• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • News
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
  • Contact

The Ballenger Report

Bill Ballenger: #1 Political Pundit in Michigan
All the Truth, All the Time
Michigan's Only "No Spin Zone"
Who is Running for What? Who Will Win?
Can Democrats Seize Total Control of Michigan Government in 2022?
Flint Water Crisis: What's Really Going On!
Politicians
Politicians
You are here: Home / Uncategorized / WOULD IMPEACHING GRETCHEN WHITMER REALLY ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING?

WOULD IMPEACHING GRETCHEN WHITMER REALLY ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING?

November 25, 2020 by tbreport 4 Comments

Impeachment: Is It Truly Michigan’s Thermonuclear Option?

Almost certainly not, because impeachment in and of itself doesn’t really matter if conviction does not follow.

No U.S. president or governor of Michigan has ever been removed from office involuntarily.

But that hasn’t deterred state Rep. Beau LaFave (R-Iron Mountain) from introducing House Resolution 324, which calls for impeaching Gov. Gretchen Whitmer for “corrupt conduct in office and crimes and misdemeanors.” This measure, co-sponsored by state Reps. Matt Maddock (R-Milford) and Daire Rendon (R-Lake City) requires a simply majority vote of the state House of Representatives to pass and be sent to the state Senate for a trial. Conviction and removal of Whitmer from office would require a 2/3 Senate majority, which will never happen because the 22 Republicans who control the chamber would need four Democratic votes to reach the 26-vote threshold. Democrats have Whitmer’s back, no matter what, and will never allow this to happen.

In fact, a case could be made that impeachment isn’t really much more significant than censure, in which an official can be admonished by his or her peers but still remains in office. Impeachment is more like a grand jury indictment, which does not always result in conviction.

Most students know from their high school civics classes — and from very recent history — that only three U.S. Presidents have ever been impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives: Andrew Johnson (1868), William Jefferson Clinton (1998) and, just this year, Donald J. Trump. However, in the U.S. Senate, where, as in Michigan, a two-thirds vote is required to convict, none of these presidents was removed from office.

Impeachment hasn’t been any more effective in Michigan, either. No governor has ever been an impeachment target.

Michigan has had four state Constitutions (1835, 1850, 1908 and 1963). Each of those Constitutions had provisions for impeachment of state officers similar to the impeachment provisions in the U.S. Constitution. Yet, in the entire history of the State of Michigan, only two state officers, one of them a judge, have ever been impeached by the Michigan House of Representatives, and only the judge was convicted. Here is that story:

The 1850 Constitution made a number of state offices elected positions, or provided that by statute they could be elected. One of those was state Land Commissioner. In 1871, the Prohibition (abstinence from alcohol) movement was influential in having the Legislature enact PA 79 of 1871, which provided that drunkenness of a public official shall be good cause for his removal from office. On March 19 of 1872, 26 citizens of the city of Lansing filed a petition with state Rep. Ira Grosvenor, a Republican from Monroe County, asking that misdemeanor charges be brought against Charles A. Edmonds, a Republican from Coldwater, who was the elected state Land Commissioner. The petition alleged that Edmonds and his office clerks were engaged in drinking, carousing and visiting places of ill repute.

Rep. Grosvenor presented the petition on March 22, 1872, to his colleagues in the state House, of whom 71 were Republicans (only 29 Democrats). That same day, a five-member Select Committee was appointed to investigate the charges in the petition. The Committee proceeded to investigate not only the drinking and whoring but also allegations of private speculation by Edmonds and his clerks, using their “inside” knowledge. Within five days, the Select Committee issued its report recommending that an impeachment motion be filed against Edmonds. The next day, March 28, the impeachment motion was passed, 79-5, in the 100-member chamber. Three House managers were then appointed to try the impeachment charges against Edmonds in the state Senate.

But then Gov. Henry Baldwin, also a Republican, threw a curve ball into the proceedings. He sent a message to the Legislature contending that, incredibly, no law existed under which the Senate could proceed to hold a trial of impeachment that might lead to expulsion.

