Michigan allows candidates up to three days to withdraw after the election, and several have, necessitating a few changes to the previous after the deadline posts. As always, the 2008 Election Preview has been updated.
Republicans managed to file a few last minute candidates, reducing to nine the number of house seats that they are not contesting, all but one in Detroit.
Former State Rep. Jerry VanderRoest has withdrawn from the 63rd district race, giving Jase Bolger the nomination, and almost certainly the election.
Democrat Alan Brown has withdrawn from challenging Julie Rogers in the 61st district. The democrats must have gotten to him. (Also, he did live in Portage, not Pontiac.)
The guy who was challenging John Conyers in the 14th Congressional district has withdrawn.
The 105th district has nine withdrawals. Is this a record?
Jack Downey has been planning to run for office for a long time. The SOS website shows that he filed for the 24th district in 1946. Clearly an error, but still amusing.
College student Jake Smith has withdrawn from challenging county commissioner Brian Johnson. This is too bad, since this race promised to offer lots of amusement.
The challenger to Treasurer Mary Balkema is a democrat, after all.
Friday, May 16, 2008
After the Deadline: Kalamazoo Townships
The county clerk's office has a list of all the candidates running in Kalamazoo County, including for township office. [See the County Clerk's list here.]
There are plenty of contested races. A few are noteworthy.
Comstock Township: The controversy over Trustee Bill Shields spurred a bumper crop of filings. Fifteen candidates are running for trustee, including Shields. Four candidates are running for Supervisor. Incumbent democrat Tim Hudson will be challenged by democrats Gary Gillette and Roger Poe. The Republican nominee will be Sue Fritz.
Kalamazoo Township: There are five candidates for Supervisor. Justin VanderArk, Patrick Butler, Kathleen Doornbos, and Jospeh Thomas will compete for the Republican nomination. VanderArk is a conservative who works for the area homebuilders association. The democrat nominee will be Terri Mellinger. Six democrats and three Republicans are seeking four trustee positions.
Oshtemo Township: Incumbent Republican Supervisor John VanDyke is not running for reelection. Former County Commissioner Bob Brink, who lost his seat in 2006, will compete with Charles Hill for the Republican nomination. The democrat nominee will be Elizabeth Heiny-Cogswell. Six Republicans and two democrats are seeking four trustee positions.
Texas Township: Conservative Republican Dave Healy will challenge incumbent supervisor Ron Commissaris. Erin Hoogendyk is among the five candidates for four trustee positions.
There are plenty of contested races. A few are noteworthy.
Comstock Township: The controversy over Trustee Bill Shields spurred a bumper crop of filings. Fifteen candidates are running for trustee, including Shields. Four candidates are running for Supervisor. Incumbent democrat Tim Hudson will be challenged by democrats Gary Gillette and Roger Poe. The Republican nominee will be Sue Fritz.
Kalamazoo Township: There are five candidates for Supervisor. Justin VanderArk, Patrick Butler, Kathleen Doornbos, and Jospeh Thomas will compete for the Republican nomination. VanderArk is a conservative who works for the area homebuilders association. The democrat nominee will be Terri Mellinger. Six democrats and three Republicans are seeking four trustee positions.
Oshtemo Township: Incumbent Republican Supervisor John VanDyke is not running for reelection. Former County Commissioner Bob Brink, who lost his seat in 2006, will compete with Charles Hill for the Republican nomination. The democrat nominee will be Elizabeth Heiny-Cogswell. Six Republicans and two democrats are seeking four trustee positions.
Texas Township: Conservative Republican Dave Healy will challenge incumbent supervisor Ron Commissaris. Erin Hoogendyk is among the five candidates for four trustee positions.
The Barack Obama Record
The Barack Obama Record
Occupations
US Senator (2004-present)
Illinois State Senator (1996-2004)
Lawyer
Websites
US Senate: http://obama.senate.gov/
Campaign: http://www.barackobama.com/
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
Notable Quotes
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and ... the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them.
"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Positions
Abortion
Obama favors abortion on demand. He defends partial birth abortion. As an Illinois state senator, he voted several times against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which would prevent born babies from being killed outside the womb.
Terry Jeffrey: Obama is the Most Pro-Abortion Candidate Ever
Terry Jeffrey: More on Obama and Babies Born Alive
Civil Rights
Obama supports racial preferences, and he opposed the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. He supports "hate crimes" laws that punish people for their thoughts. He supports "comparable worth" legislation that would allow government to regulate people's salaries. He opposes racial preferences. He opposes laws to prevent voter fraud that require showing identification to vote.
Steve Sailer: Obama's "Civil Rights" Vision: Quotas, Increased Crime, More Socialism
Marcus Epstein: Obama Oppose Quotas? Fat Chance!
Foreign Policy
Obama has criticized the war in Iraq, but has been vague about how many troops he would withdraw, and when. He has threatened to invade Pakistan. He opposes spending for defense against nuclear ballistic misslies. He opposes spending for new weapons systems.
Robert Maginnis: Obama Promises to Dismantle Our Armed Forces
Gun Rights
Obama filled out a survey in 1996 saying that he supported banning all handguns. Obama has refused to oppose the Washington DC gun ban. He wants to ban all concealed carry. In the Illinois legislature, he voted against protecting the right to self-defense with a handgun. He supports banning semi-automatic 'assault weapons'. He was on the board of the Joyce Foundation, which financially sponsored many gun control efforts. He is rated F by the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America.
Erich Pratt: Obama to Get the Dems 'Barack' into the Business of Gun Control
Robert Novak: Obama's Gun Dance
John Lott: Obama and Guns: Two Different Views
Amanda Carpenter: Obama Comes Out Against Concealed Carry
Kenneth Vogel: Obama linked to gun control efforts
Immigration
Obama supports amnesty for illegal aliens. He voted in favor of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill. He voted for the DREAM Act, which would give amnesty to several million illegal aliens. He supports giving in-state tuition to illegal aliens. He has voted against border security and interior enforcement. He supports giving drivers licences to illegal aliens.
Obama supports larger numbers of legal immigration. He supports chain migration. He supports importing more foreign workers through H1B visas.
Americans for Better Immigration: Barack Obama's Immigration Grade
Americans for Better Immigration: Barack Obama's Immigration Record
Terry Jeffrey: When Obama, Clinton and McCain Decisively Agreed
Marriage
Obama supports "civil unions", which are the same as "gay marriage" in all but name. He also supports homosexual adoption. He advocates repealing the Defence of Marriage Act. He supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would force religious organizations to hire homosexuals. He supports homosexuals in the military. He supports "hate crimes" laws that would punish certain thoughts and speech.
Terry Jeffrey: The Problem With Obama's -- Not Wright's -- Vision
WorldNetDaily: Obama promises 'gays' 'strongest possible bill'
Judges
Obama voted against confirming both John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. He advocates that judges should favor some parties over others rather than apply the law when deciding cases.
Terry Jeffrey: Obama's Class-War Court
Regulation
Obama "voted for price controls on prescription drugs,[79] to prohibit oil drilling in ANWR,[80] and for minimum wage increases.[81]". He has also supported major regulation of the economy in the name of civil rights, including racial preferrences, "hate crime" laws, and "camparable worth" legislation.
Club for Growth: Barack Obama's Economic Record
Steve Sailer: Obama's "Civil Rights" Vision: Quotas, Increased Crime, More Socialism
Sovereignty
Obama supports the United Nations. He is sponsoring the "Global poverty Act", which would cost taxpayers 845 billion dollars. This would be part of the UN's Millennium Development Goal. Obama has sent mixed signals on NAFTA, criticizing it often while also criticizing Pennsylvanians for "anti-trade sentiment". Obama supported the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill, which contained an endorsement of the Security and Prosperity Partnership.
Phyllis Schlafly: Congress Contemplates Giving Cash to Foreigners
Cliff Kincaid: Will McCain Oppose $845 Billion Earmark?
Spending
Obama has proposed major increases in government spending. The Club for Growth notes that Obama supported a "$50 billion "clean technology" venture capital fund" and a 1.5 billion dollar expansion of the Family and Medical Leave Act. He has sponsored a bill to spend 845 billion dollars on foreign aid through the United Nations. Obama has also proposed "(1) his 10-year, $150 billion program to "establish a green energy sector," (2) his 10-year, $60 billion "National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank," (3) his nearly universal health care plan (whose annual price tag he low-balls at $50 to $65 billion) and (4) a host of refundable tax credits ranging from $4,000 per year for college students to a tripling of the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers".
Club for Growth: Barack Obama's Economic Record
Washington Times: Obama's spending plan
Phyllis Schlafly: Congress Contemplates Giving Cash to Foreigners
Taxes
Obama has take positions opposing "the extension of the Bush tax cuts;[5] in opposing the extension of decreased tax rates for capital gains and dividends;[6] and in support of the cigarette tax hike contained in the SCHIP bill.[7]". Obama supports letting the Bush tax cuts expire, supports "raising taxes on private equity firms and hedge funds.[10]", and supports "raising the amount of income subject to Social Security taxes,[11]".
Club for Growth: Barack Obama's Economic Record
Character
Obama has had a number of troubling influences and disreputable contacts. His mother was a radical leftist, and his father was a Marxist. Obama's pastor of twenty years, Jeremiah Wright, is a believer in Marxist black liberation theology, which is a perversion of Christianity that is anti-white and anti-America. Obama wrote an autobiography, Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, that is obsessed with race and perceived racial slights. He is married to Michelle Obama, who wrote a thesis about her racial resentment and said that the 2008 campaign was the first time she felt proud of America. Obama is connected to Tony Rezko, a disreputable developer who is under indictment. Obama was friends with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who are unrepentant former terrorists with the Marxist Weathermen group.
Pat Buchanan: Obama In Darkest Pennsylvania
Andy McCarthy: The Company He Keeps
Steve Sailer: Barack Obama Sr.’s Mugabeist plan for Kenya
Steve Sailer: Will President Obama Wreck America? Not If Confronted By An Informed Citizenry
Steve Sailer: Obama’s Radical Background: More Questions Only VDARE.COM Will Ask
Steve Sailer: Michelle Obama And The Rage Of A Privileged Class
Steve Sailer: MainStream Media Won’t Ask Obama Those Nasty Paul-Type Questions. But Shelby Steele Could!
Ann Coulter: Obama's Dimestore 'Mein Kampf'
Allan Ryskind: Obama and His Weatherman Friends
Steve Sailer: Rezko and Wright: The Two Sides of Obama's Chicago
John Batchelor: The Obama Files
John Batchelor: Rezko Connections: More Questions for Obama
John Batchelor: Rezko Connections: More Reasons Obama Should Worry
Erick Erickson: Obama and the New Party
Jerome Corsi: Report: Obama mentored by Communist Party figure
Occupations
US Senator (2004-present)
Illinois State Senator (1996-2004)
Lawyer
Websites
US Senate: http://obama.senate.gov/
Campaign: http://www.barackobama.com/
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
Notable Quotes
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and ... the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them.
"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Positions
Abortion
Obama favors abortion on demand. He defends partial birth abortion. As an Illinois state senator, he voted several times against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which would prevent born babies from being killed outside the womb.
Terry Jeffrey: Obama is the Most Pro-Abortion Candidate Ever
Terry Jeffrey: More on Obama and Babies Born Alive
Civil Rights
Obama supports racial preferences, and he opposed the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. He supports "hate crimes" laws that punish people for their thoughts. He supports "comparable worth" legislation that would allow government to regulate people's salaries. He opposes racial preferences. He opposes laws to prevent voter fraud that require showing identification to vote.
Steve Sailer: Obama's "Civil Rights" Vision: Quotas, Increased Crime, More Socialism
Marcus Epstein: Obama Oppose Quotas? Fat Chance!
Foreign Policy
Obama has criticized the war in Iraq, but has been vague about how many troops he would withdraw, and when. He has threatened to invade Pakistan. He opposes spending for defense against nuclear ballistic misslies. He opposes spending for new weapons systems.
Robert Maginnis: Obama Promises to Dismantle Our Armed Forces
Gun Rights
Obama filled out a survey in 1996 saying that he supported banning all handguns. Obama has refused to oppose the Washington DC gun ban. He wants to ban all concealed carry. In the Illinois legislature, he voted against protecting the right to self-defense with a handgun. He supports banning semi-automatic 'assault weapons'. He was on the board of the Joyce Foundation, which financially sponsored many gun control efforts. He is rated F by the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America.
