The right tries to stir up false controversy over a field trip

Rightwing bloggers in Michigan and Republican Senate candidate Leon Drolet are stirring up a false controversy over an elementary school field trip in Ann Arbor.

Apparently, 30 students at Dicken Elementary School that are members of an academic peer-support group called the Lunch Bunch went on a field trip to the University of Michigan to hear from a black rocket scientist in the hope it would inspire the African-American students to consider science and engineering as a career. All the members of the club, currently, are African-American, but it’s open to all students. The purpose of the club is to help students struggling academically.

The club was created to help improve African-American students' MEAP performance, but again, it is open to all students. Drolet is charging discrimination because invitations did not go out to other students. I’m not aware it’s against the law to not invite someone.

District spokesman Liz Margolis told the Detroit Free Press that the trip was not paid for with school funds. The only cost was the bus, which was paid for by a private donation.

Drolet is the former chairman of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, which successfully amended the state constitution with Proposal 2, that banned affirmative action; long a target of the right., and he claims the trip "absolutely" violated Proposal 2.

"If it was directed, guided, organized by the school district, they cannot say they are doing a field trip today for blacks only, or for whites only, or for Hispanics only or for Asians only," Drolet told the Free Press.

You will recall, there was widespread voter fraud involved in putting the measure on the ballot and in collecting signatures. Despite those widespread allegations of fraud, no other body or office in the state was allowed to look into the fraud committed, In fact, Republicans went out of his way to take powers away from the state Board of Canvassers because they were concerned with the fraud committed.

Petition fraud is nothing new to Drolet and company

To quote a sage hall of fame former New York Yankee catcher, the recall farce against Michigan House Speaker Andy Dillon is "It's deja vu all over again.”

Despite mounting evidence of fraud and deceit to collect signatures, out of state money, illegal petition gathers, cash for signatures and illegal campaign contributions by Republican Macomb County Commissioner Leon Drolet and company, they are assuring the mainstream press that the recall will get on the ballot. Michigan Liberal and Eric Baerren have done an excellent job of documenting and presenting some of this fraud.

As evidence of the expected success of the Dillon recall, they point to the success of the racist Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) that went on the November 2006 ballot that did away with affirmative action. Despite proof of the same deceptive tactics used on both petition drives – even by some of the same players involved in this recall, including Drolet – the petitions were certified and it went on the ballot and was approved by voters.

You may recall that the California group headed by Ward Connerly came to Michigan to push the initiative, and the group illegally lied to people and misrepresented themselves to get signatures. In fact, the Michigan Civil Rights Commission adopted a resolution against the racist initiative. Following a six-month investigation that concluded on June 12, 2006, it released the results that found “…that efforts to place the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) on the ballot appeared to be based upon a massive campaign of fraud and deceit.”

“The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative is a shameful attempt to confuse and manipulate unsuspecting Michigan voters, was what one member of the Civil Rights Commission said about the effort.

Sounds very familiar doesn’t it? Kind of like deja vu all over again.

Drolet and company submitted the signatures just before the deadline, but we have not heard much about their failures. It started recalls against Reps. Robert Dean, D-Grand Rapids, Marie Donigan, D-Royal Oak; Sen. Jerry Van Woerkom, R-Norton Shores; Rep. Mary Valentine, D-Muskegon; Rep. Marc Corriveau, D-Northville; Rep. Ed Gaffney, R-Grosse Pointe Farms; Rep. Steve Bieda, D-Warren, and Rep. Joel Sheltrown, D-West Branch, but all have failed. It seems sad that they are crowing about 1 out of 9. That’s a pretty crappy success rate, especially when you consider it’s the Michigan voters who are the losers.

Recalls should be reserved for officeholders who commit a crime, commit fraud or deceit or are dishonest. The kind of things that Drolet has done in this witch-hunt. It is not for a politician for simply doing their job, for casting one vote and keeping the state open. If you disagree, you vote for his opponent in the election, and you can do that in August or November, just three and six months.

Ballot question petitions get the OK

LANSING - The Michigan State Board of Canvassers gave approval Wednesday to a pair of initiative petitions seeking to place questions on the November 2008 General Election ballot but rejected a third.