In response to the Governor’s message, the House acted with lightning speed. The next day, a bill was introduced which rapidly advanced to second and third reading and was passed, 78-5. The bill was given immediate effect. In 1872, the Senate had no “five-day layover” rule as is currently found in Article V, Section 26, of Michigan’s current Constitution. Accordingly, the 32-member Senate also acted quickly, suspending the rules and passing the bill, 27-1, on March 30. Baldwin signed it. By the way, the composition of the Senate was also lopsidedly Republican — 27 GOP, just five Democrats.

Here’s another wrinkle — the 1850 Michigan Constitution provided that no impeachment trial in the Senate could commence until the final adjournment of the Legislature. As a result, the impeachment trial of Charles Edmonds did not begin until April 11, after the Legislature had adjourned sine die (they did that in the spring in those days).

Eleven articles of impeachment were leveled against Edmonds. He was charged with corruptly withholding land from sale for the benefit of certain land-dealers in return for money paid to himself and/or his deputies and clerks; engaging in the purchase of state lands sold in his office; deciding that certain lands in the possession of settlers who had failed to file their proof of settlement and occupancy with his office were subject to sale; furnishing secret information concerning such lands to land dealers in whose profits he shared; engaging in the sale of swamp-land script; appointing and keeping in his office clerks of bad habits and character and allowing those clerks to purchase land from his office and sell information to land-dealers; depositing in the state treasury swamp-land script; sending from a post office in Indiana an obscene newspaper he published that was entitled “Every Saturday Night”; and, finally, disgracing himself by drunkenness and committing adultery in the city of Lansing during his term of office.

The trial lasted until May 22, at which time the Senate voted on all 11 articles of impeachment. Edmonds was acquitted of all charges. On some charges, only one senator voted guilty. Some charges were unanimous in Edmonds’s favor, to acquit. However, on three charges a majority of senators found him guilty, but not by the two-thirds vote required to convict and remove him from office. For the curious student of history, the vote on the drunkenness charge was a unanimous “Not Guilty.” On the adultery charge, there was only one “Guilty” vote. So Edmonds survived, but only for the duration of his two-year term. Beginning in 1873, there was a new state Land Commissioner. Politically, Edmonds was never heard from again.

On impeachment, was the Edmonds brouhaha the end of things? No. Nearly three-quarters of a century later, in 1943, one Michael E. Nolan, a Gogebic Co. probate judge, was impeached by the House for padding his expense account by charging excessive fees for marriage licenses. 722 secret marriages were performed in Gogebic County between 1938 and 1942. Judge Nolan was convicted by the Senate and removed from office in 1943 — the only time in Michigan history this ever happened.

Recall and Expulsion

Michigan does provide other options for removing public officials besides impeachment. One of them is defeat for re-election.

At the local level, incumbents are often defeated. In the Aug. 2, 2016, primary election, for example, four of the nine Genesee Co. commissioners were ousted at the polls. In Emmet County, all incumbent county commissioners lost. Same thing happened in various local jurisdictions this year, such as three incumbents on the Traverse City Area Public Schools (TCAPS) board.

But defeating incumbent officeholders at the state and federal levels in Michigan is difficult if not impossible. The last incumbent federal and statewide elected officials to suffer defeat at the ballot box in Michigan were James Blanchard for Governor in 1990; Richard Austin for Secretary of State in 1994; Spencer Abraham for U.S. Senator in 2000; state Supreme Court justices Clifford Taylor in 2008, Alton Davis in 2010, and Kurtis Wilder in 2018; and a handful of Congressmen.

Is there anything else? Yes, there are other ways to get rid of politicians whom the citizenry decides for various reasons they don’t like. It’s important to note, though, that they hardly ever happen

One way is recall. In fact, Michigan and Oregon were the first two states to provide for recall of elected public officials, beginning in 1908. Today, 17 other states also provide for recall of state officials.

But it’s now tougher to recall state officials than it used to be. Under amendments to Michigan’s recall law enacted in 2012, approved petition language has a shelf life of only 180 days. Signatures must be collected within a 60-day time frame within that 180-day window. An effort to recall Whitmer’s predecessor, Rick Snyder,  didn’t come close to succeeding.

No Michigan governor has ever been recalled, and only three state legislators: state Senators Phil Mastin and David Serotkin, both in 1983, and state Rep. Paul Scott in 2011.

