Posted: July 31st, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
Anti-racist activists have reported to Media Mouse that the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens, a racist group with origins in the segregationist White Citizens’ Councils of the south and active recently in Grand Rapids, were effectively disrupted in Jackson, Michigan by the combined presence of a large number of anti-racists and rain. The Michigan Council of Conservative Citizens scheduled the first of two rallies it plans in the state in order to build support for the passage of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) yesterday in Jackson. Anti-racist activists report that they showed up shortly before 2:00pm to the Council’s “Anti-Affirmative Action Rally” to find that the fifteen anti-racists essentially matched the small crowd of Council of Conservative Citizens members and their supporters and the group was consequently easily able to halt the scheduled proceedings of the rally. While there were plans to have speeches followed by a march through Jackson, the activists—holding banners and signs reading “NO MCRI,” “No Nazis, No KKK, No Fascist USA,” and “CCC is a White Supremacist Organization”—were able to use noise and chanting to interfere with the Council’s rally and effectively limited their ability to both spread their racist message or attempt to recruit additional members.
While much of the rally consisted of activists calling out Council of Conservative Citizens’ members and supporters for their racist agenda and arguing between the two groups, there were a few noteworthy items gleaned from the stories related to Media Mouse. John Raterink of Hastings, the leader of the Michigan chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens, confirmed that he has previously supported the neo-Nazi National Alliance by subscribing to their newspaper. While Raterink claimed that he “has no use” for “Klansmen or Nazis,” this statement is at odds both with his support of the National Alliance as well as the attendance of a known neo-Nazi at yesterday’s rally. There was one politician who showed up to give a speech at the rally—Charles “Chuck” Conces, a candidate for Michigan Attorney General with the Constitution Party of Michigan (United States Tax Payers Party)—who said that he was asked to speak by the Council of Conservative Citizens and claimed that he was unaware that they were a white supremacist organization. Despite being told that they were and given information confirming this fact, Conces said the he still hoped that the Council would endorse him in the upcoming election. While Conces denied being a racist and claimed to be unfamiliar with the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) despite both being invited to speak at the a rally in support of the MCRI and being a candidate for attorney general, the Constitution Party’s platform makes it clear that it is of the far right with opposition to taxes, a desire to make the United States a “Christian” country, advocacy of an “English Only” policy, and an opposition to immigration from Mexico. Of course, Conces has little chance of winning for a variety of reasons ranging from his platform to the difficulty of obtaining media coverage for candidates outside of the Democrat and Republican parties, but the presence of a political candidate at the rally is illustrative of the longstanding connections that the Council of Conservative Citizens has maintained with politicians over the years, with Senators Trent Lott and Bob Barr speaking to the organization (among others) in the past.
The Council of Conservative Citizens (CofCC) was formed in 1985 and is an outgrowth of the racist White Citizens’ Council (WCC) movement that organized to oppose desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s. The White Citizens’ Councils attracted nearly one million members by eschewing the overt racism of the Ku Klux Klan and relying on connections to powerful individuals such as bankers, newspaper editors, and politicians to organize in defense of segregation. Nationally, the Council of Conservative Citizens is led by Gordon Lee Baum (a former White Citizen’s Council organizer) and is based in St. Louis. The CofCC has built its membership in part from old mailing lists from the White Citizen’s Councils and by appealing to conservatives through organizing around contentious issues such as affirmative action, immigration, and gun control. Like the White Citizen’s Councils, it maintains a host of racist and white supremacist views with the Council of Conservative Citizens’ its “statement of principles” including the belief that “the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character,” a vehement opposition to immigration from “non-European and non-Western peoples” as it “threatens to transform our nation into a non-European majority in our lifetime,” and an opposition to “all efforts to mix the races of mankind, to promote non-white races over the European-American people through so-called ‘affirmative action’ and similar measures, to destroy or denigrate the European-American heritage, including the heritage of the Southern people, and to force the integration of the races.” The group’s statement of principles also includes opposition to “multiculturalist” or “Afrocentric” curricula in schools and an opposition to homosexuality, which they describe as a “perversion.”
The Michigan Council of Conservative Citizens appears to be a relatively new white supremacist organization in the state, with John Raterink registering the domain for their website – micofcc.org – and yesterday’s anti-affirmative action rally being their second public event. The group previously held a private July 4 picnic in 2005 in Nashville, Michigan and an anti-immigration rally in Grand Rapids in May of 2006. Based on attendance at the two public events and the number of anti-racist activists compared with the number of Council of Conservative Citizens members, it would seem that the group has little constituency in the state of Michigan, despite the Raterink’s organizing efforts. Indeed, while Raterink works closely with the national office of the Council of Conservative Citizens, speaking at the 2006 National Convention on the topic of “Keeping Christ in the Family” and hosting their “Citizen’s Supply Shop” that sells Council of Conservative Citizens’ merchandise, his organizing within the state seems to have made little progress.
