POLL: Clear Majority of Michigan Voters Favor Retaining Long-Standing Regulations on Abortions, and Voters also oppose Spending Taxpayer Dollars on Projects Connected to the Chinese Communist Party
|
Question 1): A clear majority of voters in the state, including those who voted for Proposal 3 last November, support retaining long-standing regulations on abortions that are currently threatened by the Reproductive Health Act, such as a ban on Medicaid funding for abortions, a 24-hour waiting period, a ban on partial-birth abortions, and parental and informed consent et al.
Also, voters in Michigan are overwhelmingly opposed to the state contributing funds to two battery plants in Michigan that are being built by American companies in partnership with companies affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). By a staggering 72% – 11% margin, Michigan voters do not want their tax dollars going to these projects.
As part of the Michigan Poll®, these questions commissioned by Lansing-based Marketing Resource Group were surveyed October 2-8 from 600 Michigan registered voters and have a margin of error of plus/minus 4%.
Voters were asked if the state of Michigan should be funding projects that have partnered with American companies affiliated or controlled by the CCP.
The poll showed overwhelming opposition to the state funding facilities with connections to the CCP, with every demographic, political group and geographical region of the state opposed. Sixty-six percent of the voters in West Michigan and 90% of the voters in Northern Michigan opposed the project funding even though the two battery plants are located in their areas. Union members opposed the project funding by a 76% – 7% margin even though they could benefit from the jobs created. Also opposed were some of Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s stronger supporters, including females (72% oppose), African Americans (68% oppose), and those who support the job the Governor is doing (59% oppose).
The poll also showed a clear majority of voters also favor keeping all existing restrictions on abortion, most of them with at least a 70% support. In fact, only 45% of voters who supported Proposal 3 say they did so believing in full-scale abortion on demand; a majority either did not so believe or were undecided. Indeed, 41% said they voted for Proposal 3 believing that it would restore the pre-Roe v. Wade landscape created by the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court last year, INCLUDING all existing state regulations.
So, why haven’t the results of these two poll questions been more widely reported in the news media, since they show that what the Governor and Legislature have been doing this year on these two issues is plainly at odds with public opinion?
Answer 1): It’s baffling that the news media has failed to pick up on this, other than to observe that the ‘legacy media’ skews left in favor of what the Democrats are trying to accomplish and want to suppress any information or data that damages the Democrats’ agenda. Also, the media are often lazy and unimaginative, falling back on the “narrative” that Proposal 3’s approval “settled” the question of abortion on demand — it’s here to stay, and it shouldn’t be tampered with, they assume. But the poll results should give an opportunity to Republicans. The GOP would be smart to leverage these poll findings as a bigger overall message that Democrats are out of touch with the majority of voters on a variety of issues –- not just abortion, but jobs and the economy, corporate subsidies, green energy, etc. Republicans should get back to being on the offense when it comes to issues that matter to voters. Polling (and common sense) show that House Minority Floor Leader Bryan Posthumus is right. Posthumus contends that if Democrats want to go out and sell their new “Reproductive Rights” package as something no different than a tooth extraction, they will find out the world is different than their bubble. As for the battery plants, whether voters feel uncomfortable with companies affiliated with the CCP or they just believe there are better uses for their tax dollars, they clearly oppose the state contributing funds to anything connected to the Chinese.
Michigan voters didn’t support the amount of dollars going to the Marshall plant to begin with, yet between site preparations and abatements the state of Michigan has contributed nearly two billion dollars to the construction costs of two new battery plants to be built in Michigan -– one in Big Rapids and one in Marshall. In March of this year, MRG released polling data showing voters opposed the Marshall battery plant by a 2:1 margin, (30% support and 61% opposed). By adding the information about the CCP, opposition has grown to better than 11:1. Clearly, voters don’t like this.
***********************************************
Question 2): There’s an obvious disagreement between the more aggressive freshman faction of the state House Democratic caucus and House Speaker Joe TATE (D-Detroit) over issues like financial disclosure, abortion rights, and other legislation pending during the remaining weeks of 2023. How serious of a problem is this for majority Democrats?