Erich Pratt: Obama to Get the Dems 'Barack' into the Business of Gun Control
Robert Novak: Obama's Gun Dance
John Lott: Obama and Guns: Two Different Views
Amanda Carpenter: Obama Comes Out Against Concealed Carry
Kenneth Vogel: Obama linked to gun control efforts
Immigration
Obama supports amnesty for illegal aliens. He voted in favor of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill. He voted for the DREAM Act, which would give amnesty to several million illegal aliens. He supports giving in-state tuition to illegal aliens. He has voted against border security and interior enforcement. He supports giving drivers licences to illegal aliens.
Obama supports larger numbers of legal immigration. He supports chain migration. He supports importing more foreign workers through H1B visas.
Americans for Better Immigration: Barack Obama's Immigration Grade
Americans for Better Immigration: Barack Obama's Immigration Record
Terry Jeffrey: When Obama, Clinton and McCain Decisively Agreed
Marriage
Obama supports "civil unions", which are the same as "gay marriage" in all but name. He also supports homosexual adoption. He advocates repealing the Defence of Marriage Act. He supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would force religious organizations to hire homosexuals. He supports homosexuals in the military. He supports "hate crimes" laws that would punish certain thoughts and speech.
Terry Jeffrey: The Problem With Obama's -- Not Wright's -- Vision
WorldNetDaily: Obama promises 'gays' 'strongest possible bill'
Judges
Obama voted against confirming both John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. He advocates that judges should favor some parties over others rather than apply the law when deciding cases.
Terry Jeffrey: Obama's Class-War Court
Regulation
Obama "voted for price controls on prescription drugs,[79] to prohibit oil drilling in ANWR,[80] and for minimum wage increases.[81]". He has also supported major regulation of the economy in the name of civil rights, including racial preferrences, "hate crime" laws, and "camparable worth" legislation.
Club for Growth: Barack Obama's Economic Record
Steve Sailer: Obama's "Civil Rights" Vision: Quotas, Increased Crime, More Socialism
Sovereignty
Obama supports the United Nations. He is sponsoring the "Global poverty Act", which would cost taxpayers 845 billion dollars. This would be part of the UN's Millennium Development Goal. Obama has sent mixed signals on NAFTA, criticizing it often while also criticizing Pennsylvanians for "anti-trade sentiment". Obama supported the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill, which contained an endorsement of the Security and Prosperity Partnership.
Phyllis Schlafly: Congress Contemplates Giving Cash to Foreigners
Cliff Kincaid: Will McCain Oppose $845 Billion Earmark?
Spending
Obama has proposed major increases in government spending. The Club for Growth notes that Obama supported a "$50 billion "clean technology" venture capital fund" and a 1.5 billion dollar expansion of the Family and Medical Leave Act. He has sponsored a bill to spend 845 billion dollars on foreign aid through the United Nations. Obama has also proposed "(1) his 10-year, $150 billion program to "establish a green energy sector," (2) his 10-year, $60 billion "National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank," (3) his nearly universal health care plan (whose annual price tag he low-balls at $50 to $65 billion) and (4) a host of refundable tax credits ranging from $4,000 per year for college students to a tripling of the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers".
Club for Growth: Barack Obama's Economic Record
Washington Times: Obama's spending plan
Phyllis Schlafly: Congress Contemplates Giving Cash to Foreigners
Taxes
Obama has take positions opposing "the extension of the Bush tax cuts;[5] in opposing the extension of decreased tax rates for capital gains and dividends;[6] and in support of the cigarette tax hike contained in the SCHIP bill.[7]". Obama supports letting the Bush tax cuts expire, supports "raising taxes on private equity firms and hedge funds.[10]", and supports "raising the amount of income subject to Social Security taxes,[11]".
Club for Growth: Barack Obama's Economic Record
Character
Obama has had a number of troubling influences and disreputable contacts. His mother was a radical leftist, and his father was a Marxist. Obama's pastor of twenty years, Jeremiah Wright, is a believer in Marxist black liberation theology, which is a perversion of Christianity that is anti-white and anti-America. Obama wrote an autobiography, Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, that is obsessed with race and perceived racial slights. He is married to Michelle Obama, who wrote a thesis about her racial resentment and said that the 2008 campaign was the first time she felt proud of America. Obama is connected to Tony Rezko, a disreputable developer who is under indictment. Obama was friends with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who are unrepentant former terrorists with the Marxist Weathermen group.
Pat Buchanan: Obama In Darkest Pennsylvania
Andy McCarthy: The Company He Keeps
Steve Sailer: Barack Obama Sr.’s Mugabeist plan for Kenya
Steve Sailer: Will President Obama Wreck America? Not If Confronted By An Informed Citizenry
Steve Sailer: Obama’s Radical Background: More Questions Only VDARE.COM Will Ask
Steve Sailer: Michelle Obama And The Rage Of A Privileged Class
Steve Sailer: MainStream Media Won’t Ask Obama Those Nasty Paul-Type Questions. But Shelby Steele Could!
Ann Coulter: Obama's Dimestore 'Mein Kampf'
Allan Ryskind: Obama and His Weatherman Friends
Steve Sailer: Rezko and Wright: The Two Sides of Obama's Chicago
John Batchelor: The Obama Files
John Batchelor: Rezko Connections: More Questions for Obama
John Batchelor: Rezko Connections: More Reasons Obama Should Worry
Erick Erickson: Obama and the New Party
Jerome Corsi: Report: Obama mentored by Communist Party figure
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Charles Ybema for State Representative
Charles Ybema is a candidate for state representative in the 60th district, which covers Kalamazoo, eastern Kalamazoo Township, and Cooper Township. He is a Republican who is challenging incumbent Democrat Robert Jones.
Ybema is a staunch conservative Republican. He firmly supports limited government, lower taxes, and lower spending. He supports the right to life and gun rights. He has a solid understanding of economics.
The 60th district is a tough district for Republicans. Robert Jones won 70% of the vote in 2006. So why should Republicans support Charles Ybema?
For one thing, you don't win if you don't show up. Sometimes elections have unexpected results, but you don't win if you don't try.
Further, supporting a strong advocate of liberty can help to change people's minds and help to win other elections in the future. Also, supporting conservative candidates helps them to get experience to win other races.
Charles Ybema is worthy of the support of conservatives.
See Charles Ybema's website here: http://www.ybema60.com/
Ybema is a staunch conservative Republican. He firmly supports limited government, lower taxes, and lower spending. He supports the right to life and gun rights. He has a solid understanding of economics.
The 60th district is a tough district for Republicans. Robert Jones won 70% of the vote in 2006. So why should Republicans support Charles Ybema?
For one thing, you don't win if you don't show up. Sometimes elections have unexpected results, but you don't win if you don't try.
Further, supporting a strong advocate of liberty can help to change people's minds and help to win other elections in the future. Also, supporting conservative candidates helps them to get experience to win other races.
Charles Ybema is worthy of the support of conservatives.
See Charles Ybema's website here: http://www.ybema60.com/
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
After the Deadline: Kalamazoo
The Gazette has a list of candidates who filed for office in the Kalamazoo area. It comes in 66 parts. Some thoughts on selected races are below.
Candidates file for the Aug. 5 primary
(Kalamazoo starts on 8, Allegan starts on 23, Barry starts on 34, Cass starts on 42, St. Jospeh starts on 48, and Van Buren starts on 58.)
UPDATE: Here's a one-page candidate list.
Term limits spur flood of filings: Many pursuing seats in local, state, federal races
Two targeting longtime incumbents: Local politicians file to run against Upton, Levin
Rep. Shaffer files for St. Joe County board
5 attorneys seek district court seat
Countywide Offices:
Democrats filed to run against incumbent Republicans for Sheriff, Prosecutor, Clerk, and Drain Commissioner. Someone filed to run against Treasurer Mary Balkema, but she did not specify her party. None of the challengers are well-known political names. Nobody filed to run against non-incumbent Republican Bill Hahn for Surveyor.
District 5: College Student Jake Smith is challenging commissioner Brian Johnson in the Democrat primary.
District 6: Larry Stieglitz will again challenge commissioner Franklin Thompson.
District 10: Thomas Drabik is retiring. Former Portage Mayor James Graham is unopposed for the Republican nomination.
District 12: Democrat John Nieuwenhuis won this seat from Republican Bob Brink in 2006. Republicans Chris Haenicke and Scott Zondervan are seeking the Republican nomination. Haenicke is the son-in-law of former WMU President Diether Haenicke. Zondervan is a conservative who challenged Jack Hoogendyk for renomination in 2006 before dropping out and endorsing him.
District 15: Democrat Leroy Crabtree won this seat from Republicans in 2006. Republicans Ann Nieuwenhius and Derek Robinson are seeking the Republican nomination.
Republicans did not file candidates for four county commission seats, and democrats did not file for one seat.
Candidates file for the Aug. 5 primary
(Kalamazoo starts on 8, Allegan starts on 23, Barry starts on 34, Cass starts on 42, St. Jospeh starts on 48, and Van Buren starts on 58.)
UPDATE: Here's a one-page candidate list.
Term limits spur flood of filings: Many pursuing seats in local, state, federal races
Two targeting longtime incumbents: Local politicians file to run against Upton, Levin
Rep. Shaffer files for St. Joe County board
5 attorneys seek district court seat
Countywide Offices:
Democrats filed to run against incumbent Republicans for Sheriff, Prosecutor, Clerk, and Drain Commissioner. Someone filed to run against Treasurer Mary Balkema, but she did not specify her party. None of the challengers are well-known political names. Nobody filed to run against non-incumbent Republican Bill Hahn for Surveyor.
District 5: College Student Jake Smith is challenging commissioner Brian Johnson in the Democrat primary.
District 6: Larry Stieglitz will again challenge commissioner Franklin Thompson.
District 10: Thomas Drabik is retiring. Former Portage Mayor James Graham is unopposed for the Republican nomination.
District 12: Democrat John Nieuwenhuis won this seat from Republican Bob Brink in 2006. Republicans Chris Haenicke and Scott Zondervan are seeking the Republican nomination. Haenicke is the son-in-law of former WMU President Diether Haenicke. Zondervan is a conservative who challenged Jack Hoogendyk for renomination in 2006 before dropping out and endorsing him.
District 15: Democrat Leroy Crabtree won this seat from Republicans in 2006. Republicans Ann Nieuwenhius and Derek Robinson are seeking the Republican nomination.
Republicans did not file candidates for four county commission seats, and democrats did not file for one seat.
After the Deadline: Michigan
The deadline to run for office in Michigan has passed. The unofficial list of candidates is on the Secretary of State website. Candidates can withdraw up to three days after the deadline. Some thoughts on selected races are below. The 2008 Election Preview has been updated.
2008 Unofficial Michigan Primary Candidate Listing
Senate: Jack filed 30,000 signatures, which is a strong show of support.
US House 6: Don Cooney filed 2000 signatures against Rep. Fred Upton.
US House 7: Mark Schauer has a primary opponent in Sharon Renier, who was the democrat nominee in 2004 and 2006.
US House 13: Two Democrats have filed to challenge Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, the mother of embattled Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick.
Republicans usually file token challengers in unwinnable state house districts, but this year they didn't bother, and 14 districts have no Republicans running. They are in Detroit, Westland, Flint, Muskegon, and Washtenaw County.
Michigan House 7: Seventeen democrats filed for this district.
Michigan House 17: Three democrats filed to challenge Speaker Andy Dillon, who is facing a recall election in August.
Michigan House 45: Tom McMillin is running for state house in Rochester.
Michigan House 58: Former Rep. Steve Vear is running for another term in the state house. As the only Republican from Hillsdale County, he is in a good position to win.
Michigan House 61: Two last-minute candidates complicated the race. David Yardley filed as a Republican. He is the ex-husband of Melissa Yardley, who ran in 2002 and lost to Jack Hoogendyk. Alan Brown is running as a Democrat. It isn't immediately clear who he is. His address is listed in Pontiac, but his zip code is in Portage. [UPDATE: His address has been corrected to Portage on the SOS website.]
Michigan House 62: House staffer Gregory Moore and Battle Creek City Commissioner Susan Baldwin are seeking the Republican nomination. County Commissioner Kate Segal and college graduate Tim Nendorf are seeking the democrat nomination.
Michigan House 63: Calhoun County Commissioner Jase Bolger and former Rep. Jerry VanderRoest will seek the Republican nomination.
Michigan House 88: Eight Republicans will the nomination for this safe Allegan County seat.
Michigan House 105: Eight Republicans withdrew from the race after Rep. Kevin Elsenheimer decided to seek reelection instead of a judgeship.
8th District Judge: Four candidates are seeking this judgeship for Kalamazoo County.
2008 Unofficial Michigan Primary Candidate Listing
Senate: Jack filed 30,000 signatures, which is a strong show of support.
US House 6: Don Cooney filed 2000 signatures against Rep. Fred Upton.
US House 7: Mark Schauer has a primary opponent in Sharon Renier, who was the democrat nominee in 2004 and 2006.