The petitions presented to the four-person partisan board previewed a crowded General Election ballot next November, and the petitions submitted call for the Legislature to pass laws to “ensure that every Michigan resident has affordable health care coverage,” a petition calling for a part-time legislature and a petition requiring a state-wide vote on every tax increase. The board also set the deadline to challenge signatures already collected to allow the use of medical marijuana on the ballot.

Erane Washington-Kendrick, the Democrat chair of the board, stressed that approval does not mean endorsement of the proposal; only that the petitions meet requirements of font size and form, and approval is simply a courtesy that means the petitions cannot be challenged later for improper form once the resources have been expended to collect signatures.

Petitions drives enacting legislation have become a part of the political scene in Michigan, and the proper collection of signatures has come under recent scrutiny by both the board and Michigan courts. In an unrelated discussion about giving the University of Michigan access to old ballots for a research project, Republican board member Lyn Bankes said fraud was used to gather signatures for Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) that was placed on the November 2006 ballot, but the courts never ruled on that fraud in allowing Proposal 2 to go on the ballot.

“Some of these (petitions) are so silly there will be paid signature gathers,” she said. “I can see fraud involved in that, and we are not equipped to handle that.”

The board gave approval to the petition submitted by Madison Heights-based Health Care for Michigan that would amend the state constitution to require the legislature to pass laws to ensure that “every Michigan resident has affordable and comprehensive health care coverage through a fair and cost-effective financing system.” Constitutional Amendments require the valid signatures of registered voters equal to 10 percent of the total number of votes cast for all candidates for governor in the last election, and that comes out to the signatures of 380,126 registered voters that must be collected by July 7, 2008.

The petition submitted by the Saginaw-based Part-Time Legislature Ballot Question Committee was also approved. It calls for a part-time legislature, calls for cutting the salaries of lawmakers from $79,650 to $40,000 a year with a 1 percent deduction for each day absent; eliminates post service pensions, retirement benefits, medical or life insurance; set the legislative session from March to July; limits special sessions to just 20 days per year and requires the governor to submit a budget within the first three days of session.

The same group calling itself the People's Choice Tax Repeal Committee had its petition rejected. The board said the petition was too wordy and hard to understand. However, that does not mean the signature collecting cannot go forward, but the petitions would be easier to challenge and throw out later on.

“That’s a lot of verbage to read even if it meets the 8-point (font size) requirement,” said Shelly Edgerton, the Republican Vice-Chair of the board.

The petition would amend the state constitution to mandate an election if the legislature creates a new tax, continues a tax, reduces a tax deduction or tax credit or increased the effective rate or base of tax.

The board also set the deadline to challenge signatures already collected by Citizens for Compassionate Care to allow the use of medical marijuana. The deadline is 10 days after a sample of 500 names is drawn, and the board expects the drawing of the representative sample to take place about mid-January. The committee has already submitted about 475,000 petition signatures to put the issue on the ballot. Because it is an initiative and not a constitutional amendment, only 8 percent of the total number of votes cast for all candidates for governor must be collected, which comes out to 304,101 signatures of registered voters.

Conservatives open even another front on the war on the middle class

The Republicans war on the middle class and unions with the right to work for less law is opening a new front with an assault on the Prevailing Wage Law.

The GOP is engaged in a race to the bottom, and the loser will be the middle class and the country. According to a story in the Detroit News, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy has released a study that says Michigan could save $250 million a year by repealing the prevailing wage law that requires union pay for all state-supported projects.

The Michigan Prevailing Wage Law, PA 166 of 1965, provide rates of pay for workers on construction projects for which the state or a school district is the contracting agent and financed or financially supported by the state.

“Paul Kersey, a senior labor policy analyst with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said the current prevailing wage law adds 10 to 15 percent to the cost of every construction job.” He further claims it “effectively boosts construction wages by 40 to 60 percent.”

But like anything else, you get what you pay for. Marty Mulcathy, editor of the Building Tradesman, the official publication of the Michigan Building and Construction Trade Council in Lansing, said that prevailing wages don't provide for any significant increase in the price tag of a construction project.