Tags: council of conservative citizens, jackson, michigan, nazis, protest, racism, racists
Posted: July 31st, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
The following articles of interest were published elsewhere on the web today:
Previously archived links are available on Media Mouse’s del.icio.us page. To recommend links, tag them with “mediamouserecommended” on del.icio.us.
Posted: July 29th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
Congressional Republicans, who last December advocated and passed HR 4437, a draconian “immigration reform” measure that essentially criminalized all undocumented immigrants living within the United States, have continued to advocate their approach over the summer as media and political attention has shifted away from the topic. Congressional Republicans have organized an extensive public relations effort to advocate for the passage of a bill restricting immigration before the end of the year, including an almost daily “Border Security Bulletin” that touts the hearings being held by the House of Representatives, media coverage that promotes strict immigration controls, and detailed arguments against the legislation that came out of the Senate which many Congressional Republicans see as an “amnesty” bill. In June, the House Republicans released a “statement of principles” outlining their positions on immigration (or “border security” as they have attempted to re-term the issue in order to force people to accept the premise that the borders are both not secure and that they need to be secured further) that included statements advocating for additional border patrol efforts, strengthening enforcement, requiring immigrants to assimilate and to learn the English language, increasing penalties for immigrants that break the law, and opposing efforts to “reward the behavior of illegal immigrants who have made the choice to break the laws.” According to an article published in the July 17, 2006 issue of the National Review (http://www.gop.gov/docs/July%2011%20Americas%20Voices%20on%20Border%20Security.pdf), “a unified House GOP caucus has decided to go on offense in order to wring the maximum political credit from being on the right side of their reading of public opinion” and is intending to “avoid the appearance of compromising” on the Senate bill, and in the words of an aide cited in the article, have “no intention in taking part in a conference [committee] to hammer out the differences between the House and Senate bills” unless there is a dramatic change in the Senate bill or in how congressional Republicans interpret public opinion.
One way in which House Republicans are shaping the debate on the issue is through an extensive schedule of hearings on the issue over the summer. Republicans have held hearings with titles such as “Should we Embrace the Senate’s Grant of Amnesty to Millions of Illegal Aliens and Repeat the Mistakes of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986” (House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims), “Guest Worker Programs: Impact on American Workforce and United States Immigration Policy” (Education and Workforce Committee), and “Expanding the Border Fence” (Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Cybersecurity). In addition to inviting media and supporters to the hearing, Republicans follow-up on the hearings with press releases containing statements from various people testifying as a means of further spreading their message. Republicans have also taken these hearings outside of Congress and held a hearing on “Border Vulnerabilities and International Terrorism” at a Border Patrol station in San Diego. Recently they announced a slate of twenty-one “Field Hearings” in thirteen states on topics such as “How do illegal immigrants impact the costs of healthcare, local education, and other social services, and would these costs increase under Reid-Kennedy immigration bill?” “How are U. S. workers impacted, and potentially displaced, by the Reid-Kennedy bill?” and “Do the Reid-Kennedy bill’s amnesty provisions repeat the mistakes of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986?.” The hearings are being held by a variety of House Committees including the Administration, Armed Services, Homeland Security, Judiciary, and the Select Committee on Intelligence. As part of this schedule of field hearings, a hearing will be held here in Grand Rapids, Michigan on August 23rd by the House Select Committee on Intelligence with the title “What is the Threat to the United States from Islamic Extremists who abuse the Legal Immigration System?.” The House Select Committee on Intelligence is chaired by Holland area congressperson Pete Hoekstra who voted in favor of HR 4437 in December of 2005.
House Republicans have also made use of the media and their “Border Security Bulletins” frequently tout media coverage and conservative columnists that seem to bolster their case for new immigration legislation based on their aforementioned principles. For example, on July 26, 2006, their Bulletin featured an article written by Congressperson Howard P. “Buck” McKeon for Human Events Online that criticized the Senate’s immigration bill for not being strong enough in its advocacy for the English language and the need to ensure that “those coming to America… learn English and assimilate into our society,” suggesting that Republicans have not dropped their desire for making English a national language. The Republicans’ effort has highlighted the views of prominent conservatives in the media, including the Washington Times’ citations of numerous conservative studies to conclude that the Senate bill would guarantee higher wages for immigrants than United States citizens and allow 100 million immigrants in over the next 20 years, a column by conservative Robert Novak claiming that the Senate bill has holes that would open the country to terrorist attacks, and even citing “letters to the editor” published in various newspapers as proof that the majority of United States citizens want an aggressive approach towards immigration. As has been the case since September 11, 2001, Republicans are also attempting to bring the terrorists attacks of September 11 into the debate, with the Bulletin including a message from a father of a 9/11 victim claiming that the Senate immigration bill would not take terrorism seriously and highlighting their assertion that Egyptian Mahmud Abouhalima, who participated in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, was granted “amnesty” due to liberal immigration laws.