US House 13: Two Democrats have filed to challenge Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, the mother of embattled Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick.
Republicans usually file token challengers in unwinnable state house districts, but this year they didn't bother, and 14 districts have no Republicans running. They are in Detroit, Westland, Flint, Muskegon, and Washtenaw County.
Michigan House 7: Seventeen democrats filed for this district.
Michigan House 17: Three democrats filed to challenge Speaker Andy Dillon, who is facing a recall election in August.
Michigan House 45: Tom McMillin is running for state house in Rochester.
Michigan House 58: Former Rep. Steve Vear is running for another term in the state house. As the only Republican from Hillsdale County, he is in a good position to win.
Michigan House 61: Two last-minute candidates complicated the race. David Yardley filed as a Republican. He is the ex-husband of Melissa Yardley, who ran in 2002 and lost to Jack Hoogendyk. Alan Brown is running as a Democrat. It isn't immediately clear who he is. His address is listed in Pontiac, but his zip code is in Portage. [UPDATE: His address has been corrected to Portage on the SOS website.]
Michigan House 62: House staffer Gregory Moore and Battle Creek City Commissioner Susan Baldwin are seeking the Republican nomination. County Commissioner Kate Segal and college graduate Tim Nendorf are seeking the democrat nomination.
Michigan House 63: Calhoun County Commissioner Jase Bolger and former Rep. Jerry VanderRoest will seek the Republican nomination.
Michigan House 88: Eight Republicans will the nomination for this safe Allegan County seat.
Michigan House 105: Eight Republicans withdrew from the race after Rep. Kevin Elsenheimer decided to seek reelection instead of a judgeship.
8th District Judge: Four candidates are seeking this judgeship for Kalamazoo County.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
How to Lower Gas Prices
With gas prices nearly four dollars a gallon, people need relief. But only the right proposals will ease the "pain at the pump".
A variety of ideas have been bandied about. Some would be ineffective, others would be counterproductive. One idea, a gas tax holiday, would have only a small benefit.
Here are some measures that the government can take to cut the price of gas.
State Level:
Eliminate sales taxes on gas. Offset this with spending cuts.
Repeal the law that prohibits setting gas prices too low. This law is supposed to combat the supposed threat of gas stations underselling their competition, driving them out of business, and then raising prices. Anyone who thinks this is a problem should read the section on this issue in Freedomnomics by John Lott.
Allow slant drilling under the Great Lakes. This would be drilling through rock, would not involve and oil rigs, and would not involve any danger of spills. A proposal to do this at the beginning of the decade was shot down due to irrational NIMBY fears.
Federal Level:
Repeal the tax on gas. Cut spending to offset this.
Eliminate the EPA mandate of "boutique blends", that is, special types of additives to gasoline in different regions of the country and different seasons. This increases prices, particularly in the summer.
Produce more energy. In particular,
Drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Drill for oil offshore, and in the gulf of Mexico.
Drill for oil wherever it is profitable to do so. Repeal regulations and the threat of lawsuits that prevent this from happening. Note that while developing new sources of oil would take some time, it would help to lower prices immediately, since current prices are based in part on perceptions of future supplies.
Build more oil refineries. Repeal regulations and the threat of lawsuits that prevent this from happening.
Produce more nuclear energy. Repeal regulations and the threat of lawsuits that prevent this from happening.
Repeal ethanol mandates that waste gasoline on ethanol production.
High gas prices are not inevitable. They are the result of destructive government policies. Repealing those policies will bring prices down. But this will take public pressure. Are people willing to do what it takes to lower gas prices?
Previous:
Gouging by Government
Alternative Energy Inanity
A variety of ideas have been bandied about. Some would be ineffective, others would be counterproductive. One idea, a gas tax holiday, would have only a small benefit.
Here are some measures that the government can take to cut the price of gas.
State Level:
Eliminate sales taxes on gas. Offset this with spending cuts.
Repeal the law that prohibits setting gas prices too low. This law is supposed to combat the supposed threat of gas stations underselling their competition, driving them out of business, and then raising prices. Anyone who thinks this is a problem should read the section on this issue in Freedomnomics by John Lott.
Allow slant drilling under the Great Lakes. This would be drilling through rock, would not involve and oil rigs, and would not involve any danger of spills. A proposal to do this at the beginning of the decade was shot down due to irrational NIMBY fears.
Federal Level:
Repeal the tax on gas. Cut spending to offset this.
Eliminate the EPA mandate of "boutique blends", that is, special types of additives to gasoline in different regions of the country and different seasons. This increases prices, particularly in the summer.
Produce more energy. In particular,
Drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Drill for oil offshore, and in the gulf of Mexico.
Drill for oil wherever it is profitable to do so. Repeal regulations and the threat of lawsuits that prevent this from happening. Note that while developing new sources of oil would take some time, it would help to lower prices immediately, since current prices are based in part on perceptions of future supplies.
Build more oil refineries. Repeal regulations and the threat of lawsuits that prevent this from happening.
Produce more nuclear energy. Repeal regulations and the threat of lawsuits that prevent this from happening.
Repeal ethanol mandates that waste gasoline on ethanol production.
High gas prices are not inevitable. They are the result of destructive government policies. Repealing those policies will bring prices down. But this will take public pressure. Are people willing to do what it takes to lower gas prices?
Previous:
Gouging by Government
Alternative Energy Inanity
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Walberg most Fiscally Conservative
Congressman Tim Walberg is the most fiscally conservative congressman in Michigan, according to the Club for Growth.
Tim Walberg most fiscally conservative Congressman in Michigan
Tim Walberg most fiscally conservative Congressman in Michigan
Club for Growth Scorecard 2008
Tim Walberg 92%
Dave Camp 84%
Mike Rogers 83%
Pete Hoekstra 80%
Joe Knollenberg 67%
Thaddeus McCotter 65%
Vern Ehlers 45%
Candice Miller 43%
Fred Upton 41%
All Michigan Democrats scored 12% or below
POLITICAL UPDATE--Money
This update focuses on money. The Federal Reserve recently bailed out an investment firm. Printing more money is inflation, and leads to rising prices.
Ron Paul: Bailing Out Banks
Lew Rockwell: The Inflation Monster and Its Owner
John McManus: Sound Money: Key to Prosperity
Thomas Sowell: Irony in Wall Street
Ron Paul: On Money, Inflation and Government
Don Devine: All New Dealers Now?
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Ron Paul: Bailing Out Banks
Lew Rockwell: The Inflation Monster and Its Owner
John McManus: Sound Money: Key to Prosperity
Thomas Sowell: Irony in Wall Street
Ron Paul: On Money, Inflation and Government
Don Devine: All New Dealers Now?
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Death by Government
The recent actions of the government of Burma are worth noting. It has delayed or refused aid following a hurricane that killed tens of thousands of its subjects. It puts public relations concerns ahead of the lives of its subjects. It doesn't want its subjects to see aid coming from outsiders.
This is blatant example of death by government, but far from the only one, unfortunately. This is exactly what happens when people have no responsibility for their actions.
See the Understanding Government series for more.
This is blatant example of death by government, but far from the only one, unfortunately. This is exactly what happens when people have no responsibility for their actions.
See the Understanding Government series for more.
Gun Rights Again
Proposal allowing concealed weapons in national parks raises concerns
Americans are being asked whether concealed weapons should be allowed in national parks and national wildlife refuges.
A new rule updating federal firearm regulations was posted April 30 to the Federal Register. It allows visitors to carry concealed handguns into both as long as the state where the land is located allows the weapons in its own parks or wildlife areas.
In Michigan, where carrying a concealed handgun is allowed in state parks, forests and game areas, the rule would overturn a 25-year-old prohibition at four national parks/lakeshores: Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Sleeping Bear Dunes and Keweenaw National Historical Park.
House OKs concealed weapons plan
The state House has passed a plan from Rep. Jeff Mayes, D-Bay City, to change restrictions for obtaining a concealed weapons permit in Michigan.
Currently, an applicant must have been a resident of Michigan for six months, which is troublesome for active-duty military, Mayes said in a news release.
His plan would clarify the definition of a qualified applicant to include military personnel that would not otherwise be prohibited from obtaining a license.
The Michigan State Police, Veterans of Foreign Wars and the National Rifle Association support the legislation, Mayes said.
Americans are being asked whether concealed weapons should be allowed in national parks and national wildlife refuges.
A new rule updating federal firearm regulations was posted April 30 to the Federal Register. It allows visitors to carry concealed handguns into both as long as the state where the land is located allows the weapons in its own parks or wildlife areas.
In Michigan, where carrying a concealed handgun is allowed in state parks, forests and game areas, the rule would overturn a 25-year-old prohibition at four national parks/lakeshores: Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Sleeping Bear Dunes and Keweenaw National Historical Park.
House OKs concealed weapons plan
The state House has passed a plan from Rep. Jeff Mayes, D-Bay City, to change restrictions for obtaining a concealed weapons permit in Michigan.
Currently, an applicant must have been a resident of Michigan for six months, which is troublesome for active-duty military, Mayes said in a news release.
His plan would clarify the definition of a qualified applicant to include military personnel that would not otherwise be prohibited from obtaining a license.
The Michigan State Police, Veterans of Foreign Wars and the National Rifle Association support the legislation, Mayes said.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Understanding Government: Limited Government
Given the many dangers of government power, the best form of government is one in which government power is most restricted.
NO GOVERNMENT
One might well ask whether, given this danger, it would be best if there were no government at all. There are two problems with this.
First, there appear to be some services that only government can perform. The free market requires an absence of coercion. But some some goods, such as national defense, police protection, and courts, depend on coercion. It isn't clear that the free market can provide these.
These goods appear to be collective goods, that is, goods that people benefit from whether or not they pay for them. There is a free rider problem, where people can benefit from something without paying for it. If the military prevents an invasion of the country, it benefits everyone, not just those who paid taxes. Other goods including roads and clean air appear to fall into this category.
The second problem is that it doesn't seem that having no government is possible. If there were no government, criminals would prey upon good people. Good people could resist, but criminals would organize into gangs that would make individual resistance difficult. To defend against this threat, good people would have to organize for defense, but any organization of significant size would face the free rider problem. Thus it appears all but inevitable that there will be an organization with a near monopoly on force in a given territory, i.e., a government. This is true whether or not the purpose of the government is to protect people or exploit them, or something in between.
This process can be seen in action on those occasions when a weak government collapses. Inevitably, various factions vie for power until one of them defeats the others. A state of anarchy can only persist when there is a very low population density and transportation and communication are relatively time-consuming.
MINIMAL GOVERNMENT
Thus it appears that the existence of government is inevitable. However, this does not change the very real harm that government causes. Thus if one who wishes to minimize the harm the government causes should advocate that the government be just large enough to prevent a worse government from taking over, whether by collapse or invasion, and no larger. This can be called minimal government.
How exactly to achieve and maintain a minimal government is a difficult problem. Government naturally tends to grow in size and power. As Thomas Jefferson put it, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." This is because of government's near monopoly on force, and its greater organization.
What is needed is some mechanism to keep government to its proper size and scope. Unfortunately, it appears unlikely that any such foolproof mechanism exists. This is because any such system would ultimately depend upon fallible humans to implement and maintain it.
But while no such system is foolproof, there are a number of procedural mechanisms that can limit government power and make the growth of government less likely.
SPECIFIC MECHANISMS
A government that is structured in such a fashion is a republic. A republic may have democratic elections, but it does not embrace grand theories about democracy. Democratic elections by themselves do not necessarily lead to freedom.
One of the most important mechanisms to limit government power is a constitution. A constitution defines the structure of the government and grants it power to do certain things. But for a constitution to limit government power, it must restrict what government can do. A constitution that limits government power must be written and fixed. If the constitution is nothing more than tradition, or if it is a "living constitution" that can be changed at whim, then it provides little protection. A fixed written constitution provides a reference that can be cited in public debate, so that people are not forced to argue every question from first principles.
Along with a constitution, a bill of rights is an important mechanism to protect liberty. A bill of rights lists explicitly some of the rights of the people and prohibits the government from violating them. It also provides an important reference for public debate.
Another valuable mechanism to limit government power is decentralization. It divides power and reduces the danger that a single faction can seize power. If a faction seizes control in one region, people can leave, and if it seizes control of the central government, the regional governments can resist.
Within a given level of government, a separation of powers can help to protect liberty. Separation of powers means that the executive, legislative, and judicial powers are separated, so that winning one election doesn't give one faction control of the entire government. A single faction must show sustained support over time to win control of all branches of the government.
Checks and balances go along with the separation of powers. Checks and balances are various powers that different branches of government have that affect each other. These can include the power of appointment, the power to spend money, the power to pass legislation, the power to veto it, and the power to investigate other branches.
