you only degrade Obama and not Bush... that's not bipartisanship!!!

bartock · April-09-11, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by socks_mahoney

How about this for a specific reason:

A constitutionally questionable Emergency Financial Manager bill otherwise known as Financial Martial Law

"Constitutionally questionable" is way too vague, although this appears to be the one issue that a recall could arise from. Perhaps if found to be unconstitutional...

**socks_mahoney** · April-09-11, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by bartock

"Constitutionally questionable" is way too vague, although this appears to be the one issue that a recall could arise from. Perhaps if found to be unconstitutional...

Well to be specific:

Article I section 10 of the Untied States Constitution says:

"No State shall pass any Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts" The EFM will, by law, be able to void contracts. If that's isn't blatantly unconstitutional I don't know what is.

**Wesley Mouch** · April-09-11, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by socks_mahoney

Well to be specific:

Article I section 10 of the Untied States Constitution says:

"No State shall pass any Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts" The EFM will, by law, be able to void contracts. If that's isn't blatantly unconstitutional I don't know what is.

1) NPR has run stories with debates on this subject. If its being debated, than it doesn't seem to be 'blatantly unconsitutional'.

2) Passing a 'blatantly unconsitutional' law is not a good reason for a recall. Its called a difference of opinion. The courts decide.

3) Contracts get voided all the time. See bankruptcy.

Snyder's passed a bill to accomplish something he believes in. Maybe he's wrong. It was passed by legislature because they can see that a solution was necessary. What's your solution other than tearing about Snyder's?

**socks_mahoney** · April-09-11, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Snyder's passed a bill to accomplish something he believes in. Maybe he's wrong. It was passed by legislature because they can see that a solution was necessary. What's your solution other than tearing about Snyder's?

He is wrong. Other solutions include merging school districts and inner ring suburbs or shifting service provisions to County governments to save money through economies of scales and to take the burden off municipal governments. These are all things Snyder says he "might" do with EFM's but why do it through such an undemocratic process? Why not just lay our what's to be done with the people instead of appointing dozens upon dozens of dictators to do it in a top-down process?Very fishy.

On the revenue raising side [[which Snyder has completely ignored except for tax the dirt poor and old people) we could reinstate a graduated income tax which a majority of Michigan residents were found to support in an academic poll done by Wayne State University last year. We could also apply the sales tax to services instead of just goods. Taxing goods and not services is essentially a regressive tax because the wealthy spend the majority of their money on services, while the middle class and poor spend a majority of their money on goods.

My favorite idea was proposed by, of all people, Donald Trump: a one time 25% tax on net assets for the super-rich class.

The additional revenue raised could be put towards things that are proven to spur economic development. Business incubators could be set up, expand rapid mass transit to connect markets to other markets and consumers, or to install free broadband internet in urban areas to attract residents and businesses [[been done in Austin, Tx with great success). Of course, we could also continue to fund the greatest economic development tool: public education.

The EFM bill doesn't propose any specific policies to raise revenues or balance the budget or spur economic development. The only thing its puts in place is an undemocratic system of governance that completely usurps home rule, an essential part of Michigan's political culture since we were incorporated as a state. This is not Snyder's boardroom, this is a democracy.

**1KielsonDrive** · April-09-11, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitPole

What gets me most about Rick was that people fell for the same old shit...again.

The people who voted for him had no idea what he stood for. He purposely concealed that. They just went for the empty "tough nerd" cliche. It was like George Bush, the Connecticut Yale man "clearing brush" on his "ranch" all over again. The voters said they'd rather have a beer with him than with Kerry, despite the fact that George was a dry drunk. Well, the same voters saw this image of some "tough nerd" almost magically "creating jobs" and look where we are.

Let's clear things up: nothing in Synder's plan stipulates anything about job creation. It is simply an arbitrary lowering of business taxes while everyone else must pay more and services are cut. These businesses, in fact, are free to cut jobs, leave the state, go overseas, or what have you - they simply are more profitable.

I don't have a problem with shared sacrifice. However, it isn't so much the pensions but the Earned Income Tax credit that strikes me as a low-blow. Hitting the poor with a cut that they would otherwise use to stimulate their local economies.

Then we come to the education cuts. Curious that no one here has mentioned that. Really, does this state have too many smart people? This goes for K-12 and the higher education cuts he is making. I think this is perhaps his most transparent ploy. Michigan is suffering from an undereducated, in fact partially illiterate populace, and the research universities have shown tremendous potential for job growth and he is cutting in these areas?