“When you're paying $8 or $10 or $12 an hour, you don't know what skill level you're getting and frequently (you) are getting illegal immigrants or people of questionable citizenship,” Mulcathy said. "You may be paying the unionized people a little bit more but you're getting a more skilled worker who pays taxes and contributes to the community.”

What do you think is done with that extra wage? It’s pumped right back into the local economy. If we win the race to the bottom the Republicans are engaged in, who are the winners?

The Republicans have bills in both the House and Senate to make Michigan a right to work for less state, and if that fails, and it will, there is a group poised to launch a petition drive to put it on the ballot. Some people from this group are the same people who ran the deceptive petition drive that that put the deceptive titled “Michigan Civil Eights Initiative” on the ballot last November. In fact, just yesterday Gongwer reported the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out appeals against the law, saying, “the plaintiffs have proven that the signature process to get the issue before voters was skewed.”

"By all accounts, Proposal 2 found its way on the ballot though methods that undermine the integrity and fairness our democratic processes," the decision said. "Nevertheless, we must be guided by law, not outrage, and it to the law we now turn."

This is what we can expect if this ballot proposal for right to work for less is launched.

It’s ironic that the Mackinac Center for Public Policy is behind this assault on the Prevailing Wage Law. Another front on the war against the middle class and unions is privatization, and we saw a recent example of the damage it can cause in Howell Public Schools with the firing of its custodial staff. If the Mackinac Center has its way every school and government function would be privatized.

'Every picture tells a story don’t it'

“Every picture tells a story don’t it?”

With apologies to Rod Stewart and the Faces, this picture sums up the Republicans commitment to Civil Rights and African-American voters. I recently had a “debate” – more like them attacking me – on a rightwing blog where the joker said Republicans truly represent the black voter better than Democrats. This is why that’s not true.

The NAACP held its 98th annual convention at Cobo Center, and on the final day all the presidential hopefuls were invited. Only one the 10 Republicans bothered.

According to the Detroit News, “Nine of the 10 Republican presidential hopefuls took a pass at attending the Detroit convention. Some in the audience said their absence was a snub, and disrespectful.” That last part is called an understatement.

Rightwing extremist hired gun takes shot at Howell teachers

The assault on the Howell teachers union, Howell Education Association, is getting some help from an Oakland County rightwing extremist connected with racist and extreme causes.

Chet Zarko, “a metro-Detroit, Michigan-based, political and marketing research and consulting service, focusing on conservative and moderate candidates and other clients” is accusing the HEA of abusing taxpayer-funded resources to promote union causes in a front page story in the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus. That description is from his web site, and there is nothing moderate about Zarko.

Zarko was the communications director for the California group headed by Ward Connerly that came to the state to push the racist Michigan Civil Rights Initiative on the November 2006 ballot that did away with affirmative action. Zarko is a dirty trickster in the tradition of Saul Anuzis, Kyle Bristow and Bill Nowling, and his most well known stunt is when he tried to goad Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer into a confrontation by sticking a video camera in his face at public meeting in October of 2005.

We have to wonder who is paying Zarko, and we see the fingerprints of the anti-gay hate group known as the LOVE” PAC (Livingston Organization for Values in Education) and specifically “LOVE” and school board member Wendy Day. Zarko first contacted Day on her blog, as far as we know. And we wonder why the teachers have no contract?

According to the article, “Zarko alleges Howell Education Association leaders have "conducted a large amount of union business on public time, including trying to retain MEA (Michigan Education Association) affiliated MESSA health-insurance, and using parent-teacher conferences to recruit parents (to) their side of a collective-bargaining debate. bases his claims on union leaders' e-mails that he received through the Freedom of Information Act. He has posted several of the e-mails on his Web log and commented about them in a press release issued Friday.”

“Doug Norton, union president, calls Zarko's claims "absolutely erroneous on all counts."
"It's obviously timed to throw mud to affect the school board election and to derail what are positive signs for bargaining," Norton said Monday. "Mr. Zarko is connected with (a) statewide campaign to attack MEA and MESSA. In fact, he and others are working to get other for-profit insurance companies in across the state."