Answer 2): Democrats have done a very good job of staying united to achieve their policy goals in the first nine months of this year. Now, on certain issues, the Speaker’s team is working to ensure they are positioned for leadership over the long term and are not forcing members to take unnecessarily difficult votes during a sensitive time. Every legislative caucus has some form of division, and this is nothing new nor unmanageable. Managing the Speaker’s caucus has got to be a challenge, and its drive to the left on almost every issue certainly puts the Democrats’ majority at great risk. The bottom line is that they need all 56 votes, every time. And the Speaker has very little leverage over many of his members. So, they have to limit themselves to issues where they already have 56 reps in agreement, or where they’re close to 56 and the holdouts are willing to be convinced. On some issues — like financial disclosure — the renegade, largely freshmen wing of the caucus has public opinion on its side, and the Speaker might be wise to adopt their proposed amendments rather than simply go along with the flawed, loophole-ridden “sunshine” legislation that came over to the House from the Senate. If Tate doesn’t pay heed to the upstarts on this issue, he may find the Republicans will side with the progressive left and make Democrats in swing districts pay a price at the polls next year.
**************************************************
Question 3): Speaking of financial disclosure, how many state officials and/or candidates should be included? Proposal 1 mentions only state legislators and the four constitutional officers, but it doesn’t say other state officials should NOT be included in any reforms or strictures the Legislature might enact. So, what about the judiciary, from the Michigan Supreme Court on down through all appellate, circuit, district and probate court judges? With all the controversy swirling around U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his possible conflicts of interest, why shouldn’t Michigan use the opportunity afforded by Proposal 1 to get in front of the parade and tackle this issue head-on? Why not require financial disclosure in some form for all Michigan judges?
Answer 3): The judiciary SHOULD be included. Indeed, the House Democrats’ progressive freshmen have proposed including all statewide educational board members or candidates for those four boards (U-M, MSU, WSU and the SBE), even though these offices are not mentioned specifically in Proposal 1. So why not judges? Common Cause of Michigan says judges should be held to the same standard as those in the executive and legislative branches, but so far neither CC nor any other reform group nor the news media has pushed such a demand. It’s baffling.
****************************************************
Once again, excellent coverage and reporting on important public policy issues for Michigan citizens.
Highlighting the Legislature’s approach to abortion, a Chinese plant in Michigan, and public disclosure rules for public authorities, Mr. Ballenger illustrates once again how representative government, both in Michigan and nationwide, is working less and less well than our founders had hoped.
It is truly disgusting how little regard our elected representatives care to truly represent the interests of those who elected them and who pay their salaries.
“Consent of the governed” is becoming a quaint idea that once meant something.
Bill-
Judges already report and are the only elected State Officials currently required to report all income. This goes for all Judges, and, I believe, quasi Judicial officers (Magistrates , Referees, etc)..
Report goes to SCAO.
Excellent article, Bill, and spot on. As was your comment on “Off The Record” concerning Representative Whitsett, not that those who run the Democratic Party will agree with it.
QUESTION 1: Spot on. The MSM mantra seems to be “Blessed be the Narrative” © (with trademark pending). Some of them are lazy and find it much easier to simply go with the PR release. Some of them may have to try and fit in stories on this subject with the next two car crashes on the freeway they have to cover, along with the shooting on the east side or a store opening. Some are so ideologically rigid that they agree with Leonard Downie, formerly of the Washington Post, that objectivity should be thrown out with the trash in favor of some sort of “subjective truth” or “their” truth, both terms being oxymoronic and offensive. And some are stuck with corporate or editorial directives that command they do not cover stories like this if they wish to stay working.
As for abortion, Prop 3 was marketed as returning Michigan to status ante Dobbs and sold to the Michigan people that way. As I noted in a comment in the September 26, 2022 edition of TBR, that was a lie. And the authors and advocates for Prop 3 knew it was a lie. It was not what they meant. And the MSM also knew that and let it slide. Well, let me charitable here, they did not lie, they merely reconstructed the truth in a manner that did not reflect reality or the common meaning of the word “truth”. The only thing that has kept Michigan from becoming a state where the nation’s most prolific serial killer – Kermit Gosnell – could practice medicine was Representative Whitsett, and she could (and should) have held out for more restrictions. She should expect a primary challenge for her insolence and heresy.
As for the battery plants, the peasants getting restless disturbs “The Narrative” © and hence is barely covered. The scope and depth of the opposition crosses all sorts of lines. And it should be covered. Living here in suburban Detroit, I do not know if west Michigan TV stations are covering it, or if what’s left of the Grand Rapids Press and the other former Booth Newspapers are covering it, or even if Michigan Public Radio out there is covering it, but they should. And they – this includes not just the media but most importantly the politicians – should want to find out why there is this opposition. This requires a return to true objectivity, not the nonsense being espoused now by Leonard Downie.