Once again, one of the lessons that can be learned from this is that the public relations system utilized by the rightwing in this country is considerably more significant than that of the Democrats or what constitutes the “left.” Congressional Republicans—aided by armed vigilantes and racist groups such as the Minutemen who make them seem more “reasonable”—have been able to control the immigration debate to the point where there are no questions about the underlying racism and disregard for basic human rights inherent in declaring a person “illegal.” The prominence of Republican views has led Democrats to support “border security” including the extension a fence along the United States-Mexico border and the continued militarization of the border and has once again setup a Congressional debate where there is no meaningful discussion and where basic underlying principles are left unchallenged and the only question is the degree to which immigrants will be criminalized. This situation has been exacerbated by the fact that many immigrant rights groups have split over the question of whether or not to support the Senate’s immigration bill, with some advocating its passage while others oppose it. While such differences are not entirely unsurprising, they have created a situation where House Republicans by virtue of their coordinated message, have been able to continue to promote their draconian approach.
Tags: congress, grand rapids, hr 4437, immigration, media, michigan, republicans
Posted: July 28th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
The following articles of interest were published elsewhere on the web today:
Previously archived links are available on Media Mouse’s del.icio.us page. To recommend links, tag them with “mediamouserecommended” on del.icio.us.
Posted: July 27th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
Last night at the Ladies Literary Club in downtown Grand Rapids, three candidates for the 75th District Michigan House of Representatives (the district covers much of Grand Rapids) seat participated in a candidate forum sponsored by the Men’s Alliance for Progress. The three candidates—Republican Sue Devries, Republican Chris Meyer, and Democrat Robert Dean—fielded a variety of questions developed by both the Men’s Alliance for Progress and the audience. Before beginning the questioning by former Grand Valley State University president Don Lubbers, a representative from the Men’s Alliance for Progress shared with the audience that the questions reflected the priorities of the organization. He identified these priorities as the environment as it relates to pollution and global warming, the war in Iraq, healthcare, and election reform. In the spirit of providing substantive coverage of elections in light of the corporate media’s failure to do so, questions and the candidates’ responses have been summarized:
- Opening Statement
- Sue Devries (SD): She described herself as a strong grassroots candidate and leader and cited her experience as the West Michigan Protection Manager at the Nature Conservancy where she does conservation and environmental protection work. She previously was the head of the Garfield Neighborhood Development Corporation which involved work to help people of different backgrounds in improving their lives, encouraging development and the economy, and establishing partnerships with the federal government (HUD) and Calvin College. She also served on the Grand Rapids Public Library board for 12 years and worked to protect first amendment rights and to limit how the USA PATRIOT Act affects patrons. She cited major problems facing the state as the economy (state is in a recession, the need to educate workers, improve tax policies, and diversify the economy), healthcare (there needs to be a better benefit structure and increased transparency), education (need to increasing funding for K-12 and college), and the environment (encourage green building, sustainable forest policy, protection measures). She said that there is a lack of dialog in politics and that she is willing to work together with people of a variety of political persuasions.
- Robert Dean (RD): He has a background in community development and was born and raised in Grand Rapids. His entire life’s work has been focused on giving back to the community because he believes that the problems of the world are such that one simply “can’t do enough” to address them. He is concerned about the lack of affordable healthcare and said that he worked to limit these costs when serving on the Grand Rapids Public Schools board and the Grand Rapids City Commission. He said that he offers visionary and proactive leadership with a proven record as he wrote the city’s business plan that encouraged business and improved the cities relationship with the school system. He also cited work he did creating healing racism workshops in Grand Rapids and said that he is a progressive who will deviate from the “party line” when it is needed.
- Chris Meyer (CM): He said that politics are how people plan the future and told the audience that he first got involved working with former Representative Paul Henry. He lived in Grand Rapids as a youth and models his political approach after the bipartisanship of Paul Henry. He cited his work on the board of The Rapid and how the Rapid has increased the number of riders while addressing the suburban/urban divide in transit as examples of his achievements. He said that he was concerned with the cost of healthcare and told the audience that he accepts no PAC money. He has been going door-to-door since April and identifies his major issues as the economy, education, healthcare, and revenue sharing. He said that incomes in the states have fallen since the 1950s and that Michigan needs to look at other states are doing and to adopt proven bipartisan solutions from other states.
