Question 1):. What will happen to Michigan’s Detroit-area legislative districts? Will they be redrawn? If so, by whom? And when? We still don’t know!
Last week, a panel of three federal judges in Kalamazoo heard arguments, pro and con, as to whether Michigan’s Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission (MICRC) should be given a second chance to try to craft maps for legislative districts in metro Detroit, even while the MICRC is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the three judges’ decision last month that the current district lines violate the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA).
At the Friday afternoon hearing, federal Judges Raymond Kethledge, Janet Neff and Paul Maloney, without issuing an order, broached the idea of allowing the commission to craft its own maps, but also having an outside “special master” retained to make its own version at the same time. The judges would then assess both sets of maps and decide which sets are preferable.
The court ruled in December that the MICRC had “indisputably” drawn state House and Senate districts in and around Detroit that violated the federal VRA. Acting on the advice of their legal counsel, the commissioners had diluted the representation of Black voters in violation of the law, the judges said.
The court has blocked new elections in 13 state House and Senate district until new maps are drawn, but with a candidate filing deadline for legislative offices on April 23, all sides wrestled in court Friday with what to do under the tight time frame — as little as nine weeks. Should the judges or MICRC bring in an outside expert as special master to craft them unilaterally?
Two special elections to fill vacancies are scheduled for mid-April in House districts 13 and 25, and one of them (mainly in Warren) may be affected by any new maps. Furthermore, it appears such an election could not be held at all using the current illegal maps, according to the judges’ logic.
The judges issued no order Friday other than to deny the MICRC’s request for a stay on the judges’ December decision until the U.S. Supremes make a final ruling on the case. The judges say they will come up with some sort of an order “soon.”
So, what happens next? And should the MICRC, with three new members replacing a trio who have resigned, be given a second bite at the apple?
Answer 2): The MICRC has been a chaotic circus. The judges found it “in defiance and disarray.” This has given credence to its critics’ contention that the commission was never about legal redistricting. Instead, they contend, it had another priority — giving Democrats majorities in the Legislature. The easiest way to do that was to trample on the Voting Rights Act, courtesy of ‘experts’ forced upon it who knew such a violation was needed to accomplish the first goal. The commission’s legal counsel has resigned in the wake of the judges’ scathing opinion about their work. But does that mean pending court action will correct the course going forward? Who could possibly have predicted that bringing in people who know next to nothing about an important function of government would lead to dysfunction? Reapportionment is one of the hardest, most complicated tasks in politics. Democrats complained for the past two decades that the legislative maps were Republican gerrymanders, but if so why did they always stand up to court challenges? The MICRC’s maps didn’t. Besides, for the past 60 years (for anyone who can remember) each of the two major parties has won on maps the other has drawn for the House. But Democrats pushed the 2018 ballot proposal because they knew that demographics meant it was impossible to take the Senate without racial gerrymandering, and they rolled the dice. So here we are.
************************************************************
Question 2): 2023 featured the first majority for Michigan Democrats in the Michigan House of Representatives in a dozen years, as well as the first time in four decades that they could count on help from a Democratic majority in the state Senate combined with a Democratic governor. Nobody will argue that this ‘Trifecta’ spurred the Democrats to enact their most progressive policy agenda in more than a half-century. So can Democrats capitalize on this success at the polls next Nov. 5? Gretchen Whitmer won’t be on the ballot, and probably the state Senate won’t be, either. But the entire Michigan House of Representatives will be up for grabs. What look like the best campaign issue or issues Democratic candidates for the state House, including incumbents, challengers and candidates for open seats, could run on?
Answer 2): Abortion is one of the few issues where Democrats dominate Republicans in the current issue environment. Gun c0ntrol in the wake of Oxford and Michigan State University is another. These may not prove to be the most important issues by next fall, but it’s about all Democrats have to work with. So expect Democratic candidates to hit hard on these two issues, blistering Republican incumbents who voted the “wrong way’ and pressuring other GOP candidates to say where they stand. Other issues such as expanding LGBTQ civil rights protections, repealing Right to Work, and “reforming” voting rights will be more problematic, depending on the districts and the candidates.
Other than that, Democrats could bring up issues like repealing the pension tax, hiking the Earned Income Tax Credit, reform of guardianship and the probate courts, free school meals and two years of community college tuition, but those are too ‘niche’ to be truly important. Overhanging all this are the Big Kahuna issues of national politics –like inflation, which polling tells us is at the top of voters’ minds in both parties. Everything from gas, to food, to electricity has been mentioned, so Democrats would be remiss to not have answers ready for attacks they get on this and other issues, like immigration.