To cover this objectively will lead, I believe, to finding two primary sources of opposition. First, the people recognize Red China as an existential threat to us as a nation and our way of life. As a result of that, they see no real reason we should help exacerbate that threat. Like trading with Hitler in the 1930s or before his declaring war on us in December 1941 was a bad idea, helping Red China is equally bad. Corporate profits and executive compensation be damned. The nation comes first.
That line of thought is not just a threat to corporate profits and executive compensation, it attacks what has become a secular religion. On the political left, climate change (formerly known as global cooling then global warming) is a tenet of faith. Anything, and I mean anything, that challenges that is an act of heresy that must be suppressed. Heretics are no longer burned at the stake, but they are branded as “deniers” and find it increasing difficult to get a hearing. Never mind that bringing about EVs and “clean energy” will require us to effectively strip mine the planet (and maybe a few asteroids) to get the copper, zinc, lithium, rare earth elements, molybdenum and other minerals needed to create the batteries, storage equipment and engines needed for this ‘green paradise’ by multiples of at least 4. (To see a good analysis of this, I would recommend any of the videos done on this subject by Peter Zeihan on Zeihan on Geopolitics). The faith is the faith. Dissent is not tolerated.
And this leads to a populist surge that tends to favor Donald Trump as the latest New York Times/Siena College poll shows. And that bothers them as well, but not enough to change course.
QUESTION 2: Spot on. As for disclosure, the legislature is taking an extreme minimalist approach. Speaker Tate could have tried to go bipartisan on this issue – and force the GOP to actually put up or shut up – but he decided to stick with his own party. Hence the result we have. The interesting thing will be to see how long the holdout Dems hold out, or if he will try to find some corporate GOP types who will sign on to this watered-down version of a short beer. Watching this unfold is interesting. In an effort to keep his party in line with a narrow majority, Speaker Tate seems willing to allow a fraud of transparency to masquerade as the real thing. Not exactly what the proponents of Prop 1 thought they were getting. Might be something the MSM should cover, “The Narrative” © be damned.
QUESTION 3: Damn straight the courts, as well as the elected education boards, should be covered. How do we find out about conflicts of interest otherwise? If the prospect of having the source one’s family wealth exposed or reported is so offensive to you, then don’t run for office. This is where the Democratic renegades, outliers, or whatever they are being called in hushed whispers in Lansing, should work with the GOP. They will get one of two results: a bill that actually does what the people thought they were voting for; or expose the GOP as all talk and no action. Either way, they win the policy fight. Re-election might be another matter.
Of course, this spectacle does not just apply to Michigan. DC Democrats and the MSM howl now about Clarence Thomas, but earlier we had Abe Fortas and there were issues with William O. Douglas at the time as well (from the article “Abe Fortas resigns from Supreme Court, May 15, 1969” by Andrew Glass from Politico May 14, 2017).
On this issue, the Democratic holdouts want us to be in lead on this issue and not bringing up the rear. In a fair world, they would prevail. Excellent article, Bill, and spot on. As was your comment on “Off The Record” concerning Representative Whitsett, not that those who run the Democratic Party will agree with it.
QUESTION 1: Spot on. The MSM mantra seems to be “Blessed be the Narrative” © (with trademark pending). Some of them are lazy and find it much easier to simply go with the PR release. Some of them may have to try and fit in stories on this subject with the next two car crashes on the freeway they have to cover, along with the shooting on the east side or a store opening. Some are so ideologically rigid that they agree with Leonard Downie, formerly of the Washington Post, that objectivity should be thrown out with the trash in favor of some sort of “subjective truth” or “their” truth, both terms being oxymoronic and offensive. And some are stuck with corporate or editorial directives that command they do not cover stories like this if they wish to stay working.
As for abortion, Prop 3 was marketed as returning Michigan to status ante Dobbs and sold to the Michigan people that way. As I noted in a comment in the September 26, 2022 edition of TBR, that was a lie. And the authors and advocates for Prop 3 knew it was a lie. It was not what they meant. And the MSM also knew that and let it slide. Well, let me charitable here, they did not lie, they merely reconstructed the truth in a manner that did not reflect reality or the common meaning of the word “truth”. The only thing that has kept Michigan from becoming a state where the nation’s most prolific serial killer – Kermit Gosnell – could practice medicine was Representative Whitsett, and she could (and should) have held out for more restrictions. She should expected a primary challenge.