Another important protection against government power is gun rights. In the extreme, if the government becomes tyrannical, the people can resist it with force. Short of that, they may need to resist individual branches or rouge agents of the government. Beyond that, gun rights send an important message that the government exists to serve the interests of the people, and not the other way around. Gun rights can prevent democide, which killed 262 million people in the twentieth century.
Because the government has the power to arrest and imprison, civil liberties are essential. They help to prevent government from taking away the liberties of people unjustly. To maximize liberty, government must punish criminals while protecting civil liberties.
As the saying goes, the power to tax is the power to destroy. Procedural restrictions on taxation can help to protect liberty. These can include requiring a supermajority in the legislature to raise taxes and requiring a public vote to raise taxes.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, since it is virtually impossible to have no government, the best protection of liberty is limited or minimal government. There does not appear to be any foolproof mechanism to protect limited government. However, various procedural mechanisms including a constitution, bill of rights, decentralization, separation of powers, checks and balances, gun rights, civil liberties, and limitations on taxation can help to protect liberty.
NO GOVERNMENT
One might well ask whether, given this danger, it would be best if there were no government at all. There are two problems with this.
First, there appear to be some services that only government can perform. The free market requires an absence of coercion. But some some goods, such as national defense, police protection, and courts, depend on coercion. It isn't clear that the free market can provide these.
These goods appear to be collective goods, that is, goods that people benefit from whether or not they pay for them. There is a free rider problem, where people can benefit from something without paying for it. If the military prevents an invasion of the country, it benefits everyone, not just those who paid taxes. Other goods including roads and clean air appear to fall into this category.
The second problem is that it doesn't seem that having no government is possible. If there were no government, criminals would prey upon good people. Good people could resist, but criminals would organize into gangs that would make individual resistance difficult. To defend against this threat, good people would have to organize for defense, but any organization of significant size would face the free rider problem. Thus it appears all but inevitable that there will be an organization with a near monopoly on force in a given territory, i.e., a government. This is true whether or not the purpose of the government is to protect people or exploit them, or something in between.
This process can be seen in action on those occasions when a weak government collapses. Inevitably, various factions vie for power until one of them defeats the others. A state of anarchy can only persist when there is a very low population density and transportation and communication are relatively time-consuming.
MINIMAL GOVERNMENT
Thus it appears that the existence of government is inevitable. However, this does not change the very real harm that government causes. Thus if one who wishes to minimize the harm the government causes should advocate that the government be just large enough to prevent a worse government from taking over, whether by collapse or invasion, and no larger. This can be called minimal government.
How exactly to achieve and maintain a minimal government is a difficult problem. Government naturally tends to grow in size and power. As Thomas Jefferson put it, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." This is because of government's near monopoly on force, and its greater organization.
What is needed is some mechanism to keep government to its proper size and scope. Unfortunately, it appears unlikely that any such foolproof mechanism exists. This is because any such system would ultimately depend upon fallible humans to implement and maintain it.
But while no such system is foolproof, there are a number of procedural mechanisms that can limit government power and make the growth of government less likely.
SPECIFIC MECHANISMS
A government that is structured in such a fashion is a republic. A republic may have democratic elections, but it does not embrace grand theories about democracy. Democratic elections by themselves do not necessarily lead to freedom.
One of the most important mechanisms to limit government power is a constitution. A constitution defines the structure of the government and grants it power to do certain things. But for a constitution to limit government power, it must restrict what government can do. A constitution that limits government power must be written and fixed. If the constitution is nothing more than tradition, or if it is a "living constitution" that can be changed at whim, then it provides little protection. A fixed written constitution provides a reference that can be cited in public debate, so that people are not forced to argue every question from first principles.
Along with a constitution, a bill of rights is an important mechanism to protect liberty. A bill of rights lists explicitly some of the rights of the people and prohibits the government from violating them. It also provides an important reference for public debate.
Another valuable mechanism to limit government power is decentralization. It divides power and reduces the danger that a single faction can seize power. If a faction seizes control in one region, people can leave, and if it seizes control of the central government, the regional governments can resist.
Within a given level of government, a separation of powers can help to protect liberty. Separation of powers means that the executive, legislative, and judicial powers are separated, so that winning one election doesn't give one faction control of the entire government. A single faction must show sustained support over time to win control of all branches of the government.
Checks and balances go along with the separation of powers. Checks and balances are various powers that different branches of government have that affect each other. These can include the power of appointment, the power to spend money, the power to pass legislation, the power to veto it, and the power to investigate other branches.
Another important protection against government power is gun rights. In the extreme, if the government becomes tyrannical, the people can resist it with force. Short of that, they may need to resist individual branches or rouge agents of the government. Beyond that, gun rights send an important message that the government exists to serve the interests of the people, and not the other way around. Gun rights can prevent democide, which killed 262 million people in the twentieth century.
Because the government has the power to arrest and imprison, civil liberties are essential. They help to prevent government from taking away the liberties of people unjustly. To maximize liberty, government must punish criminals while protecting civil liberties.
As the saying goes, the power to tax is the power to destroy. Procedural restrictions on taxation can help to protect liberty. These can include requiring a supermajority in the legislature to raise taxes and requiring a public vote to raise taxes.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, since it is virtually impossible to have no government, the best protection of liberty is limited or minimal government. There does not appear to be any foolproof mechanism to protect limited government. However, various procedural mechanisms including a constitution, bill of rights, decentralization, separation of powers, checks and balances, gun rights, civil liberties, and limitations on taxation can help to protect liberty.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Wabbling Back to the Fire
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
--The Gods of the Copybook Headings
The KRESA tax passed with 57% of the vote. Apparently enough voters bought the propaganda about more spending creating good schools and dire cuts if this tax didn't pass.
The measure passed in the Kalamazoo and Portage districts. All districts will have to pay, even though many outlying districts voted against it. And of course, all citizens will have to pay, even though 43% of voters voted against it.
It doesn't take much foresight to see what will happen in the future. Government schools will continue to be mediocre. They will continue to waste money on MESSA insurance and lots of other things. Employee salaries and benefits will continue to increase. And there will be another dire fiscal emergency three years from now demanding renewal of this 'temporary' tax.
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
--The Gods of the Copybook Headings
The KRESA tax passed with 57% of the vote. Apparently enough voters bought the propaganda about more spending creating good schools and dire cuts if this tax didn't pass.
The measure passed in the Kalamazoo and Portage districts. All districts will have to pay, even though many outlying districts voted against it. And of course, all citizens will have to pay, even though 43% of voters voted against it.
It doesn't take much foresight to see what will happen in the future. Government schools will continue to be mediocre. They will continue to waste money on MESSA insurance and lots of other things. Employee salaries and benefits will continue to increase. And there will be another dire fiscal emergency three years from now demanding renewal of this 'temporary' tax.
Monday, May 05, 2008
Stop the KRESA Tax
The most important issue on the ballot in Tuesday's election is the KRESA tax hike.
Despite the title, KRESA is simply being used as an intermediary to funnel money to local school districts based in Kalamazoo County. Three years ago, this tax was billed as a one-time emergency measure. Now, the schools want to renew it for another three years.
Advocates of the tax argue that quality education is essential to the community. But no one disputes this. The relevant question is whether passing the tax would improve education. This question is never addressed by advocates of the tax. They have not offered any such evidence.
The Gazette reports that advocates of the tax warn that all sorts of wonderful programs will be cut if the tax is not passed. This is an example of the Washington Monument strategy. That is, when there is a threat of cuts, bureaucrats threaten to cut the most popular programs instead of waste or unnecessary spending. (And why aren't there ever any newspaper stories about parents forced to take lollipops from their children because their taxes increased?)
In fact, the main result of increased school taxes are higher salaries and benefits for school employees. Increasing the salaries of the same people who have provided mediorce education won't help anything.
The biggest waste of tax dollars, though far from the only one, is the MESSA health insurance that the school districts purchase from the Michigan Education Association (MEA). Comparable coverage can be obtained for much less, and the difference goes to the MEA. It pressures school districts to use the expensive coverage. All nine Kalamazoo County school districts do so.
A Kalamazoo Gazette editorial admitted this problem and still urged that the tax be approved.
The primary donors to the campaign for the tax are the very people who stand to gain financially from its passage.
Thousands spent on school-tax campaigns
The KRESA tax richly deserves to be rejected.
For much more valuable information, see the Kalamazoo County Taxpayers Association.
Despite the title, KRESA is simply being used as an intermediary to funnel money to local school districts based in Kalamazoo County. Three years ago, this tax was billed as a one-time emergency measure. Now, the schools want to renew it for another three years.
Advocates of the tax argue that quality education is essential to the community. But no one disputes this. The relevant question is whether passing the tax would improve education. This question is never addressed by advocates of the tax. They have not offered any such evidence.
The Gazette reports that advocates of the tax warn that all sorts of wonderful programs will be cut if the tax is not passed. This is an example of the Washington Monument strategy. That is, when there is a threat of cuts, bureaucrats threaten to cut the most popular programs instead of waste or unnecessary spending. (And why aren't there ever any newspaper stories about parents forced to take lollipops from their children because their taxes increased?)
In fact, the main result of increased school taxes are higher salaries and benefits for school employees. Increasing the salaries of the same people who have provided mediorce education won't help anything.
The biggest waste of tax dollars, though far from the only one, is the MESSA health insurance that the school districts purchase from the Michigan Education Association (MEA). Comparable coverage can be obtained for much less, and the difference goes to the MEA. It pressures school districts to use the expensive coverage. All nine Kalamazoo County school districts do so.
A Kalamazoo Gazette editorial admitted this problem and still urged that the tax be approved.
The primary donors to the campaign for the tax are the very people who stand to gain financially from its passage.
Thousands spent on school-tax campaigns
The KRESA tax richly deserves to be rejected.
For much more valuable information, see the Kalamazoo County Taxpayers Association.
Sunday, May 04, 2008
More Money...for Western
From the Gazette:
Also at the WMU Board of Trustees meeting Friday, trustees:
v Voted to raise room-and-board costs at the WMU's 20 residence halls and rent at university apartments by 4.75 percent.
v Approved naming the baseball stadium at Hyames Field the Robert J. Bobb Stadium. Bobb, a WMU alumnus from the class of 1969, donated $1 million to help renovate the stadium.
v Approved raising the Student Assessment Fee that supports programs and projects of WMU student organizations to $21 from $12 for each the fall and winter semesters. The assessment will increase to $10.50 from $6 each summer session.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
POLITICAL UPDATE--News from Abroad
This update focuses on news from abroad. The war in Iraq continues. There is trouble in Palestine, North Korea, and Venezuela. Conservatives won elections in Italy and Britain.
Don Devine: New Iraqi Moment?
Chris Holton: The Truth About Saddam and Terrorism
William Jasper: A Bad Investment
Joseph Farah: No Good Guys in 'Palestine'
William Jasper: Global Blowback
Robert Spencer: A Muslim Battle Plan Against Free Speech
James Zumwalt: Enabling North Korean Misconduct
Bob Unruh: Hidden-camera series reveals nationwide cult
Matthew Vadum: Terrorist-Supporting Venezuelan Strongman Has Famous Allies
Gustavo Coronel: War in the Andes?
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Don Devine: New Iraqi Moment?
Chris Holton: The Truth About Saddam and Terrorism
William Jasper: A Bad Investment
Joseph Farah: No Good Guys in 'Palestine'
William Jasper: Global Blowback
Robert Spencer: A Muslim Battle Plan Against Free Speech
James Zumwalt: Enabling North Korean Misconduct
Bob Unruh: Hidden-camera series reveals nationwide cult
Matthew Vadum: Terrorist-Supporting Venezuelan Strongman Has Famous Allies
Gustavo Coronel: War in the Andes?
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Awful Ethanol
The terrible consequences of government subsidies for ethanol are becoming apparent. Politicians looking for votes from farmers have lavishly subsidized ethanol by 51 cents per gallon, and imposed a tariff on foreign ethanol.
This has led farmers to devote more land to ethanol and less to food. This in turn decreased the supply of food and raised food prices. This is bad enough in America, but riots have broken out across the Third World, where people face the danger of starvation.
And ethanol isn't a valid alternative to oil because it takes as much or more gasoline to run farm equipment, make fertilizer, and ship it by truck, since it can't be shipped by pipeline to the danger of impurities. Ethanol also yields fewer miles per gallon.
The politicians in Congress who promoted ethanol, and who believed that they could best decide what energy people should use should be ashamed of themselves. But will they?
Previous:
That Awful Energy Bill
Alternative Energy Inanity
Ethanol is not the Answer
Further Reading:
Ross Kamisky: Do-gooders and Politicians Support Faulty Ethanol Policy
Deroy Murdock: Global Food Riots: Made in Washington, D.C.