But when all is said and done, it may get down to how the presidential candidates fare in Michigan at the top of the ticket — whether they be Donald Trump or Joe Biden. Will whichever one wins, and by how much, have far more of an impact on how voters behave on down-ballot races?
One thing seems apparent — legislative Democrats in swing districts aren’t getting much help, It almost seems as though Gov. Whitmer and her ‘progressive’ allies in the Legislature decided long ago to sacrifice their House majority in this year’s election, knowing that nothing could be undone by Republicans until after 2026 at least.
************************************************************
Question 3): The 2024 election is now only 10 months away. What would be the best campaign issue or issues that Republican candidates for the state House of Representatives could run on in an effort to regain the majority they held for a dozen years until 2022?
Answer 3): Despite the organizational dysfunction of the Michigan GOP state apparatus, believe it or not the Republicans seem to have an inside track on issues if the vote was just two months away. Inflation is top of mind for Democratic voters as much as it is for Republicans. If Republicans simultaneously cast blame on Democrats for high inflation costs while also focusing on their plan for reducing the cost pressures facing residents, that will surely appeal to voters heading to the polls.
Or the Democrats’ ‘extreme’ social agenda could be fatal for Dem candidates running in marginal districts.
Or it could be something unexpected like the Democrats’ ‘fantasy’ energy policies. For instance, a Ballot Campaign Committee calling itself “Citizens for Local Choice” last week submitted an initiative petition to the state Bureau of Elections to amend the Democrats’ recently-enacted “Clean and Renewable Energy and Energy Waste Reduction Act” that strips away the authority of local governments to stop ‘green energy’ projects that the State of Michigan says it wants, giving the ultimate power to approve such projects to the state Public Service Commission, regardless of what local citizens want in their backyard.
If this petition gets the requisite number of signatures and gets on the fall ballot, could it be a key factor in determining who wins most of the swing legislative districts up for grabs? Republicans would be almost all on one side of the ballot proposal (Vote “Yes”) , Democrats on the other (“No,” because it would undo almost everything they did this past year on energy). The Committee has requested approval of the Summary of Purpose and pre-approval as to form.
The ‘Summary of Purpose’ provided to the Elections Bureau by the Committee says this:
“A proposed initiated law to allow local units of government to retain authority to regulate the development of solar, wind, or energy storage facilities in their jurisdictions by repealing laws that mandate statewide standards for energy facilities and permit the Michigan Public Service Commission to override local energy facility development decisions. If enacted, this proposal will allow local units of government to continue to determine their own standards regarding setback distance, structure height, and the amount of light and sound emitted by energy facilities, and to exercise final authority over the construction of energy facilities within their jurisdictions.”
The ballot Committee hopes the Board of State Canvassers will approve the petition within 30 days, following which the Committee will be granted a 180-day window to gather and file the necessary 356,958 valid signatures from registered voters. To ensure placement on the November 2024 ballot, valid signatures must be submitted by May 29th; otherwise, the initiative will proceed to the November 2026 ballot.
For those wishing to participate in the effort, additional details can be found at www.micitizenschoice.org.
Buckle your seat belts.
**************************************
Leanne says
Good questions and answers.
The federal court slamming the Redistricting Commission was well-deserved and expected – however until we know what remedy is going to be implemented the battle is only half one for both Republicans and victimized black Democrats.
Kudos to the three judge panel for a thoughtful and well-reasoned opinion.
An outside special master respected by all sides needs to be appointed – that master will need to draw equitable district lines to respect the letter and intent of the Voting Rights Act.
The GOP needs to make tax relief their hallmark issue. Election denying will net nothing for them.
Tim Sullivan says
First of all, GO BLUE! BEAT WASHINGTON!
Nice article, Bill. Once again, politics is going to be interesting. And quite possibly entertaining.
QUESTION 1: Readers of The Ballenger Report should know already what I think of the MiCRC. It hasn’t changed in the recent past. I think you were a bit too kind in calling it a chaotic circus (I assume that as part of a New Year’s resolution you’re trying to be more kind in your descriptions of folks like this than being brutally honest). I also think the judges were a bit too kind in calling their behavior “IN DEFIANCE AND DISARRAY.” Overt contempt while telling us all to screw ourselves is probably a more accurate description.