- Question: The environment is the number one issue of the Men’s Alliance for Progress, what role can the state play?
- RD: The state has to be the first line of defense and offense when it comes to the environment. Trash dumping fees need to be increased in the state to stop the state from becoming a dumping ground and he cited the fact that by 2011 the state’s landfills will reach capacity. He also told the audience that while serving on the City Commission he worked on cleaning up the Butterworth dump and as such has experience dealing with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). He said that his work in on the City Commission was also a reason why 99% of the wastewater entering the Grand River is pollution free.
- CM: The state can participate in a regional collaboration to limit emissions. He also said that there should be a regional plan to limit sprawl and that a portion of this plan could be removing the dependency of localities on property taxes for funding as this encourages development. He also believes that the state can promote mass transit, conservation, and alternative energy sources such as nuclear power.
- SD: The state needs to maintain laws protecting wetlands. She also supports setting standards that require utilities to generate a portion of their energy from renewable resources, increased standards of efficiency for high-use appliances such as walk-in freezers, development and encouragement of alternative fuel sources beyond ethanol, research and funding for Great Lakes protections, and improved growth plans and the development of walkable communities.
- Question: There are numerous issues with healthcare in the state, especially with regard to access and cost, what are some state solutions?
- CM: For many, healthcare premiums are equal to their family’s mortgage payments. Out of this context, he argued that it is necessary to look at a national approach to healthcare and one idea is to put information on paychecks to inform the public about how much of their wages are going to pay for healthcare. Meyer believes that this would encourage the population to ask questions about why healthcare costs in the United States are more than double what they are in other countries.
- SD: She said that before addressing the issue we need to define what adequate and good care is and proceed from there. She would educated about costs and enter into a dialog about fairness and costs between business and labor. She wants to maintain care for poor people and would look for new models of care.
- RD: When he was on the City Commission they did many things such as looking at the healthcare costs and then switching providers (saved $15 million), persuading the City Commission to take a 5% cut in benefits to lead by examples, and negotiating with unions in order to save taxpayers money. He said that this was also addressed while he was on the Grand Rapids Public Schools board.
- Question: In the last election there were reports of voter access problems and intimidation, how can this be addressed?
- SD: She would pay poll workers more for their time and get more even representation from the two parties (Republicans are currently over represented). She would also request additional election observers, improve communication about changing polling places, and would oppose identification requirements for voting.
- CM: He would address this in part by increasing voter turnout that he would do by allowing “no reason” absentee voting and creating super precincts that would setup early voting centers two weeks before the election. He wants to see electronic poll books with swipable IDs for easier access, appropriate staffing at each polling place, and allowing only registered party poll challengers and keeping all others out.
- RD: There were four precincts with problems in his ward and they addressed this by educating poll workers and voters, splitting and balancing precincts, and implementing an electronic voting system. He said this is another example of results as a City Commissioner.
- Question: What is the state’s role in providing sustainable employment and living wages?
- RD: The state has a responsibility to attract businesses but the state is not actively using that power. He wants the state to be on “the front end” of this issue by avoiding tax breaks and instead working to help corporations with ideas and product innovation. He said that an improved economy guarantees and improvement in the quality of life.
- SD: She would focus on training, making cities and neighborhoods strong, creating a strong infrastructure as a way of making Michigan appealing for businesses and would due so these ways instead of using tax breaks.
- CM: He described sustainable employment as having businesses to employ workers, educated employees, a strong transportation infrastructure, and a roadmap out of poverty. He would reform the tax system and eliminate the single business tax.
- Question: What makes you a Democrat or a Republican?
- SD: She grew up as a Republican and the party is open to working with all who have intelligent ideas and is working for the benefit of all.
- RD: He is a progressive Democrat although he has now put an emphasis on partisanship while on the Grand Rapids Public Schools board or the City Commission. He looks at all issues and attempts to build consensus in his politics and is pro-business while being compassion in his work on social issues.
- CM: He worked for Paul Henry who was part of the Moderate Republican Caucus and supports limited government with the belief that all citizens deserve a government of limited programs, and spending. He also explained that the Republican Party is the only one talking about “life, liberty, and property.”
- Question: How will immigration reform affect Michigan’s economy?
- RD: He said that the issue is not just with “illegal workers” but also the employers that employ them and he said he thinks a guest worker program for those that contribute is an appropriate solution.
- CM: There are currently 11 million humans looking for better lives in the United States without being legal immigrants and that a major problem is that tough citizenship requirements for work are not being enforced. He supports the McCain or Bush approaches to immigration reform.
- SD: She wants to make sure the Detroit and Port Huron borders are secure and believes that people need to be treated civilly and become citizens.
- Question: Discuss your personal and political principles underlying your position on abortion?