Recall under both the 1908 and 1963 Michigan Constitutions excluded judges. Impeachment was the only way to remove a sitting judge until the adoption of a constitutional amendment in 1968 creating, in Article VI, Section 30, a Judicial Tenure Commission which may recommend to the Supreme Court that a judge be censured, suspended, retired or removed from the bench.

How about expulsion?

The current (1963) Michigan Constitution, in Article IV, Section 16, provides that each legislative chamber may expel a member with concurrence of two-thirds of all members elected and serving. Yet only four lawmakers have been expelled in all of Michigan history: state Rep. Milo Dakin in 1887; state Rep. Monte Geralds in 1978; state Senator David Jaye in 2001; and state Rep. Cindy Gamrat in 2015.

Back to impeachment. Any action against Whitmer under HR 324 would have to be accomplished before year’s end, when the 100th Legislature adjourns sine die. Nothing is likely to happen in the next five weeks, even a committee hearing, because House Speaker Lee Chatfield (R-Levering) has announced that the resolution will not be taken up. But Chatfield’s final term is up at the end of next month, and so is that of Jason Sheppard (R-Lambertville), chairman of the Government Operations Committee, in which the measure is lodged. The resolution will have to be reintroduced in the 101st Legislature and then could be a ticking time bomb for nearly two years through 2022, when Whitmer is expected to seek re-election.

Will incoming Speaker Jason Wentworth (R-Farwell) be any more hospitable to HR 324 than Chatfield? Doubtful, because he doesn’t want to make a martyr out of the embattled governor, no matter how divisive and polarizing she may be during the next 25 months.

*************************************

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Jerome Dallas Winegarden says

    November 25, 2020 at 11:30 am

    Interesting historical data however realistically when are the voters going to realize that these Republican lackeys should be permanently put out of office? To attempt to steal the rights of the people TO gain notoriety is outrageous. Especially when governor Gretchen Whitmer is doing an outstanding job protecting the health safety and public welfare in a pandemic! shameful conduct!

    Reply
  2. Lisa Harris Haverdink says

    November 25, 2020 at 1:42 pm

    As we have witnessed, it’s near next to impossible to remove anyone. We have seen voter fraud. It was witnessed, and yet nothing can be done?! So why would the majority of Michigan residents believe the governor could be impeached and removed for destroying our wonderful state? Her husband was allowed free rein to travel the state when the strictest of mandates were in place. Our whole political system is a farce.

    Reply
  3. Timothy K Sullivan says

    November 25, 2020 at 8:35 pm

    She won’t be impeached and removed from office. Like too much going on in government – at all levels by both parties – this is activity masquerading as accomplishment. Reminds me too much of time working for the State before my retirement.

    Reply
    • Doug Reed says

      November 28, 2020 at 12:30 pm

      This is an excellent post! “activity masquerading as accomplishment”. I have seen so much of this in both the public and private sectors. Management 101 says “doing something is better than doing nothing” even if there is no net result.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter Sign-up

Receive The Ballenger Report in your inbox!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Follow on twitter

Tweets by @Bill_Ballenger
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Upcoming Ballenger Events

  • Mar
    31
    "Off the Record," MICHIGAN PUBLIC TELEVISION, WKAR.ORG, EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN
    All Day
  • © 2023 · The Ballenger Report · Login · Sitemap

    Support The Ballenger Report - Contribute Today!

    Thank you for visiting! You have let us know that what we produce about Michigan politics and government matters to you. More people than ever are reading and listening to what we put on our news site, and the 2022 election was especially momentous. Your support makes all the difference.

    As you know, unlike many news websites, we haven’t put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism as open as we can, but we need to ask for your help. We are editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism remains truly free from commercial influence or bias. We are not subsidized. We don’t put up paid advertisements. No one edits our Editor. No one steers our opinion.

    But The Ballenger Report (TBR) takes time, money and hard work to produce. If everyone who reads or listens to our material — and likes it! — helps to support it, our future would be much more secure.

    Whatever you might want to contribute will help TBR continue. Thank you.

    Contribute to The Ballenger Report