First of all, the judges got it right. Those districts are not defensible. The idea that this decision has resulted in the MiCRC having a “Come to Jesus” moment is highly unlikely. The tone and tenor of the MiCRC as reported in the media supports that conclusion. To fix the problem, the judges should skip the MiCRC (they will probably vote themselves another pay hike) and go straight to a Special Master(s). I still volunteer a selection of TBR readers to serve as Master(s), though I would gratefully accept the help of Sean Trende.
You make an interesting point: WHO COULD POSSIBLY HAVE PREDICTED THAT BRINGING IN PEOPLE WHO KNOW NEXT TO NOTHING ABOUT AN IMPORTANT FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT WOULD LEAD TO DYSFUNCTION? Those of us who voted no.
You’re right on the difficulties in redistricting. The Democrats complaining about the gerrymanders/redistricting done following the census results of 2000 and 2010 seem to have a form of memory loss. They have forgotten what I think was the most egregious gerrymandering done in my lifetime, the one following the 1970 census. 1970 was an especially lousy year for the GOP nationwide and the subsequent gerrymander shows crappy it was. In 1972, Nixon beat McGovern roughly 60-40 in the popular vote, won all the electoral college votes except Massachusetts and DC, and the GOP picked up five seats in the US Senate. Somehow, they managed to lose four seats in the House nationwide despite the Nixon landslide. That was the result of some damned fine gerrymandering that benefitted them and survived court challenges. Apparently the MiCRC also forgot this or forgot to study some history. Maybe if they spent less time working on their 40% pay hike…. Sorry, I’m being mean here.
The Court will have to act quickly prior to the special elections. I suspect the MiCRC is using their appeal process to play a form of political/judicial rope-a-dope to get the special elections through before any resolution to the mess that they willfully made. If one were a cynic, one might think that the folks on the MiCRC planned all this.
QUESTION 2: A fine analysis. The pension tax is a bugaboo for retired state employees like me, but with the vast majority of folks now on 401ks, 457 and other retirement plans, the audience for this is shrinking.
I’m not sure how giving free school lunches to the children of millionaires is a winning issue, but who knows, maybe Michigan has gotten so “progressive” that shifting monies and benefits to the wealthy is now a winning issue.
Reform of the guardianship laws was long overdue, but it is not a “sexy” argument, usually has a small audience at any one point in time, though it will eventually hit many of us, and it is a hard thing to explain in an ad of 30 seconds or so.
The issue of abortion – if covered by Michigan Public Broadcasting – should include the abortion episode from “THAT DELICATE BALANCE II”. It might result in a debate over how many classes of untermensch we are willing tolerate. Buck v. Bell anyone? Jacobsen?
You’re spot on in the closing sentence. The leadership of the Governor and her party feel whatever they’ve accomplished can’t, or won’t, be reversed and if it costs a few legislators their jobs, it’s well worth the price. And remember, Democrats had near unanimity in all their votes. The legislators who may lose must have reached the same conclusion. Their political legacy was worth their jobs.
QUESTION 3: You’re right, buckle your seatbelts. They hope we don’t pay too much attention to the PSC that took a “questionable” junket I believe to Lost Wages and then okayed a utility rate hike that would cover such things. I know that the cable news channel NewsNation covered the events in Green Township over in Mecosta County on the Chinese battery plant, if this gets on the ballot they might need to open a Michigan bureau and shame the other networks into covering it as well. It would be nice if Leland Vittert isn’t the only one talking about it.
But on this issue, it is fun though to see that Democrats support for local control is as flexible as the Republicans. They’re for it until they’re against it. Not quite the same as the Senator in “Finian’s Rainbow” saying he was too busy defending the Constitution to take the time to read it, but close. They want to crush, punish and make an example of Green Township and those pesky voters who held the politicians who voted for the battery plant accountable by sending the politicians to an early retirement.
It’s quite apparent the Democrats, and some of the Republicans, have noticed that the peasants are revolting. The problem is that they find the peasants are revolting. For the Democrats, it’s directed at the voters insufficiently progressive or woke, so they must be punished. They want your political death, but will accept your subservience.
For the GOP, it’s the fight over Karamo and who should be chair. And raise money. And end their circular firing squad. It will make politics interesting. As they used to say (and I still do), film at 11.