- CM: He is pro-life except for in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is threatened. To address the issue of abortion he would look at women and their lives, not just the unborn, and would create better environments for children by addressing homelessness, hunger, and developing a roadmap out of poverty.
- SD: She is a pro-choice candidate and would work to make sure there were not unwanted pregnancies by having access to contraceptives, sex education, and a good reproductive health system.
- RD: He believes in the sanctity of life and has a pro-life record of counseling in his ministry. He believes people can have a position on the issue but that they need to not be judgmental and not reject people for their decisions.
- Question: What is the biggest issue relating to improving education in the state? Do you have any proposals?
- RD: Funding and unfunded mandates are the two biggest issues for the education system. He said that the schools are the biggest landlord in the city with substantial unused land and that they could sell this land to developers and make money for the city’s and the school system. He also said that he increased MEAP scores when he was on the board.
- CM: Education must be high quality in order to provide for children and as such he would equalize funding among school districts for capital and operating costs, would allow boards more flexibility in deciding how they spend money, would encourage workable performance standards, and would fund college and technical programs.
- SD: She supports funding equity, would work on truancy, would improve graduation levels, and improve healthcare for families so that there are less absences due to health.
- Question: Are state problems caused by cuts in federal funding and federal mandates?
- SD: Unfunded mandates are a big problem and there needs to be an examination of how money is being spent at the state level along with a process of involving citizens in deciding how the money is spent.
- CM: Unfunded mandates come up most in Medicare and education and the government needs to look at changing spending if programs are not giving results.
- RD: The state cannot balance its budget on the backs of local communities through revenue sharing and in response to such practices he led the City Commission to sue the state over lack of funding for special education and will continue to work to get fair funding.
- Question: Do you support legalizing embryonic stem cell research?
- RD: He is pro-life and says that research can be done without taking lives.
- CM: Michigan has a law that allows stem cell research on existing embryos but does not allow the creation of new embryos. He says that he is unaware of arguments that this law is limiting research and says that currently stem cell research on adult lines is showing the most promise. He has not yet reached a conclusion on the issue.
- SD: She supports research on in-vitro fertilized embryos but not when harvested.
- Question: Is there a “Bush Factor” in the election?
- CM: He does not know as he does not do polling.
- SD: The only “Bush Factor” she is aware of are bushes blocking doors.
- RD: He is not polling but he has encountered many people frustrated with the war and how money is being spent on that instead of infrastructure.
- Question: Have you read “The Price of Government” and, if so, how can its ideas be adopted?
- SD: She has read it and would work with citizens to prioritize funding of programs.
- RD: He read the book while on the City Commission and incorporated some of the practices into city government.
- CM: He has read it and what sticks out most in his mind is a graphic indicating how quickly healthcare costs have risen, food costs have fallen, and housing costs have stayed the same. With a tax base that has stayed roughly the same since World War II they need to look at spending and develop measurable results for programs.
- Closing Statements
- CM: He has the support of the Grand Rapids Press, former mayor Logie, and the Wyoming mayor. He would like to engage the state as a partner with citizens and sees his work with The Rapid as a good example of how this can be done.
- RD: He has a motto of “service before self” and has demonstrated his commitment to this in his adult life and work. He would like to serve the community as he did on the Grand Rapids Public Schools board and the City Commission. He explained that each day he has to face his creator and ask if he did his best. He also said that he has demonstrated results, not just talk.
- SD: She is a grassroots leader with leadership experience. She will look out for the needs of people and values diversity.
Tags: elections, grand rapids, house, michigan
Posted: July 27th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
The following articles of interest were published elsewhere on the web today:
Previously archived links are available on Media Mouse’s del.icio.us page. To recommend links, tag them with “mediamouserecommended” on del.icio.us.
Posted: July 26th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
Last night at Grand Valley State University (GVSU), GVSU’s Public Policy Institute hosted a candidate forum for candidates in the 28th Michigan Senate district Republican primary. The Republican primary consists of four candidates—Scott Harvey of Belmont, Mark Jansen of Grand Rapids, James Koetje of Wyoming, and Joanne Voorhees of Wyoming—with one of the four Republican candidates going on to face Democratic Party candidate Albert Abasse in the November general election. The 28th district covers much of Kent County outside of Grand Rapids and a map of the district is available. The questions were posed by moderator William Byl of the Public Policy Institute and consisted of those submitted by groups including Clean Water Action, the West Michigan Environmental Action Council, the Grand Rapids Public Schools, and the Chamber of Commerce as well as the audience. In order to facilitate access to the information required for voters to make more informed choices at the polls, Media Mouse has compiled a list of questions and candidate responses:
- Opening Statements
- James Koetje (JK): Michigan needs a Senator with job creation and job development experience, and as former member of the Michigan House of Representatives, he has that experience. He has been a business lawyer for more than twenty years. He wants an improved economy, is pro-life, supports the second amendment, and supports decreasing taxes and regulations that inhibit business.