Arthur Robinson: Nobel Prize for Death
Walter Williams: Big Corn and Ethanol Hoax
This has led farmers to devote more land to ethanol and less to food. This in turn decreased the supply of food and raised food prices. This is bad enough in America, but riots have broken out across the Third World, where people face the danger of starvation.
And ethanol isn't a valid alternative to oil because it takes as much or more gasoline to run farm equipment, make fertilizer, and ship it by truck, since it can't be shipped by pipeline to the danger of impurities. Ethanol also yields fewer miles per gallon.
The politicians in Congress who promoted ethanol, and who believed that they could best decide what energy people should use should be ashamed of themselves. But will they?
Previous:
That Awful Energy Bill
Alternative Energy Inanity
Ethanol is not the Answer
Further Reading:
Ross Kamisky: Do-gooders and Politicians Support Faulty Ethanol Policy
Deroy Murdock: Global Food Riots: Made in Washington, D.C.
Arthur Robinson: Nobel Prize for Death
Walter Williams: Big Corn and Ethanol Hoax
Non-local Elections
Conservatives in Britain won big victories in local elections. Conservative Boris Johnson appears to have defeated communist "Red Ken" Livingston as Mayor of London.
Rightist National Front member Giovanni Alemanno was elected Mayor of Rome.
The organizers of the recall against Andy Dillon turned in more than enough signatures to get on the ballot. There will be litigation, but the recall should make the ballot. Residents of Dillon's district are in for a long summer.
Rightist National Front member Giovanni Alemanno was elected Mayor of Rome.
The organizers of the recall against Andy Dillon turned in more than enough signatures to get on the ballot. There will be litigation, but the recall should make the ballot. Residents of Dillon's district are in for a long summer.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Comparable Evil
Folks in Lansing are keeping busy.
Marxist "Comparable Worth" bill passes Michigan House
The state house passed comparable worth legislation on a party line vote. This would mandate that men and women who work in comparable professions be paid equally. What professions are comparable? Well, feminists will decide. Why should lumberjacks be paid more than nurses anyways?
Back in the real world, prices are determined by what people are willing to pay. Traditionally male jobs are often paid more than traditionally female jobs because they require more manual labor, are more dangerous, and require long or inflexible hours.
The legislation would establish a commission dominated by liberals to fix labor prices. One standard they would use is the level of education required to perform a job. But what does this mean? Are a degree in math and a degree in women's studies equally easy to obtain? Is coal mining not worth much because you don't need a PhD to do it?
Passing this legislation would further hurt business and damage Michigan's economy. This would hurt both men and women, but feminists are intent on imposing their vision on society no matter how many people it hurts.
The fact that every state house democrat voted for this awful legislation says a lot about who runs the democrat party.
Marxist "Comparable Worth" bill passes Michigan House
The state house passed comparable worth legislation on a party line vote. This would mandate that men and women who work in comparable professions be paid equally. What professions are comparable? Well, feminists will decide. Why should lumberjacks be paid more than nurses anyways?
Back in the real world, prices are determined by what people are willing to pay. Traditionally male jobs are often paid more than traditionally female jobs because they require more manual labor, are more dangerous, and require long or inflexible hours.
The legislation would establish a commission dominated by liberals to fix labor prices. One standard they would use is the level of education required to perform a job. But what does this mean? Are a degree in math and a degree in women's studies equally easy to obtain? Is coal mining not worth much because you don't need a PhD to do it?
Passing this legislation would further hurt business and damage Michigan's economy. This would hurt both men and women, but feminists are intent on imposing their vision on society no matter how many people it hurts.
The fact that every state house democrat voted for this awful legislation says a lot about who runs the democrat party.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Margaret O'Brien for State Representative
Portage Councilwoman Margaret O'Brien has announced her candidacy for State Representative in the 61st district.
The 61st district includes the cities of Portage and Parchment, and Oshtemo, Texas, Alamo, and Praire Ronde, and western Kalamazoo Townships. Portage Councilman Larry DeShazor is also running as a Republican and Julie Rogers is running as a democrat.
O'Brien is a lifelong resident of Kalamazoo County who works as a realtor. She was first elected to the Portage city Council in 2003 and reelected in 2007.
Margaret is a staunch conservative. She is pro-life, and she hasn't just said so, she has volunteered for pro-life causes. She supports the right to keep and bear arms. She supports limited government and opposes tax increases and spending increases. She supports greater education freedom. She supports protecting jobs from illegal immigrants.
O'Brien has fought for fiscal responsibility in Portage. One major issue that she has been involved with is special assessments. These charge homeowners for work on the roads that they live on. This might make sense on purely residential streets, but it made no sense on Oakland Drive, a major thoroughfare. This was a major controversy, with homeowners between Milham and Romence posting homemade signs in their yards saying how much the special assessment would cost. Eventually, the Council put a measure on the ballot to end special assessments, and it was passed by voters.
Margaret has been endorsed by current State Representative Jack Hoogendyk. She deserves the support of Republicans in the August 5 primary election.
See Margaret's website: http://www.margaretobrien.com/
Watch her declaration of candidacy.
The 61st district includes the cities of Portage and Parchment, and Oshtemo, Texas, Alamo, and Praire Ronde, and western Kalamazoo Townships. Portage Councilman Larry DeShazor is also running as a Republican and Julie Rogers is running as a democrat.
O'Brien is a lifelong resident of Kalamazoo County who works as a realtor. She was first elected to the Portage city Council in 2003 and reelected in 2007.
Margaret is a staunch conservative. She is pro-life, and she hasn't just said so, she has volunteered for pro-life causes. She supports the right to keep and bear arms. She supports limited government and opposes tax increases and spending increases. She supports greater education freedom. She supports protecting jobs from illegal immigrants.
O'Brien has fought for fiscal responsibility in Portage. One major issue that she has been involved with is special assessments. These charge homeowners for work on the roads that they live on. This might make sense on purely residential streets, but it made no sense on Oakland Drive, a major thoroughfare. This was a major controversy, with homeowners between Milham and Romence posting homemade signs in their yards saying how much the special assessment would cost. Eventually, the Council put a measure on the ballot to end special assessments, and it was passed by voters.
Margaret has been endorsed by current State Representative Jack Hoogendyk. She deserves the support of Republicans in the August 5 primary election.
See Margaret's website: http://www.margaretobrien.com/
Watch her declaration of candidacy.
Cooney for Congress?
The news is reporting that Kalamazoo City Commissioner Don Cooney will run for Congress against Fred Upton. Cooney has a reputation as very liberal. He has close ties to the Green Party. He has been an outspoken critic of the Iraq war.
I wonder what his position on light bulb choice is?
There don't seem to be any news articles online at this time.
I wonder what his position on light bulb choice is?
There don't seem to be any news articles online at this time.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
End the Silence
I know what you're thinking. But this post has absolutely nothing to do with any sort of gay rights movement. It's more about a very dangerous silence than any out there: the silence that is the global warming debate. It's really a one sided deal with schools showing films such as Al Gore's "An Inconvient Truth" and the media acting like it's a settled issue. However, today I'm going to do my part to break that silence and submit some evidence that needs to be considered by all. Here's a couple speeches from Michael Crichton.
The first one is called "Aliens cause Global Warming." It points out that the science behind the global warming movement is not science.
The second I consider to be one of the best cases against this assumption that global warming is an issue. It's called "The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming." It points out many of the flaws in the arguement for global warming.
Now why do I call this silence dangerous? It's quite simple. Because of this global warming concern, people are denied sources of fuel that would help lower fuel costs. These high fuel costs make it harder and harder for struggling families to bring home much of a paycheck. Regulations on third world countries force people there to deal with weak or unhealthy forms of energy for cooking heat or simple development within their country. This isn't a debate where we can side on caution. Because if we enforce stupid regulations that hurt people and it ends up being for no reason at all, then we will have caused needless death and suffering. This is the sort of thing where we need to be sure we're right.
The first one is called "Aliens cause Global Warming." It points out that the science behind the global warming movement is not science.
The second I consider to be one of the best cases against this assumption that global warming is an issue. It's called "The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming." It points out many of the flaws in the arguement for global warming.
Now why do I call this silence dangerous? It's quite simple. Because of this global warming concern, people are denied sources of fuel that would help lower fuel costs. These high fuel costs make it harder and harder for struggling families to bring home much of a paycheck. Regulations on third world countries force people there to deal with weak or unhealthy forms of energy for cooking heat or simple development within their country. This isn't a debate where we can side on caution. Because if we enforce stupid regulations that hurt people and it ends up being for no reason at all, then we will have caused needless death and suffering. This is the sort of thing where we need to be sure we're right.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
POLITICAL UPDATE--Environmentalism
This update focuses on environmentalism. Ethanol subsides lead to rising food prices and third world riots. More evidence comes in against global warming hysteria. The Earth has not warmed since 1998. Earth Day was founded to celebrate Lenin's birthday.
Ross Kamisky: Do-gooders and Politicians Support Faulty Ethanol Policy
Steven Hayward: Happy Earth Day
Deroy Murdock: Global Food Riots: Made in Washington, D.C.
Arthur Robinson: Nobel Prize for Death
Deroy Murdock: Oil Drilling America
Walter Williams: Big Corn and Ethanol Hoax
Chris Horner: W Goes Green?
William Jasper: 2008 Climate Debate
William Jasper: Weather Channel Founder’s Forecast
Thomas Sowell: Cold Water on "Global Warming"
John Lott: No Global Warming Crisis
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Ross Kamisky: Do-gooders and Politicians Support Faulty Ethanol Policy
Steven Hayward: Happy Earth Day
Deroy Murdock: Global Food Riots: Made in Washington, D.C.
Arthur Robinson: Nobel Prize for Death
Deroy Murdock: Oil Drilling America
Walter Williams: Big Corn and Ethanol Hoax
Chris Horner: W Goes Green?
William Jasper: 2008 Climate Debate
William Jasper: Weather Channel Founder’s Forecast
Thomas Sowell: Cold Water on "Global Warming"
John Lott: No Global Warming Crisis
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Third Party News
The Constitution Party held its national convention this weekend. Pastor, author, and 2004 Vice-Presidential nominee Chuck Baldwin was nominated over former Republican Presidential candidate Alan Keyes. Baldwin's website can be seen here.
The Libertarian Party will hold its national convention next month. Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr, who led the fight to impeach President Clinton, is the frontrunner for the nomination. Former Democrat senator and recent presidential candidate Mike Gravel is also running, along with a slew of others.
Ralph Nader is running as an independent, or possibly Green Party candidate. Former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney is running for the Green Party nomination.
The Libertarian Party will hold its national convention next month. Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr, who led the fight to impeach President Clinton, is the frontrunner for the nomination. Former Democrat senator and recent presidential candidate Mike Gravel is also running, along with a slew of others.
Ralph Nader is running as an independent, or possibly Green Party candidate. Former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney is running for the Green Party nomination.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a new documentary from actor Ben Stein on the subject of Darwinism and intelligent design. It is well-produced and entertaining. It takes a position sympathetic of intelligent design, but allows Darwinists a chance to give their views as well.
Expelled features a number of interviews. Stein talks with many of the leading proponents of intelligent design. They make an interesting case, at least for further study of the issue.
Stein also interviews the most virulent critics of intelligent design. They are given a chance to make their case, but Stein also shows that some of their statements are false. The Darwinists also make some revealing admissions. Atheist Richard Dawkins attacks God and Christianity in the most caustic terms. Michael Ruse claims that life may have formed on the back of crystals. Dawkins admits that scientists have no idea how life began, but says that aliens may have designed it, just not God.
Expelled details the efforts of Darwinists to suppress debate of the issue. A string of scientists were fired or denied tenure after advocating or even mentioning intelligent design. The media either ignores or misrepresents the issue. Darwinists rhetorically attack or even sue schools that broach the issue.
Expelled doesn't delve too deeply into the scientific details, which would be tough for this sort of documentary. But it does have some fascinating animation of the complexity of the cell.
Expelled also explores the moral and political implications of Darwinism. It shows that Darwinism was closely tied to the eugenics movement, which sought to prevent the reproduction of those people seen as less fit. It also formed a part of the ideological basis of Nazism, though of course most Darwinists weren't Nazis.
Expelled ends with a call for freedom of inquiry on this important issue. It is a movie that conservatives should see.
Expelled is playing at the Kalamazoo 10 theater.
Connecting Hitler and Darwin
'Expelled' goes easy on Darwin-Nazi link
Expelled features a number of interviews. Stein talks with many of the leading proponents of intelligent design. They make an interesting case, at least for further study of the issue.