Let's move on to revenue sharing and historic preservation and brownfield credits. Basically this is a gigantic "fuck you" to the bleeding cities of Michigan. So developers are now, out of the goodness of their hearts, supposed to develop historic buildings and brownfield sites [[which exist in the countryside as well) as opposed to just sprawling out to nowhere for cheaper as we have been doing for the past 30 years? All the Republicans here are bitching about doing something different; what is different about that?

I'm all for shared sacrifice. However Snyder is predictably cutting funding in all the wrong areas - and then simply making businesses more profitable. I'm not quite sure what all of you expect from this formula, all you who scream "give it a chance!" So for the record: cut funding to education, aid to poor people, cities, retirees, and then just lower business taxes and wish, hope, and pray they will create jobs?? How superstitious are you? I can tell you that Cristal sales will likely go through the roof and corks come off in the offices of CEOs throughout the state, but don't hold your breath waiting for a drop of it to trickle down to you. Your city is bankrupt, your formerly prestigious school district is cut to the bone, your eldest can't afford college, your pension is taxed, and there are a bunch of desperate poor people not too far from you now even more desperate. Perhaps we shall see some job creation in the area of security doors and handguns.

Recall? I guess I'd sign it; I'm more pissed that you assholes who voted for him stuck us with this pile of shit to begin with.

Thank you DetroitPole, I not only hear what you're saying but also I feel your sentiments. Right on. And your analogy of Snyder to George Bush is on the money.

**1KielsonDrive** · April-09-11, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by Gistok

Sorry 1KielsonDrive... just had a bad day... no offense against you... but you only degrade Obama and not Bush... that's not bipartisanship!!!

Only degrade NO!bama? Who's in office right now? You apparently haven't heard my comments about Bush2. He's the worst president in HISTORY. Acknowledging that does us little good at this time partially due to the fact that NO!bama will do nothing about Bush2's criminality, nor will he criticize Bush2 or assign blame for all the fuck ups he inherited from Bush2. So guess what? Those fuck ups are now NO!bama's. I have no shortage of dislike for Bush2, but I'm focusing on the guy I worked my ass of for and who let me and millions of other hard working, middle class American citizens down. Do I have to rehash all of this? You know I will. 99er's. Bailouts for everyone EXCEPT real people. Foreclosures. Guantanamo. Etc, etc, etc. When Bush2 is back on the radar again [[I hope never) I'll make my criticisms of him. Until then.........

**1KielsonDrive** · April-09-11, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by Gistok

Sorry 1KielsonDrive... just had a bad day... no offense against you... but you only degrade Obama and not Bush... that's not bipartisanship!!!

Also, there's nothing bi-partisan about the situation were in at this time other than both parties [[if you can truly call them two parties) are responsible. The republicrats call the shots and NO!bama and the demicans carry the water. Nero fiddled while Rome burned.........

Augustiner · April-09-11, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

Also, there's nothing bi-partisan about the situation were in at this time other than both parties [[if you can truly call them two parties) are responsible. The republicrats call the shots and NO!bama and the demicans carry the water. Nero fiddled while Rome burned.........

I think you've made your point.

**1KielsonDrive** · April-09-11, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by Augustiner

I think you've made your point.

And I will keep making it and keep making it. If you don't want to hear, ignore it or refer to post #55.

Augustiner · April-09-11, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive

And I will keep making it and keep making it. If you don't want to hear, ignore it or refer to post #55.

I've expressed no opinion about whether or not I want to hear it. I just figured it must be tough, finding a way to work "republicrats" and "demicans" and "NO!bama" into every single one of your posts, and I thought you might like to take a little break and bask in the satisfaction of a job well done.

bartock · April-09-11, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by socks_mahoney

Well to be specific:

Article I section 10 of the Untied States Constitution says:

"No State shall pass any Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts" The EFM will, by law, be able to void contracts. If that's isn't blatantly unconstitutional I don't know what is.

That is your specific opinion, I doubt it would pass muster as a specific reason for a recall, as others have pointed out.

I look at someone like the former "Governor" Blago as someone who did things deserving of a recall...you may disagree with Snyder, but find me evidence that parallels anything close to that, or anything really other than an opinion on something you've even described as "questionably Constitutional."

**firstandten** · April-09-11, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by bartock

I look at someone like the former "Governor" Blago as someone who did things deserving of a recall...you may disagree with Snyder, but find me evidence that parallels anything close to that, or anything really other than an opinion on something you've even described as "questionably Constitutional."

I agree. It would take something like what Blago was doing for me a sign a recall petition. In my opinion the only time the recall should be used is for something unconstitutional or criminal.As much as I dislike Snyder's policies its not to the stage where a recall is warranted.