- Scott Harvey (SH): He has no background in the Michigan House of Representatives or the Senate but he has experience as a leader in the telecommunications industry with a track record of creating jobs in that industry. He believes that the state needs to cut wasteful spending, create jobs, and stop driving jobs out because of public policy.
- Mark Jansen (MJ): He is a former member of the Michigan House of Representatives and he believes that with a changing economy Michigan needs a Senator with bold leadership. He did appropriations in the House of Representatives and as such he has the experience to work on the budgeting process and to work on improving the economy. He cited his deep faith, endorsement from the Chamber of Commerce, and his involvement on the convention center, M-6, and life sciences corridor as reasons to vote for him.
- Joanne Voorhees (JV): She is a former businesswoman and Michigan House of Representatives member. She wants to reform tax laws to support farmers and small business owners, remove the Single Business Tax (SBT), and remove unnecessary government regulations. She worked on K-12 education when in the House.
- Question: Michigan’s general fund is the section of the budget most controllable by the state legislator, but it is currently done 9% to $9 billion. What would you do with a 2% increase?
- JV: She advocated a zero-based budget where each department of the government would have to justify its funding by explaining exactly what they need to make their program work. She believes that all programs must prove that they work before being funding.
- JK: He would turn some money over to local communities for police and fire and would go after “tax cheats” in order to shift revenue. He would also continue to cut employer taxes.
- MJ: With a 2% increase, the appropriations process would work and the legislature would look at what needs funding and make decisions that way. He also would look at investing in venture capital to grow business.
- SH: He would start with a 5% reduction of the budgets of all agencies and require agencies to show that they are functioning. He would allot funds to revenue sharing and investment in jobs.
- Question: If there was a 2% shortfall for the general fund, what would you do?
- MJ: He would look at raising revenue and cutting programs as a means of offsetting losses.
- JV: She would get rid of the SBT, reform tax law, and “open the doors wide” for business in Michigan which she believes would help the economy get better.
- SH: He would hold government accountable and tell agencies to make cuts. He cited and example where separate corrections departments in Ionia County could combine services rather than maintaining and duplicating services.
- JK: He would establish a lifetime limit on welfare of four years in order to increase revenues, would go after tax cheats, and would reduce the budget where able.
- Question: The legislature has the primary responsibility for funding education and with Governor Jennifer Granholm stating that she wants to double the number of college graduates, do you feel that Michigan’s K-12 educational system can meet her challenge?
- SH: He has faith in the system and believes that it is important to go into “troubled areas” and mentor students and teachers in order to improve graduation rates.
- MJ: Kent County has some “tremendous” school systems and graduation rates are higher than in some other Michigan counties. He believes parents need to become more involved and educators need to be brought together to work on the issue.
- JK: The schools should make use of video and technology to have advanced courses available to rural areas. Money is not the only key, but it is important to increase funding.
- JV: She was on the education committee in the House and shared the fact that only fifty-seven cents of every dollar spent on education gets into the classroom. Schools need to be held accountable for the money that they spend.
- Question: If the state is to be successful in graduating more college graduates, how can universities and families meet this goal and how will the state help?
- JK: He said that he would have new money coming in via his plans to grow business in the state and that would prevent funding shortfalls. He explained the importance of eliminating unnecessary spending and cited the University of Michigan teaching classes on “how to be gay” as a waste of money.
- SH: He would increase internship and mentoring programs but would not put any more money into education until the system was held accountable for its spending.
- MJ: Tuition grants are not helping enough and he was involved in the merit scholarship program as a means of helping youth and also worked to secure more funding for universities while in the House.
- JV: Government and universities need to partner as everyone should go to college to participate in the economy; she supports similar partnerships between high schools and universities.
- Question: The cost of health care is a burden for everyone—what, if anything, can the state do about this?
- JV: The state can promote tax credits for individuals getting their own care, provide tax credits to employers for providing care, and promote health and well-being.
- JK: In Massachusetts’ health plan, they make sure that all uninsured patients at emergency rooms signup for Medicaid. He would also remove the SBT as it is a penalty for employers offering healthcare.
- MT: He would incentivize health and wellness, stop penalizing businesses for providing insurance, and would work to keep people out of emergency rooms if it is not needed.
- SH: He supports a centralized database of patients as a means of reducing bureaucracy and increasing efficiency while he would also look at health care savings accounts and ways for small businesses to pool resources.
- Question: Should the state further regulate access to the state’s waters and aquifers and do you support a constitutional amendment giving the legislature control over the state’s water?