Mark M Koroi says
Parallels to 1968:
(A) In 1968 the Democratic Party was divided over the Vietnam War – today the issue is the Gaza War with Progressive Democrats opposing aid to Israel with Biden effectively preventing a cease-fire that the rest of the world will support in the UN Security Council and the General Assembly – LBJ and Biden are now in comparable unenviable positions;
(B) Biden is faced with the prospect of ongoing warfare in Gaza occurring throughout 2024 – per published plans of the Israel Defense Forces – with Biden receiving intense pressure to control Israel and seeing his popularity numbers in polling continuing to tumble – LBJ bailed out after he barely beat Eugene McCarthy in an early primary election in 1968;
(C) RFK became a presidential candidate in 1968 on an anti-war pro-civil rights platform – and RFK, Jr has made controversial statements on the Gaza crisis and emphasized the black civil rights struggle during his candidacy;
(D) LBJ presided during the racial unrest and police violence addressed in the Kerner Commission report in 1968 – and Biden is facing the same issues in 2024;
(E) like 1968, GOP presidential nominee Richard Nixon portraying himself as the “law and order” candidate, Trump has close ties to the police community.
The fact that RFK, Jr. with many of his controversial opinions on diverse subjects such as vaccinations, Sirhan Sirhan parole, and Israel – as well as lack of support from many of his relatives – can still command polling numbers in the low 20s in a three-way race between Trump, Biden and himself is astounding and testament to the desire by American voters for a populist presidential candidate outside of the major party systems.
David L Richards says
In answer to Bill’s question: “Democrats complained for the past two decades that the legislative maps were Republican gerrymanders, but if so why did they always stand up to court challenges?”, the answer is courts rarely have interfered with plain gerrymandering by either party. The issue now is the Voters Rights Act, federal legislation, enacted in response to suppression of black voters in the South. Apparently the MICRC violated that law by not guaranteeing black representation in its maps. The irony is that while changes will increase opportunities for black politicians, it may well return a Republican majority to the state house, a negative result for black people in Michigan.
Royal says
Now where can we get better political perspective than TBR? Nowhere, I say. Thanks Bill,
wrt Q#1: I live in districts and county that have totally flipped from Republican to Democrat. I’ve heard from my several new Dem representatives more in these past few years than I ever heard from my Repub handlers in the previous, er, many, years. Even though they mostly admonish me to support their woke ways and insist I accept my culpability in my privileged lifestyle & mentality, they mostly leave me alone as long as I yell, Hail Caesar!, when they want me to, and I thank them when they throw me back a few pittances after I mail them in my pensions. So, what was your question again? Oh, redistricting, yes . . . so wouldn’t it be easier to just convince voters that you have have better ideas to govern than the other guys? Rather than to haggle who votes in what district? I suppose that may be antithetical to someone’s privilege group though . . .
wrt Q#2: While I see quite a difference between libertarian capitalists vs global socialists at the national level, I don’t see that same distinction here in Michigan. Thanks to our long history of collective union influence, we are all pretty much socialists here, irrespective of party affiliation. Since the socialists (putting both party adherents together) currently enjoy a clear majority, I would think they should continue their blanket voter mailings, at public largess I am sure, trying to convince/threaten un-educatables like me to vote per my public conformance. This would be far preferable (to me and them) than needing to vote me off the peninsula via some medical junta, or imprisoning me for life via some law-fare tactic (guns, abortion, equality, school unionization, etc) . . .
wrt Q#3: So, what issues should the minority libertarians run on? How about publishing a single page summary of our state budget and informing the people how they would spend their $$ differently than the majority globalists are currently? I’m sure a few stark contrasts may pop out from such an exercise that would give them something to run on/against . . .
Thanks Bill, for all of your endeavors
Robert Nelson says
All Democrats have to run on are abortion and gun control? Give me a break. They have a history of protecting the little guy, the environment and , criminal justice reform and worker safety. Of course what else can one expect from a long-time Republican operative.
John C Stewart says
Michigan Republicans have clearly lost the younger generation vote and especially the women’s vote in Southeast Michigan MIGOP to honor reproductive rights and LGBTQ rights. Grumpy old Neanderthal men who served as former state legislators will never never never be elected statewide. The sea change has occurred. Moderately conservative is the only way forward in the future for Michigan Republicans
John C Stewart says
Unenlightened men are history. The path forward for the Michigan GOP is clear: Karamo ousted —interim Chair one year, Pete Hoekstra. February 2025, Scott Greenlee Chair, , political Directors, Pete Hoekstra, and Stuart Foster, onward and forward we must go. Former Supreme Court Justice, Kurt Wilder, a senior statesman, says this is the only way to restore sanity to the Michigan GOP.