As for the battery plants, the peasants getting restless disturbs “The Narrative” © and hence is barely covered. The scope and depth of the opposition crosses all sorts of lines. And it should be covered. Living here in suburban Detroit, I do not know if west Michigan TV stations are covering it, or if what’s left of the Grand Rapids Press and the other former Booth Newspapers are covering it, or even if Michigan Public Radio out there is covering it, but they should. And they – this includes not just the media but most importantly the politicians – should want to find out why there is this opposition. This requires a return to true objectivity, not the nonsense being espoused now by Leonard Downie.
To cover this objectively will lead, I believe, to finding two primary sources of opposition. First, the people recognize Red China as an existential threat to us as a nation and our way of life. As a result of that, they see no real reason we should help exacerbate that threat. Like trading with Hitler in the 1930s or before his declaring war on us in December 1941 was a bad idea, helping Red China is equally bad. Corporate profits and executive compensation be damned. The nation comes first.
That line of thought is not just a threat to corporate profits and executive compensation, it attacks what has become a secular religion. On the political left, climate change (formerly known as global cooling then global warming) is a tenet of faith. Anything, and I mean anything, that challenges that is an act of heresy that must be suppressed. Heretics are no longer burned at the stake, but they are branded as “deniers” and find it increasing difficult to get a hearing. Never mind that bringing about EVs and “clean energy” will require us to effectively strip mine the planet (and maybe a few asteroids) to get the copper, zinc, lithium, rare earth elements, molybdenum and other minerals needed to create the batteries, storage equipment and engines needed for this ‘green paradise’ by multiples of at least 4. (To see a good analysis of this, I would recommend any of the videos done on this subject by Peter Zeihan on Zeihan on Geopolitics). The faith is the faith. Dissent is not tolerated.
And this leads to a populist surge that tends to favor Donald Trump as the latest New York Times/Siena College poll shows. And that bothers them as well, but not enough to change course.
QUESTION 2: Spot on. As for disclosure, the legislature is taking an extreme minimalist approach. Speaker Tate could have tried to go bipartisan on this issue – and force the GOP to actually put up or shut up – but he decided to stick with his own party. Hence the result we have. The interesting thing will be to see how long the holdout Dems hold out, or if he will try to find some corporate GOP types who will sign on to this watered-down version of a short beer. Watching this unfold is interesting. In an effort to keep his party in line with a narrow majority, Speaker Tate seems willing to allow a fraud of transparency to masquerade as the real thing. Not exactly what the proponents of Prop 1 thought they were getting. Might be something the MSM should cover, “The Narrative” © be damned.
QUESTION 3: Damn straight the courts, as well as the elected education boards, should be covered. How do we find out about conflicts of interest otherwise? If the prospect of having the source one’s family wealth exposed or reported is so offensive to you, then don’t run for office. This is where the Democratic renegades, outliers, or whatever they are being called in hushed whispers in Lansing, should work with the GOP. They will get one of two results: a bill that actually does what the people thought they were voting for; or expose the GOP as all talk and no action. Either way, they win the policy fight. Re-election might be another matter.
Of course, this spectacle does not just apply to Michigan. DC Democrats and the MSM howl now about Clarence Thomas, but earlier we had Abe Fortas and there were issues with William O. Douglas at the time as well (from the article “Abe Fortas resigns from Supreme Court, May 15, 1969” by Andrew Glass from Politico May 14, 2017).
On this issue, the Democratic holdouts want us to be in lead on this issue and not bringing up the rear. In a fair world, they would prevail. So in keeping with the goal of fairness, let me paraphrase what the Fifth Dimension sang in the 1960s, “Let the sun shine, let the sunshine in.” But I am not holding my breath.
The only poll that I heed is the “Right/wrong direction of the country poll. If opinion polls were the laws, slavery would be a protected institution in the USA. A Democracy is two wolves and a sheep discussing the supper menu. A Republic is two wolves and a well-armed sheep discussing the supper menu.
Excellent analysis right on point I wish everyone in the state could read this analysis of this legislation. I completely agree with Dr Zako