Stein also interviews the most virulent critics of intelligent design. They are given a chance to make their case, but Stein also shows that some of their statements are false. The Darwinists also make some revealing admissions. Atheist Richard Dawkins attacks God and Christianity in the most caustic terms. Michael Ruse claims that life may have formed on the back of crystals. Dawkins admits that scientists have no idea how life began, but says that aliens may have designed it, just not God.
Expelled details the efforts of Darwinists to suppress debate of the issue. A string of scientists were fired or denied tenure after advocating or even mentioning intelligent design. The media either ignores or misrepresents the issue. Darwinists rhetorically attack or even sue schools that broach the issue.
Expelled doesn't delve too deeply into the scientific details, which would be tough for this sort of documentary. But it does have some fascinating animation of the complexity of the cell.
Expelled also explores the moral and political implications of Darwinism. It shows that Darwinism was closely tied to the eugenics movement, which sought to prevent the reproduction of those people seen as less fit. It also formed a part of the ideological basis of Nazism, though of course most Darwinists weren't Nazis.
Expelled ends with a call for freedom of inquiry on this important issue. It is a movie that conservatives should see.
Expelled is playing at the Kalamazoo 10 theater.
Connecting Hitler and Darwin
'Expelled' goes easy on Darwin-Nazi link
Pain at the Pump
With gas prices at or near record highs (even adjusting for inflation) these two articles that appeared previously on this blog are more timely than ever.
Gouging by Government
Alternative Energy Inanity
Read them if you want to know the real story behind high gas prices.
Gouging by Government
Alternative Energy Inanity
Read them if you want to know the real story behind high gas prices.
Sowell on College
Thomas Sowell explains why college costs so much in this series of articles.
The Economics of College: Part I Part II Part III.
College costs so much because government funnels so much money to colleges that charge high prices. Once again, big government liberalism makes problems worse.
Previous: Why Does College Cost So Much?
The Economics of College: Part I Part II Part III.
College costs so much because government funnels so much money to colleges that charge high prices. Once again, big government liberalism makes problems worse.
Previous: Why Does College Cost So Much?
Michigan Politics
Political News from Kalamazoo and Michigan.
Elections:
Gazette: Rogers running again for House
Gazette: Two more seek Kalamazoo Co. sheriff's job
Gazette: Haenicke's son-in-law seeks county board seat
Gazette: Former MSU Extension chief seeks county seat
Gazette: Comstock resident plans to run for township supervisor
Herald: WMU junior runs for county commission
Saul: University Board Candidates
Other Politics:
NRA: Michigan: Registration Reform Assigned to Senate Committee!
Saul: Homeschooling parents say bill would strip their rights
Herald: Political groups aim to focus on elections next year
Herald: College GOP selects 2008-09 e-board
Gazette: Interim official chosen as drain commissioner
Elections:
Gazette: Rogers running again for House
Gazette: Two more seek Kalamazoo Co. sheriff's job
Gazette: Haenicke's son-in-law seeks county board seat
Gazette: Former MSU Extension chief seeks county seat
Gazette: Comstock resident plans to run for township supervisor
Herald: WMU junior runs for county commission
Saul: University Board Candidates
Other Politics:
NRA: Michigan: Registration Reform Assigned to Senate Committee!
Saul: Homeschooling parents say bill would strip their rights
Herald: Political groups aim to focus on elections next year
Herald: College GOP selects 2008-09 e-board
Gazette: Interim official chosen as drain commissioner
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Take Back the Nonsense
Feminists on campus held their annual Take Back the Night event on Thursday, April 10.
Group fights sexual assault in Take Back the Night
Take Back the Night offers an opportunity for sexual assault awareness, education at WMU
Take Back the Night has come a long way since Bailey administration, is an important event
Take Back the Night, because sexual assault affects everyone
Letter to the editor: Sam Kallen
The event received lavish publicity in th Herald and a write-up afterwards. The event is supposedly to combat rape on campus. The event sponsors' primary means of doing this is to "raise awareness" by recounting stories of sexual assault.
The promotion of the event has raised questions whether there might be another agenda. Last year, its promotion featured the claim that "one in four" women have been raped. This year, an editorial promoting the event mentioned the claim.
The recent and extremely valuable article The Campus Rape Myth by Heather MacDonald explains the origin of the phony "one in four" statistic.
Angry feminists commenting on Sam Kallen's letter cited even more ridiculous statistics. "Angela Simon, WMU Doctoral Associate" claimed
So what is the point of all this? Certainly rape is a serious issue. Why trivialize it with such bogus statistics?
What do they advocate? Rape is illegal and severely punished. There is no pro-rape lobby. Do rapists care if women hold rallies? Encouraging the reporting of genuine rapes is fine, but there is no need for bogus statistics for this.
Sam Kallen argues
Feminism is a twisted view of the world that implies hatred of men and any women who resist the feminist agenda.
Another questionable claim coming from the Take Back the Night crowd appears in this letter from Dr. Robert Wait.
Previous:
Fight Back with Poetry
Don't Bring an Umbrella to a Gunfight
Planned Parenthood Covers Up Rape
Take Back the Night
End the Campus Gun Ban
Group fights sexual assault in Take Back the Night
Take Back the Night offers an opportunity for sexual assault awareness, education at WMU
Take Back the Night has come a long way since Bailey administration, is an important event
Take Back the Night, because sexual assault affects everyone
Letter to the editor: Sam Kallen
The event received lavish publicity in th Herald and a write-up afterwards. The event is supposedly to combat rape on campus. The event sponsors' primary means of doing this is to "raise awareness" by recounting stories of sexual assault.
The promotion of the event has raised questions whether there might be another agenda. Last year, its promotion featured the claim that "one in four" women have been raped. This year, an editorial promoting the event mentioned the claim.
"I was raped. I am your sister. Cousin. Mother. Girlfriend. Wife. Classmate. Friend. Nobody wants to talk about this. But I deal with it every day." So reads one of the flyers for Take Back the Night, an annual event held by FIRE!, the sexual assault peer educators on campus, that serves to raise awareness and empower survivors of sexual assault. Considering the statistic that one in four women will experience sexual assault, as the flyer's message states, you know someone who has been raped.The problem with the "one in four" statistic is that it is not true. The only definition of rape that makes it true is one that includes non-rape. Letter-writer Sam Kallen takes a skeptical look at the statistics.
The problem that often arises with the "one in four" statistic is definition: what is rape? Definitions vary to the extremes and encompass a great deal of gray area. The only way to change the confusion and gray area is to create opportunities for awareness and education. Take Back the Night is WMU's biggest annual event about sexual assault, and it is a powerful one.
One in four raped? According to a 1988 study by Ms. 20 to 25 percent of women will be the victims of a rape or an attempted rape in their lifetimes. At WMU, there are 12,918 females enrolled in the undergraduate program in the fall of 2007 (last semester). If it is true that one in four were raped during college, then that would be 12,900 (students) / 4 (one in four raped) / 5 (years at school) = 645.9 rapes per year or 322 per semester. Were there 300 rapes last semester? 80 rapes a month? 2.6 rapes a day? If so, we must have the most lax security force possible. It's a veritable rape-a-thon going on here at WMU.Of course, it is doubtless true that some rapes go unreported. But 99% of them?
Here are the statistics from the WMU DPS Crime Report: Forcible Sex Offenses: Total Crimes Reported: 2004 - 8, 2005 -10, 2006 - 4.
In 2006 there were 13,076 enrolled female students according to the university statistics. If it were true that there were only four reported cases of rape, then instead of a one in four statistic, we at WMU have a one in 3,269 rape rate, which is roughly 00.0305 percent. This is 161 times less than those claimed by the anti-rape promoters.
The recent and extremely valuable article The Campus Rape Myth by Heather MacDonald explains the origin of the phony "one in four" statistic.
The campus rape industry’s central tenet is that one-quarter of all college girls will be raped or be the targets of attempted rape by the end of their college years (completed rapes outnumbering attempted rapes by a ratio of about three to two). The girls’ assailants are not terrifying strangers grabbing them in dark alleys but the guys sitting next to them in class or at the cafeteria.That's right. The statistic comes from classifying non-rape as rape.
This claim, first published in Ms. magazine in 1987, took the universities by storm. By the early 1990s, campus rape centers and 24-hour hotlines were opening across the country, aided by tens of millions of dollars of federal funding. Victimhood rituals sprang up: first the Take Back the Night rallies, in which alleged rape victims reveal their stories to gathered crowds of candle-holding supporters; then the Clothesline Project, in which T-shirts made by self-proclaimed rape survivors are strung on campus, while recorded sounds of gongs and drums mark minute-by-minute casualties of the “rape culture.” A special rhetoric emerged: victims’ family and friends were “co-survivors”; “survivors” existed in a larger “community of survivors.”
...
If the one-in-four statistic is correct—it is sometimes modified to “one-in-five to one-in-four”—campus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportions. No crime, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20 or 25 percent, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants—a rate of 2.4 percent. The one-in-four statistic would mean that every year, millions of young women graduate who have suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience. Such a crime wave would require nothing less than a state of emergency—Take Back the Night rallies and 24-hour hotlines would hardly be adequate to counter this tsunami of sexual violence. Admissions policies letting in tens of thousands of vicious criminals would require a complete revision, perhaps banning boys entirely. The nation’s nearly 10 million female undergrads would need to take the most stringent safety precautions. Certainly, they would have to alter their sexual behavior radically to avoid falling prey to the rape epidemic.
None of this crisis response occurs, of course—because the crisis doesn’t exist. During the 1980s, feminist researchers committed to the rape-culture theory had discovered that asking women directly if they had been raped yielded disappointing results—very few women said that they had been. So Ms. commissioned University of Arizona public health professor Mary Koss to develop a different way of measuring the prevalence of rape. Rather than asking female students about rape per se, Koss asked them if they had experienced actions that she then classified as rape. Koss’s method produced the 25 percent rate, which Ms. then published.
Koss’s study had serious flaws. Her survey instrument was highly ambiguous, as University of California at Berkeley social-welfare professor Neil Gilbert has pointed out. But the most powerful refutation of Koss’s research came from her own subjects: 73 percent of the women whom she characterized as rape victims said that they hadn’t been raped. Further—though it is inconceivable that a raped woman would voluntarily have sex again with the fiend who attacked her—42 percent of Koss’s supposed victims had intercourse again with their alleged assailants.
Angry feminists commenting on Sam Kallen's letter cited even more ridiculous statistics. "Angela Simon, WMU Doctoral Associate" claimed
It is only through facing the reality-- that far more than 1 in 4 college women , 1 in 6 women in general, and 1 in 33 men are sexually assaulted each year and that there is a culture which produces an environment in which 60% of victims don't feel comfortable reporting their experience--and in creating change that we will see progress and that we can re-create the new culture and safe environment that is needed so desperately.That's about 3000 rapes per year at Western for those of you keeping track.
So what is the point of all this? Certainly rape is a serious issue. Why trivialize it with such bogus statistics?
What do they advocate? Rape is illegal and severely punished. There is no pro-rape lobby. Do rapists care if women hold rallies? Encouraging the reporting of genuine rapes is fine, but there is no need for bogus statistics for this.
Sam Kallen argues
Why is this a problem? Because it perpetuates anti-male propaganda. There is already enough going against us [men] without the need for women to be afraid whenever they see a man walking down the street. I am all for protection, and I am all for safety, and I am totally against rape, but I think it's important to realize the damage that a campaign chanting "One In Four" might do to men. "All men are rapists" sounds a lot to me like "all blacks are criminals." It simply isn't true.The feminists' actions strongly suggest that they have an anti-male agenda. If "one in four" women are raped, and most rapists are friends or relatives, then something approaching one in four men are rapists. This is an outrageous slander. It suggests an anti-male, anti-American worldview, for any society that tolerated this would have to be considered evil.
Feminism is a twisted view of the world that implies hatred of men and any women who resist the feminist agenda.
Another questionable claim coming from the Take Back the Night crowd appears in this letter from Dr. Robert Wait.
Speakers and organizers of TBTN were stalked and harassed by members of anti-feminist political groups, and rumors were spread that the event would be disrupted. Participants in the event had to provide for their own protection. They were stalked even as they walked peacefully to Kanley track to commemorate sexual violence experienced by female (and male) participants.Wait doesn't bother to name these anti-feminist groups, but rumors at the time implicated the College Republicans after we pointed out that the speaker for the first Take Back the Night event was Dr. Edith Fisher. The stalking and harassing is almost certainly wholly fictitious.
It is hard to believe that hardcore anti-feminists would try to prevent or disrupt this event, but that's exactly what happened three years ago. The opposition to TBTN was organized and planned, and occurred with the knowledge of members of Judith Bailey's administration. Hopefully, we we'll never again see a repetition of these sorry events on this campus.