In a further development, Genoa Township radio station WHMI is reporting a temporary restraining order has been signed by Livingston County Circuit Court Judge Stanley Latreille that prevents Howell Public Schools from releasing more e-mails by leaders and members of the teacher’s union.”

A hearing has been set for Thursday to see if more emails can be released under FOIA.

Newspaper rightwing editorial condones voter fraud and eliminating independent judiciary

Despite an anti-Republican swing in the nation, the OP-ED pages of the Daily Press & Argus continues its shift to the right. The latest evidence of that trend is the editorial in today’s edition that says Proposal 2, that bans affirmative action programs based on race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin, should not be challenged in the courts. Their reasoning is because voters in Livingston County voted nearly 3-1 for it.

Apparently, they have forgotten there are three branches of government, and the independent judiciary job’s is to ensure laws pass Constitutional muster. Often, it’s the last resort for the poor and powerless who have been discriminated against and who have been treated unfairly. I’m sure if a Constitutional amendment banning African-Americans from voting had been placed on the ballot in 1962 in Alabama or Mississippi it would have passed by a similar margin, but that would note have made it right. Remember, Proposal 2 was opposed by both candidates for governor, and those who supported Proposal 2 included the KKK. Let the courts do the job the Founding Fathers intended it to do.

The editorial says opponents fought hard to keep it off the ballot, but they did not commit voter fraud like California’s Ward Connerly and his supporters. I don’t know what affirmative action plan Chris Ward has suggested, but I can safely say it will be like every alleged reform he has introduced and only benefit Republicans.

Ward’s position on Prop 2 was pretty clear. He asked the Attorney General to determine whether the Michigan Civil Rights Commission "may have exceeded its constitutional and statutory powers" in investigating the gathering of signatures for the ban. Legal experts have said they did not, and Ward conveniently ignored the fact that despite widespread allegations of fraud, no other body or office in the state was allowed to look into the fraud committed, In fact, Ward went out of his way to take powers away from the state Board of Canvassers because they were concerned with the fraud committed. He’s supposed to be so concerned about voter fraud with his unconstitutional voter ID bill, but voter fraud committed for something he supports is OK.

The reasons for the issue’s success are many. Most obvious was the fact that many voters — particularly white voters — saw logic in an argument that said discrimination by race is wrong, regardless of the motivation.
The opponents didn’t help their cause with clumsy and frantic tactics. They fought hard to keep the issue from the ballot, leaving the impression that they didn’t want voters to have a say in the matter.
Then they used scare tactics, including wild suggestions that the proposal would prevent women from getting cancer screenings.
The measure would have likely passed anyway, but many voters could not have enjoyed being treated as though they were idiots.
Now what? One tactic is for opponents to talk long and loud about how this places a stigma on the state. Do that effectively enough, and it could be come a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Another strategy was immediately announced by Mary Sue Coleman, president of the University of Michigan, which was the target of two U.S. Supreme Court lawsuits that centered on its affirmative action admission programs.
Coleman stridently vowed to begin litigation to fight the decision of the state’s voters. Apparently our voters are allowed to pay taxes to support the university — and to pay for lawsuits — but they aren’t competent to make informed decisions on complex issues.
There is another strategy. That’s to accept the decision of the voters and to accept the notion that affirmative action plans based solely on race are inherently flawed. Why not instead pursue affirmative action plans based on socioeconomic factors rather than race, as state Rep. Chris Ward, R-Brighton Township, suggested?
Why not also more seriously address the root problems that make affirmative action plans necessary? It may sound good if U-M adds a few minority students — some of whom may be in the upper middle class — under an affirmative action program.
But shouldn’t we, as a matter of state policy, be looking instead at why a majority of minority-dominated inner-city high school students have dropped out and aren’t candidates for any sort of college? Shouldn’t we be attacking the root problems that imply that minority students aren’t prepared to get into college unless they get a break?
Tuesday’s vote doesn’t mean that state government and universities have to turn their backs on minority progress. What it does mean is that voters feel the policies are unfair and that, despite some successes, ineffective.
In light of last week’s vote, state university, government and business leaders have two choices. They can find more effective ways to narrow inequities while promoting minority advancement.
Or they can file another lawsuit.