Detroit News. February 20, 2019
House GOP smart to keep focus bipartisan
Michigan House Republicans, led by Speaker Lee Chatfield, R-Levering, unveiled their Action Plan for the 100th Legislature Tuesday. It correctly prioritizes bipartisan issues such as civil asset forfeiture reform, fixing the roads and lowering car insurance for Michigan drivers.
These are important goals for lawmakers - and the state - and they are also a reasonable set of priorities given the current divided government. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, has also said she supports several of these key initiatives.
The GOP Action Plan is an opportunity for Republicans and Democrats to come together on issues that affect the daily lives of Michigan residents.
The plan, authored by the Policy Action Plan Committee chaired by Rep. Aaron Miller, R-Sturgis, focuses on five broad points: building Michigan’s future; defending the American way; standing up for the most vulnerable; protecting people and communities; and continuing Michigan’s comeback.
Where bipartisan agreement is most likely to be found, lawmakers should prioritize these policies.
Underlying the entire plan is a greater call for transparency for government by expanding Freedom of Information Act requests in Michigan to include the Legislature, the governor and the lieutenant governor.
These changes are long overdue, and the Republicans should be lauded for their efforts. Whitmer similarly issued an executive directive at the beginning of the month to ensure prompt responses for public record requests.
On the first day of the new legislative session, the Michigan House Republicans introduced a bill to remove the exemptions on the governor and lieutenant governor, and create a new Legislative Open Records Act to make nearly everything lawmakers do subject to public scrutiny.
Michigan is one of only two states that still has those exemptions, and getting rid of them would be an early bipartisan win for the Legislature.
The most potentially divisive issue in the Action Plan is a commitment by the House GOP to protect the proposed tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac which would house the Line 5 oil pipeline.
Whitmer has already asked Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel for an opinion on whether she can block the construction of the tunnel setting up a likely future political fight.
Regardless of what happens on the pipeline, lawmakers and the governor should be able to find plenty of room for common ground in the House agenda.
They’ll almost certainly disagree about the best way to solve some of the state’s longstanding problems, such as the condition of its roads, but both sides will need to compromise to find solutions that benefit all Michiganians.
___
The Mining Journal. February 18, 2019
Whitmer speech dress gets much downstate attention
By now, many readers are aware of the media dust up that took place last week about the clothing Gov. Gretchen Whitmer wore to her first State of the State address, specifically her blue dress.
One of the local television stations in that part of the state, Fox 2, did a story following the speech that, in part, cited online comments about Whitmer’s dress, some of which were vulgar and derogatory.
The station was criticized by some for doing the story in the first place. And station representatives have said, among other things, that the story was meant to call out online trolls.
For her part, Whitmer said she has been getting teased for many years. “My mom said ’hold your head high and don’t let it bother you.’ . I’m tough, I can take it,” she said.
As a practical matter, we believe anything the governor does or doesn’t do while in office is fair game for coverage, even her choice of wardrobe and what others think about that. So the T.V. station was well within its rights in airing the report. That said, we’d argue the bigger - and more compelling - questions emerging from Whitmer’s SOTS was how she plans to underwrite fixing the roads, education, free community college and the rest of her program.
So while the TV station didn’t necessarily do anything wrong, internet trolls, like a lot of what’s online these days, should be ignored.
___
Traverse City Record-Eagle. February 22, 2019
The wet blanket rule just won’t fit all sizes
Wanna start an uproar? Churn up the waters? Institute an alcohol ban on parts of some of Michigan’s prettiest, most popular paddling rivers.
Backlash to the Huron-Manistee National Forest ban announced early this month was swift and sure, and within a week of the announcement, the rule tipped into “delayed” status.
The rollout was admittedly rocky - an accidental typo in the original statement called for an “up to 5-years in prison” punishment, which seemed extreme, even for the people supporting the ban.
(It was actually punishable by a maximum $5,000 fine and up to six months behind bars).
But that’s the thing with a one-size-fits-all kind of policy; it takes the ability for reasoned judgment out of the equation.
People wince at the image of that sweet couple in their canoe, celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary with a glass of wine, and ending up in the clink.
It’s too easy to envision the trouble with this blanket rule; the exceptions, the lack of reasoned judgments and the by-the-book types who feel obligated to crack down on all of us as a matter of principle.
But we also hear the frustration from the people who deal with the ugly underbelly of river boozin.’
Our own Traverse Area Paddle Club has organized more than 50 cleanups on the Pine River alone. They liken the aftermath to “Animal House.”
It’s not all good, clean fun to them. They pick up vast amounts of our litter, rescue the drunken capsized, and have endured unfriendly, obnoxious partiers who care not a whit about the resource - they’re entitled to their good time, damn the consequences.
We’d like to float an alternative, middle of the river approach: Enforce existing nuisance rules for trespassing, urinating, littering, public drunkeness and underage drinking.
We realize this is easy to say, and not easy to do given the level of law enforcement staffing compared to these big party summer weekends.
We know it’s a federal issue, but we have some good examples of programs that work on the state organization and nonprofit level. The DNR’s Riverwatch (to prevent salmon snagging during the aggressive fishing crush at Tippy Dam), or Sturgeon for Tomorrow’s camping weekends, have found ways to use volunteer patrols - who don’t confront but only report - to be the eyes for the experts.
We think only law enforcement trained in de-escalation should interact with the problematic public.
Volunteers could instead ask paddlers for returnables and trash at pressure points in the river as a service to paddlers; the returnable money used for walkie-talkies, garbage bags and cool T-shirts.
If that doesn’t cover it, maybe beef up the current watercraft permit program on the Pine or institute others on the Manistee and Au Sable.
We believe that people like to be a part of the solution - especially when it’s easy enough to paddle over to a friendly, helpful person who takes your garbage, and could impart some interpretive information about the resource they share.
Our rivers aren’t dumping grounds, port-a-potties or party highways. They’re shared, they’re important and they can be dangerous to drunk people and drunk people can be dangerous to them and on them.
But we can learn lessons from our rivers, too, and try to go with the flow instead of throwing up obstructions.
___
Please read our comment policy before commenting.