Previous:
Fight Back with Poetry
Don't Bring an Umbrella to a Gunfight
Planned Parenthood Covers Up Rape
Take Back the Night
End the Campus Gun Ban
Saturday, April 19, 2008
POLITICAL UPDATE--National Defense
This update focuses on national defense. Terrorists threaten our security and liberals threaten our military. Democracy is not the answer to security.
Pat Buchanan: Onward the Revolution!
Pat Buchanan: Should We Fight for South Ossetia?
Phyllis Schlafly: New Proof of Reagan's Wisdom
Phyllis Schlafly: Supremacist Judges Attack Our Military
Don Devine: Conservatives Agree on Democracy?
Joseph Farah: The Gravest Threat of All
Ron Paul: Constitutional Responses to Terrorism
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Pat Buchanan: Onward the Revolution!
Pat Buchanan: Should We Fight for South Ossetia?
Phyllis Schlafly: New Proof of Reagan's Wisdom
Phyllis Schlafly: Supremacist Judges Attack Our Military
Don Devine: Conservatives Agree on Democracy?
Joseph Farah: The Gravest Threat of All
Ron Paul: Constitutional Responses to Terrorism
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Ending Registration
The Michigan State House of Representatives passed a bill to eliminate handgun registration. The bill passed overwhelmingly, which means that it is likely to pass the Senate and be signed by the Governor. All pro-gun bills, including "stand your ground" and various improvements to concealed carry, have passed by significant margins since concealed carry passed in 2000.
---------------
From MCRGO:
Michigan House Bills 4490 and 4491 pass House
2008/04/16
Legislative Update
Michigan House Bills 4490 and 4491 passed out of the Tourism and Outdoor Recreation Committee by a vote of 8 - 1. The Bills were sent to the full House April 16th.
These bills would (1) eliminate the current requirement in the Michigan handgun licensure law that pistol owners obtain safety inspection certificates; (2) require that all existing records of inspection certificates maintained by local and state law enforcement officials be destroyed; and (3) eliminate the misdemeanor crime of failing to have one's pistol inspected.
House Bill 4490 would repeal Section 9 of the handgun licensure act (MCL 28.429), which requires people who purchase or otherwise come into possession of a pistol in Michigan to obtain a safety inspection certificate from their local police department (or local sheriff, if they reside in a part of the state without an organized police department). That section also requires local law enforcement officials and the State Police to maintain records of safety inspection certificates. The bill would require state and local law enforcement officials to destroy all of their existing records of pistol safety inspections within one year.
House Bill 4491 would repeal Section 228 of the Michigan Penal Code (MCL 750.228) under which a person who fails to have his or her pistol inspected as required is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for up to 90 days, or a fine of up to $100, or both. The bill would also eliminate other references to Section 9 and safety inspections contained in the Penal Code. House Bill 4491 is tie-barred to House Bill 4490, meaning it could not take effect unless both bills were enacted.
Roll call vote results:
HB 4490, Yeas 93 Nays 15.
HB 4491, Yeas 92 Nays 16
Bills now move to the Senate.
---------------
From MCRGO:
Michigan House Bills 4490 and 4491 pass House
2008/04/16
Legislative Update
Michigan House Bills 4490 and 4491 passed out of the Tourism and Outdoor Recreation Committee by a vote of 8 - 1. The Bills were sent to the full House April 16th.
These bills would (1) eliminate the current requirement in the Michigan handgun licensure law that pistol owners obtain safety inspection certificates; (2) require that all existing records of inspection certificates maintained by local and state law enforcement officials be destroyed; and (3) eliminate the misdemeanor crime of failing to have one's pistol inspected.
House Bill 4490 would repeal Section 9 of the handgun licensure act (MCL 28.429), which requires people who purchase or otherwise come into possession of a pistol in Michigan to obtain a safety inspection certificate from their local police department (or local sheriff, if they reside in a part of the state without an organized police department). That section also requires local law enforcement officials and the State Police to maintain records of safety inspection certificates. The bill would require state and local law enforcement officials to destroy all of their existing records of pistol safety inspections within one year.
House Bill 4491 would repeal Section 228 of the Michigan Penal Code (MCL 750.228) under which a person who fails to have his or her pistol inspected as required is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for up to 90 days, or a fine of up to $100, or both. The bill would also eliminate other references to Section 9 and safety inspections contained in the Penal Code. House Bill 4491 is tie-barred to House Bill 4490, meaning it could not take effect unless both bills were enacted.
Roll call vote results:
HB 4490, Yeas 93 Nays 15.
HB 4491, Yeas 92 Nays 16
Bills now move to the Senate.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Taxes, Big Brother, and Unintended Consequences
The Herald hits the nail on the head with this Quotes and Comments article. McCain is the only candidate who has the American taxpayer's best interests in mind.
The Thought Police are at it again in France. Freedom is Slavery!
The unintended consequences of ethanol continue to rear their ugly heads. Luckily, Senator McCain is leading the charge to stop these damaging programs. Democrats lack both the courage and foresight to solve this problem.
The Thought Police are at it again in France. Freedom is Slavery!
The unintended consequences of ethanol continue to rear their ugly heads. Luckily, Senator McCain is leading the charge to stop these damaging programs. Democrats lack both the courage and foresight to solve this problem.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Berlusconi Wins!
Silvio Berlusconi has been elected again as Premier of Italy. This follows two years of leftist Romano Prodi. Berlusconi is a conservative. His election was by a large margin.
Berlusconi Wins Italian Election, Set for Third Term as Premier
Italy: It's a landslide
Berlusconi Wins Italian Election, Set for Third Term as Premier
Italy: It's a landslide
Monday, April 14, 2008
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Award
The WMU College Republicans received an award for being a "5-star RSO" during the 2007-2008 school year.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
POLITICAL UPDATE--North American Union
This update focuses on the North American Union. Plans continue, but many citizens are resisting these efforts. Trade impacts American sovereignty.
Phyllis Schlafly: North American Union: It's the real deal
Michael Howe: Promoting the North American Union
Jerome Corsi: Inside the hush-hush North American Union confab
Jerome Corsi: Leaders push PR campaign for North American alliance
Dennis Behreandt: Creating a Transatlantic Common Market
Jerome Corsi: North American Army created without OK by Congress
Jerome Corsi: Mexican official says NAFTA includes superhighways
Ron Paul: Taxes or Tolls on the TTC
Ron Paul: Paving Paradise
Phyllis Schlafly: Creating Jobs in Europe, Not America
Michael Howe: China advances on U.S. trucking
Phyllis Schlafly: It's Still The Economy, Stupid
More information:
North American Union: Eagle Forum Stop the NAU Stop SPP
Trans-Texas Corridor: Corridor Watch
Phyllis Schlafly: North American Union: It's the real deal
Michael Howe: Promoting the North American Union
Jerome Corsi: Inside the hush-hush North American Union confab
Jerome Corsi: Leaders push PR campaign for North American alliance
Dennis Behreandt: Creating a Transatlantic Common Market
Jerome Corsi: North American Army created without OK by Congress
Jerome Corsi: Mexican official says NAFTA includes superhighways
Ron Paul: Taxes or Tolls on the TTC
Ron Paul: Paving Paradise
Phyllis Schlafly: Creating Jobs in Europe, Not America
Michael Howe: China advances on U.S. trucking
Phyllis Schlafly: It's Still The Economy, Stupid
More information:
North American Union: Eagle Forum Stop the NAU Stop SPP
Trans-Texas Corridor: Corridor Watch
Registration Leads to Confiscation
Registration leads to confiscation. This true of gun registration. And it is also true of Michigan Democrats' latest plan to force home-schoolers to register with the government.
Michigan home-schoolers recently held a rally in Lansing to protest HB 5912, sponsored by many Democrats. Legislators have reportedly been flooded with mail on the issue.
What's the point of registration? Home-schooling is perfectly legal in Michigan, not to mention a fundamental human right. Why should home-schoolers have to identify themselves to the government?
The only argument offered in the article is the following.
In Utah, a paperwork error by a local school district gave a liberal judge an excuse to order that children be taken away from a family. They had to flee the state.
In Germany, a family has been repeatedly harassed by the government for home-schooling. Their daughter was taken from them, and they were forced to flee the country.
It was only a few decades ago that home-schooling was illegal in Michigan and most other states.
One major advocate for this bill is bound to be the MEA. The more children who can be forced into government schools, the more money for the teachers unions.
Home-schooling threatens government, because home-schoolers don't get government indoctrination about how much we need government. That's why statists want to restrict it.
This bill must be defeated.
Michigan home-schoolers recently held a rally in Lansing to protest HB 5912, sponsored by many Democrats. Legislators have reportedly been flooded with mail on the issue.
What's the point of registration? Home-schooling is perfectly legal in Michigan, not to mention a fundamental human right. Why should home-schoolers have to identify themselves to the government?
The only argument offered in the article is the following.
State Rep. Joan Bauer, D-Lansing, said the bill will help address questions of truancy, as school officials will know if students are being home-schooled or simply not showing up to school.If parents are homeschooling, they will know whether or not their children are truant. If students are not enrolled in school, then parents must not want them to be, so they aren't truant. If there are any legitimate questions about truancy, they can be resolved by simply asking the parents. There is no need for a giant database.
"I think it's reasonable that we know where and if our children are being educated, whether it's in a public school, private school, or at home," said Bauer, who co-sponsored the bill.Our? Who's we? Rep. Bauer is saying here that children belong to the government, not parents. They aren't your children, Joan.
Wisconsin, California and Arizona have registration requirements similar to the proposed Michigan legislation.What's the big deal? Home-schooling could never be outlawed, right? Well, in California, a judge recently ruled that home-schooling is illegal. This ruling endangers 166,000 home-schoolers in California. The case is currently under review.
In Utah, a paperwork error by a local school district gave a liberal judge an excuse to order that children be taken away from a family. They had to flee the state.
In Germany, a family has been repeatedly harassed by the government for home-schooling. Their daughter was taken from them, and they were forced to flee the country.
It was only a few decades ago that home-schooling was illegal in Michigan and most other states.
One major advocate for this bill is bound to be the MEA. The more children who can be forced into government schools, the more money for the teachers unions.
Home-schooling threatens government, because home-schoolers don't get government indoctrination about how much we need government. That's why statists want to restrict it.
This bill must be defeated.
Looting Michigan
The "takings coalition" is never satisfied. Raising taxes wasn't enough. Big special interest groups are planning to take even more from Michigan taxpayers.
The big energy providers are apparently planning to lobby the legislature to reimpose a monopoly. This will cost consumers 2-3 billion dollars.
A UAW union strike at American Axle in Three Rivers has shut down many auto factories. Just what Michigan needs. Of course, unions are creatures of government privilege.
The Michigan Education Association (MEA) continues to profit from selling its own super-expensive health insurance. It costs a lot more than comparable coverage, with the profits going to the MEA. They pressure local school boards to continue this racket, including by raising taxes.
And of course there's Lansing's newest plan to give our tax dollars to movie studios. Nick at Right Michigan has an excellent deconstruction of the plan.
All this is the governmental equivalent of stealing anything that isn't nailed down.
The big energy providers are apparently planning to lobby the legislature to reimpose a monopoly. This will cost consumers 2-3 billion dollars.
A UAW union strike at American Axle in Three Rivers has shut down many auto factories. Just what Michigan needs. Of course, unions are creatures of government privilege.
The Michigan Education Association (MEA) continues to profit from selling its own super-expensive health insurance. It costs a lot more than comparable coverage, with the profits going to the MEA. They pressure local school boards to continue this racket, including by raising taxes.
And of course there's Lansing's newest plan to give our tax dollars to movie studios. Nick at Right Michigan has an excellent deconstruction of the plan.
All this is the governmental equivalent of stealing anything that isn't nailed down.
Local News
Political news from around the area.
MAY 6 TAX VOTES School-tax formula shares wealth
Dispatcher running for Kalamazoo Co. sheriff
Champion to make bid for prosecutor seat
Candidacy costs young St. Joseph County prosecutor his job
No more `suffering in that basement': WMU holds open house showcasing renovated art-school facilities
College Dems elect new executive board
Reflection Room, in infancy, could be start of interfaith center
MAY 6 TAX VOTES School-tax formula shares wealth
Dispatcher running for Kalamazoo Co. sheriff
Champion to make bid for prosecutor seat
Candidacy costs young St. Joseph County prosecutor his job
No more `suffering in that basement': WMU holds open house showcasing renovated art-school facilities
College Dems elect new executive board
Reflection Room, in infancy, could be start of interfaith center
Friday, April 11, 2008
Concealed Stupidity
The recent article on concealed carry in the Herald has spawned quite a debate in the comments section. Conservatives have made intelligent, rational arguments. Liberals have responded with paranoia and bigotry.