- MJ: We need to evaluate if using god-given resources in the best way and to look at bottling plants such as the one in Mecosta County where jobs are being provided to the community and evaluate if they are effectively sharing access to resources without harming the environment.
- JV: Legislation on this issue needs to be based both on science and common sense and she feels that current legislation on the issue is appropriate.
- SH: Scientists can tell how much if any water can be diverted from the state. He is opposed to pipelines shipping the state’s water elsewhere but he is would look at ways of providing access to water resources when there are emergencies elsewhere. It is important to protect the environment when these decisions are being made.
- JK: Science is important with this issue, but also look at common sense if wells are drying up next to bottling plants. This issue has already been addressed by the state and ultimately will be decided at the federal level. He also explained that he voted against slant drilling in the Great Lakes.
- Question: Local governments have seen a loss in state revenue sharing, how will you listen to local officials and improve the situation?
- SH: He has talked to communities and money is not getting to first responders. Spending needs to be reevaluated as he believes the world is on the verge of World War 3 and defense and security spending must not be cut.
- MJ: Local control is essential and communities need to control how money is spent; he fought against revenue sharing cuts when he was in the House.
- JK: He was on the Grandville City Council and worked for local control of revenue sharing dollars and he would look at cutting spending on city pension programs.
- JV: She believes in local control and revenue sharing, but did vote against a measure protecting this in 2004 as she believed more cuts could have been made at the state level.
- Question: With gas prices at record highs, increasing the gas tax is obviously a bad idea, but how can the state fund transportation?
- JK: He would consider using dollars from the general fund, but is against implementing tolls or property taxes to fund infrastructure. He argued that welfare can be cut and “tax cheats” can be pursued to fund infrastructure.
- SH: Do not increase the gas tax.
- MJ: He worked on the appropriations committee to secure funding for West Michigan more equal to that awarded to Southeast Michigan and there can be money for projects in West Michigan if the funding disparities are addressed.
- JV: Michigan ranks second to last for transportation funding, she would fight for road funding—especially if the roads would spur job growth.
- Question: What is your stance on the Senior Millage, Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI), Single Business Tax (SBT), and the K-16 Proposal?
- JV: Supports the Senior Millage and is opposed to the MCRI, SBT, and K-16 proposal. She opposes the K-16 proposal because he believes that you cannot tie the hands of the legislature. The senior millage is very important as it keeps seniors in their homes which saves money and helps seniors.
- JK: Supports the Senior Millage, is opposed to the MCRI and K-16 proposal, and SBT is a non-issue as the legislature already voted to eliminate it. K-16 would take away legislative control and create mandatory increases in educational funding as it is a money grab by people wanting to benefit themselves.
- MJ: No to the MCRI as it is the wrong approach, supports the Senior Millage, already voted to eliminate the SBT, and is opposed to K-16 proposal as it is a budget issue for the legislature and it is already a priority.
- SH: Told the audience to vote yes on the Senior Millage no matter what their stance is on the candidates, is opposed to the MCRI, supports eliminating the SBT, and is opposed to the K-16 proposal as bureaucrats will waste the money.
- Question: There is a ballot proposal for a unicameral government, is this a good idea?
- MJ: He has worked with Nebraska legislators on welfare reform and they said that they did not like the unicameral system. He said it limits the diversity of legislation and would look at cutting costs other ways.
- JV: She likes the balance of two chambers as different angles are expressed on legislation by each chamber.
- SH: He does not support this as bureaucrats are doing more in Nebraska than legislators. He would look for other ways to cut costs.
- JK: He opposes it, especially in light of term limits.
- Question: What has the impact of term limits been? Would you support changing them?
- SH: They have opened the doors for people outside of the legislature to campaign for seats vacated by term limits. He would evaluate them in a few more years and would monitor bureaucrats to make sure they are not getting too much power.
- MJ: Staff and lobbyists often have more knowledge than many legislators. He voted for them as it provides an opportunity for a citizen legislature but would also support strengthening them.
- JK: There are good and bad aspects, with the bad being that a lot of legislators make unnecessary legislation in order to make names for themselves and that it costs businesses money if inexperienced legislators are writing tax policy. He voted to extend them to 14 years.
- JV: She would not have had an opportunity to serve without, but feels that six years is not enough time as legislators are just starting to feel comfortable at that point.
- Closing Statements
- SH: Believe that power corrupts and that Senators need to respond to the needs of the people and as such he said that it is important for legislators to have an open-door policy.
- JV: Her priorities are jobs, economy, workforce development, education, and quality of life for seniors. She said that she has a record and work ethic worthy of the job and that Michigan is an example of what can be done when people work together.
- JK: He focused his time on job creation when in the House and would continue removing regulations and reforming taxes.