To get the full flavor of the argument, you really have to read the whole thread.
Commenter "Jerry McKraker" is obsessed with who is a "tough guy", even though the pro-concealed carry commenters have said nothing of the sort. Then there's this:
To get the full flavor of the argument, you really have to read the whole thread.
Commenter "Jerry McKraker" is obsessed with who is a "tough guy", even though the pro-concealed carry commenters have said nothing of the sort. Then there's this:
Think about the police, or tha Marine Corps. Most people join those institutions in the hopes that they will be able to shoot someone.This is what happens when liberals can't debate the facts.
Saturday, April 05, 2008
POLITICAL UPDATE--United Nations
This update focuses on the United Nations. The UN threatens American freedom and sovereignty. The Law of the Sea Treaty remains before the Senate. The US Supreme Court delivered a victory for sovereignty against the World Court in the case Medellin v. Texas.
Thomas Kilgannon: The Supreme Court Stands Alone
Ted Cruz: SCOTUS Rejects Authority of World Court
Kami Dalton: Surprise: The UN is Against Press Freedom
Thomas Kilgannon: UN Charges U.S. With Discrimination
Phyllis Schlafly: Congress Contemplates Giving Cash to Foreigners
Gregory Hession: Health Threat From EU and UN
Roy Moore: UN-American
Douglas Stone: Law of the Sea Treaty: Tunnel Vision on the Oceans
Brian Farmer: Will America Get LOST?
More information:
Get US Out of the UN
Eagle Forum: United Nations
Thomas Kilgannon: The Supreme Court Stands Alone
Ted Cruz: SCOTUS Rejects Authority of World Court
Kami Dalton: Surprise: The UN is Against Press Freedom
Thomas Kilgannon: UN Charges U.S. With Discrimination
Phyllis Schlafly: Congress Contemplates Giving Cash to Foreigners
Gregory Hession: Health Threat From EU and UN
Roy Moore: UN-American
Douglas Stone: Law of the Sea Treaty: Tunnel Vision on the Oceans
Brian Farmer: Will America Get LOST?
More information:
Get US Out of the UN
Eagle Forum: United Nations
Corrupt Politicians Against Transparency
The Herald has an article about the efforts of some students to implement transparency in university spending by creating a searchable website of contracts.
More interesting is the first comment on the article. It is by the now former Speaker of the Senate of the WSA. He is fanatically opposed to the concept.
He starts by objecting that the website would cost too much money. This objection has been shown to be bogus by the states that have implemented such a system. He also argues that such a system would hurt Western's competition with other universities. Isn't it possible that some potential students might be impressed by a university committed to transparency in its spending?
With these red herrings out of the way, he gets to his real objection: elitism. How dare ordinary people want to know how the university spends its money? Who do those rubes think they are? Don't they know what's good for them?
He asks how average people can evaluate spending by administrators. While the average citizen may know less than the average administration bureaucrat, there are plenty of citizens who do know something: faculty, legislators, businessmen, contractors, rival contractors, accountants, lawyers, and plenty of others who may be knowledgeable on some particular aspect of university spending. This is the error of socialists: An individual expert may know more than an individual citizen, but the citizens together know far more than the experts.
Doubtless there will be some things that citizens won't understand. Let them ask questions. If there are reasonable explanations, the university can provide them. If not, the administration may be forced to save taxpayers money.
He concludes:
Then there's the Sangren Hall parking lot, which was covered with snow for the last five months, when it wasn't baking over the summer. How dare anyone want to park there?
Ironically, the author of this comment was convicted unanimously by the WSA Judicial Council for flagrantly and willfully violating the WSA Constitution. Why wouldn't he want transparency in government?
More interesting is the first comment on the article. It is by the now former Speaker of the Senate of the WSA. He is fanatically opposed to the concept.
He starts by objecting that the website would cost too much money. This objection has been shown to be bogus by the states that have implemented such a system. He also argues that such a system would hurt Western's competition with other universities. Isn't it possible that some potential students might be impressed by a university committed to transparency in its spending?
With these red herrings out of the way, he gets to his real objection: elitism. How dare ordinary people want to know how the university spends its money? Who do those rubes think they are? Don't they know what's good for them?
He asks how average people can evaluate spending by administrators. While the average citizen may know less than the average administration bureaucrat, there are plenty of citizens who do know something: faculty, legislators, businessmen, contractors, rival contractors, accountants, lawyers, and plenty of others who may be knowledgeable on some particular aspect of university spending. This is the error of socialists: An individual expert may know more than an individual citizen, but the citizens together know far more than the experts.
Doubtless there will be some things that citizens won't understand. Let them ask questions. If there are reasonable explanations, the university can provide them. If not, the administration may be forced to save taxpayers money.
He concludes:
The university does a great job at spending money effectively and efficiently while always keeping in mind the research and educational mission of the university. Both the administration and the board of trustees examines where money is going and if that is what is best for the students and well being of WMU.What a relief! It turns out that the university didn't hire Judy Bailey, give away a million dollars, spend another half a million settling with Bailey, agree to take a building that cost two million a year to operate, pay professors an average of $136,000 dollars per year, and repair the damage when Judy Bailey broke a window in her house when she locked her keys inside (and that's just the ones we know about over the last two years). They always spend our money effectively. Always!
Then there's the Sangren Hall parking lot, which was covered with snow for the last five months, when it wasn't baking over the summer. How dare anyone want to park there?
Ironically, the author of this comment was convicted unanimously by the WSA Judicial Council for flagrantly and willfully violating the WSA Constitution. Why wouldn't he want transparency in government?
Chamber for Communism
The Gazette has an article documenting support for the KRESA tax hike. Supporters make some very interesting arguments that deserve examination.
Cutting taxpayer budgets isn't good for the economy.
"It would be economic suicide to take that $11 million out of the schools right now,'' said Ron Kitchens, chief executive officer of Southwest Michigan First, the county's economic-development agency.Perhaps "Southwest Michigan First" stands for "Southwest Michigan government employees First, and the rest of you can go to hell". Where is the evidence that more education spending will improve education results?
"The amount it would take off tax bills is not enough to have a real impact on citizens or the cost of doing business, but it is enough that the impact would be pretty immediate for school districts. It would devalue homes. We would immediately lose jobs and lower the quality of children's educational experience. It would devalue the long-term economic structure of our economy.''
Kitchens said failure to renew the millage would undermine attempts to brand the Kalamazoo area as the Education Community. "You can't be the Education Community if you don't invest in education,'' he said.
George Erickcek, a senior analyst with the local W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, takes issue with the notion that government spending automatically depresses the economy.None of those government employees will save money or spend it outside the county, right? Maybe Erickcek should go back to school. If government takes money from taxpayers, then they can't spend money and create a multiplier effect. You can't buy locally if you don't produce locally. If you do, it will be consumed, locally or not. But higher taxes discourage real investment and production. And where is the evidence that more education spending will improve education results?
Erickcek said renewing the education tax likely would help the local economy more than decreasing local taxes by the 1.5 mills.
If the $11 million is given back to taxpayers, not all that money would be recycled into the local economy, Erickcek said.
Individuals might put some of their $90 in the bank, spend it on Internet purchases or otherwise withdraw it from the local economy. Businesses also may take that money elsewhere. For instance, Pfizer Inc., the county's largest taxpayer, would save almost $700,000 in taxes if the school levy is not renewed, but it's unlikely those savings would be spent locally.
"If instead you give that money to schools, it goes into salaries. And right there you've already made a difference'' in the local economy, Erickcek said. "That's a job and a worker with income, and he or she is spending that money.''
"The idea that the tax decreases economic activity, that's not true,'' Erickcek said. "If you raise taxes and spend the money on government services, then you do get a small increase in economic activity. In economic terms, it's known as the balanced-budget-multiplier effect.''
However, Erickcek said the $11 million represents a small fraction of the local economy. The bigger issue, he said, is the need to invest in education at a time when the county needs highly skilled workers to compete in a global economy.
"It's the old adage of putting your money where your mouth is,'' Erickcek said. "If the community is convinced that education is important and that we're living in a world where talent and knowledge are gaining more power, then you should be putting more money toward schools.''
But Chamber President Steward Sandstrom said Dodge is referring to challenges throughout Michigan. Locally, however, Sandstrom pointed out that the local economy is finally getting some positive momentum, citing recent announcements about job expansions here.Where is the evidence that more education spending will improve education results? Michigan teacher compensation is near the highest of the states, but results remain mediocre compared to other states, much less other countries. How will spending more money on higher benefits for the same teachers help?
Voting down the education tax could stymie future growth, he said.
In fact, Sandstrom said, he's not sure "if $11 million is enough'' for the schools. He said local leaders need to be thinking about preschool and other programs that will boost academic outcomes.
"On the face of it, cutting school funds is not a good idea,'' Sandstrom said. "We need to take the long view of growing our economy through a better education system.''
Cutting taxpayer budgets isn't good for the economy.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Promises, Promises
March concluded the College Democrats' "Neoconservative Awarenwess Month". Let's take a moment to look back.
The Democrats made sweeping promises for their month.
They also promised "we will blog every week day in March on the topic". They actually blogged 11 days out of 21. Readers can decide whether this counts as one broken promise or ten.
It seems that the College Democrats went to war against neocons without a plan. Mission accomplished!
A genuine campaign to educate people about neoconservatism and how it differs from real conservatism would be welcome. But it appear that the College Democrats have no clue what it actually is. A graphic on their website shows pictures of six people, one of whom is Pat Buchanan, a paleoconservative who is a vehement critic of neoconservatism.
Will Obama or Hillary break as many promises as the College Democrats? And if so, would that be good or bad?
The Democrats made sweeping promises for their month.
Over the course of the month we will probe topics spanning nearly four decades, setting the course of U.S. policies and positions, placement in the global arena, and some of the current and future domestic reality.By my count, the Democrats promised to discuss 18 topics. What was their actual record? Over the next month, they discussed Iraq, and none of the other topics. That makes them one for 18. See for yourself.
Some of the topics will include the Iran-Contra affair and the Regan violation of the Arms Export Control Act, NeoConservative support of terrorism, the balance of powers and checks and balances, the invasion of Iraq on false pretenses, illegal wiretaps and searches (without a warrant), the Bush Administration’s monitoring of war protesters, violation of the Geneva conventions, the abusive NeoCon monetary and fiscal policies, detainment of citizens and non US citizens without warrant, representation, charges presented and a timely trial, imperialism by the Bush administration and election tampering in four elections over the past eight years.
They also promised "we will blog every week day in March on the topic". They actually blogged 11 days out of 21. Readers can decide whether this counts as one broken promise or ten.
It seems that the College Democrats went to war against neocons without a plan. Mission accomplished!
A genuine campaign to educate people about neoconservatism and how it differs from real conservatism would be welcome. But it appear that the College Democrats have no clue what it actually is. A graphic on their website shows pictures of six people, one of whom is Pat Buchanan, a paleoconservative who is a vehement critic of neoconservatism.
Will Obama or Hillary break as many promises as the College Democrats? And if so, would that be good or bad?
Movie Welfare
The state government is proceeding with its ridiculous plan to give our tax dollars to movie studios.
Movie incentives come with price tag
At least Nancy Cassis has the right idea.
If tax cuts are a good idea, why not cut taxes for everyone? In reality, this is giveaway to a special interest. Government should stop pretending that it can pick winners and losers better than the market.
Movie incentives come with price tag
So the government is giving our tax dollars to Hollywood movie studios. That'll have the economy turned around in no time!LANSING, Mich. (AP) — When Gov. Jennifer Granholm signs tax incentives aimed at making Michigan the country's most attractive place to make movies, they may come with a hefty price tag.
The marquee piece of legislation will give film studios up to a 42 percent refundable credit on production expenses in the state — the most lucractive in the United States.
For example, if an out-of-state studio has no Michigan Business Tax liability and spends $10 million on production in the state, the state will cut it a check for $4 million. The credit otherwise can be used by in-state and out-of-state studios to reduce their state taxes.
At least Nancy Cassis has the right idea.
Cassis, however, criticized the idea of refundable tax credits and said the state should be helping all Michigan businesses.It's tempting to make a joke about the dating game here. It's not really surprising that Democrats would support a scheme like this. What excuse do Republicans have?
"We support credits, but going beyond and giving certain favored companies or businesses a check in the mail hurts all those other businesses that are here right now, today, paying taxes," she said. "They are not receiving any relief. They are trying to hold on."
If tax cuts are a good idea, why not cut taxes for everyone? In reality, this is giveaway to a special interest. Government should stop pretending that it can pick winners and losers better than the market.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)