- MJ: Has been on appropriations and has evaluated spending and that is an experience that others do not have. He also mentioned that current Senator Sikkema supports him.
The forum will be broadcast on GRTV’s LiveWire Channel 24 on the following dates and times:
- Thursday – August 3rd at 7:30pm
- Saturday – August 5th at 8:00pm
- Monday – August 7th – 9:30pm
Tags: elections, grand rapids, michigan, primaries, republicans, senate
Posted: July 26th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
The Community Media Center has made available an audio file of the Kent County Circuit Court candidate forum that it held at the Wealthy Theatre in Grand Rapids on July 13 with the Grand Rapids Bar Association. The forum features all four candidates–Helen Brinkman, Christian Krupp, David Murkowski, and Mark Trusock–for Circuit Court judge. Voters will vote have the opportunity to vote for one candidate in the August 8 primary for a term that will end in 2012.
For more information on this race, Media Mouse posted a summary of the forum and the candidates’ responses.
Tags: courts, elections, grand rapids, kent county, michigan
Posted: July 26th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
The following articles of interest were published elsewhere on the web today:
Previously archived links are available on Media Mouse’s del.icio.us page. To recommend links, tag them with “mediamouserecommended” on del.icio.us.
Posted: July 25th, 2006 | Author: edcutlip |
This posting was compiled by Nancy Bedell.
The Military Service Dialogue Committee of the Institute for Global Education (IGE) began its work in 2003 by among other activities, studying the military presence of Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) in the public schools.
We decided to focus on GRPS because it houses the only JROTC program in Kent County and because we assumed the JROTC affected the numbers recruited in the city high schools. Our information was received in writing after several meetings and questions to the previous Superintendent of Grand Rapids Public Schools, Bert Bleke.
We were interested to learn about JROTC curriculum qualifications and pay of JROTC instructors, total cost to the district, numbers of enrollees and were somewhat startled by the information we gleaned.
We learned that the JROTC curriculum is devised by the Department of Defense and includes a variety of subjects, not only physical education and training, but including civics, military history, personal decision-making, motivational issues, drug awareness, sexual-harassment, values education among others. This material is taught by career Army officers in retirement with no teaching training required, although a provisional certification is awarded to the instructors at the request of the school district by the state. Students attend one class daily (of six high school periods) for their entire four years of high school with the same single instructor all year in each high school. The Army retirees are teaching this wide variety of courses with no college major or minor coursework required in any of the subjects taught.
There are no firearms used in training, but imitation equipment is used, so that the appearance of drilling and combat are taking place in our public schools!
From the years 2000-2005 approximately 1000 students per year participated in the JROTC program. It is estimated by the district that 10-15% of JROTC graduates are recruited.
The Federal Government determines salaries of the retired Army-instructors, so the JROTC instructors are plugged into the school district’s 18-step pay scale based on the federal predetermined pay rate. The step they have achieved, therefore, does not necessarily have any relationship to their educational achievement or years of teaching experience. In 2004-5 the four JROTC teachers’ salaries totaled $488,160! Their supervisor who works on a 52 week-contract was paid $76,000. The entire budget for JROTC-GRPS for that year totaled over $500,000. Certain estimated benefit costs and revenue from the government had reduced the total budget from $698,000. Our committee was amazed at the cost of this program.
The former superintendent opined when we wondered if the program could ever be dissolved, that it provides intrinsic benefits to students who are followed all year by usually charismatic JROTIC instructors who serve as mentors. Social camping/weekend events outside school tend to solidify the group and raise morale. Undoubtedly an additional consequence is that graduates have been primed to enlist as the result of a well-designed program and carefully selected instructors.
One additional goal of our committee was to pursue the possibility of providing a clear and well-explained opt-out form for parents and students of GRPS. Currently as a requirement of the 2002 No Child Left Behind federal law the Department of Defense/recruiters may access personal information about any high school student unless the parent (under age 18 of the student) or the student (at age 18) has requested the opt-out in writing. The information about opt-out in the GRPS publications is hidden in a generic school district publication and not clearly applicable to students enrolling for high school. The committee asked if we could add an opt-out form to the high school registration packet received by parents. Our request was denied. The district believes that too much additional paperwork would be involved by adding this form. Given the lack of parent organizations in GRPS high schools which might have been interested in this matter, the Committee now plans to visit high schools regularly during the lunch hour in the coming school year and provide information to students directly. We have presented our information to school counselors and hope they will also pass on information about recruiting and the opt-out possibility.
Our Committee continues to work on other projects, including a student video project and plans another conference to inform young people and their parents about the military. You are invited to join our efforts by calling IGE at 454-1642.
Tags: education, grand rapids, grps, michigan, military, military recruiting
Facebook
Twitter
MySpace
Delicious