At long last, we’re coming into the home stretch of a long, loooong election campaign.
Yes, many of us are ready for it to be over, and yes, there are all sorts of important races on the ballot. But take a minute to think about some vital ones that aren’t getting that much attention.
In many ways, the ones that should matter most to us in Michigan are the contests for 110 seats in the House of Representatives. Every seat is up for grabs, and more than half involve incumbent lawmakers. There are 45 open seats, however, most ones where incumbents have been term-limited out of office.
The winners will have a heavy load on their plates. Michigan’s economy has been in the dumps for years, and the recent Wall Street meltdown and the coming national recession can’t help matters.
These are uncertain times for all of us. But this much IS certain:
Michigan is at an important hinge in our history. The decisions we will make over the next few years will go a long way to determine the kind of state we’ll have in the next half century, or longer. Starting with this year’s vote and continuing through the watershed election of 2010, Michigan voters will overhaul our political leadership almost completely. Michiganders say over and over again they’re disappointed there’s so much political sniping between the parties. They want much more bipartisan collaboration in Lansing.
The media tend to cover elections by concentrating on the big politically contentious questions such as abortion, tax policy, stem cell research and medical marijuana.
What they seldom look at is how the candidates propose to work together — something essential if we are ever to make any progress. Very little attention is paid to areas where candidates can find common ground, instead of merely scoring partisan points.
You may find candidates or their advocates knocking on your front door over the next couple of weeks. Here’s an idea — instead of just shutting the door or taking their literature, consider asking them these questions. They might serve as a quick guide to help you make up your mind for whom and how to vote:
1) What is your vision of what Michigan should be? What strategies and tactics do you propose to get us there? How exactly do you fit your vision for our state into your budget priorities?
For example, if you think Michigan should be spending more on our colleges and universities, what specific areas would you cut to free up the money for higher education?
2) What far-reaching strategies do you have to reform and improve our state? If you want to restore the Great Lakes to health, how will you partner with your fellow legislators and business and community leaders to get there? How will you see that your goal is treated with the urgency it deserves? How will you focus political will to advance your strategy?
3) Why do you think it has been so difficult for Michigan to adopt far-reaching strategies to reform and improve our state? Can you point to an occasion when you have bucked your party’s orthodoxy or stood up to the leaders of your caucus?
Neither party has a monopoly on good ideas. Nor is one party alone responsible for all the problems. But if you listen to the talk coming out of Lansing, it too often sounds that way. So ask your would-be lawmaker: When confronted by a really good idea from the other side, will you have the guts to push partisanship aside and collaborate?
4) Recent polls show voters are looking for bipartisan cooperation. So ask your candidate: How, exactly, will you work toward that? Under what circumstances will you collaborate with your opposition colleagues? Are you willing to take heat and threats from the important special interests that fund your party, whether we’re talking about organized labor or Right To Life?
Beyond a doubt, the sooner those running for state offices get beyond partisan dogma and thoughtfully address questions like these, the sooner Michigan can get on the road to recovery.
So, when candidates knock on your door or shake your hand consider posing these questions. If you get blank stares, consider whether that candidate deserves your vote. If you receive thoughtful, solid answers, you just might be onto somebody you can support.
***
Editor’s Note: Former newspaper publisher and University of Michigan Regent Phil Power is a longtime observer of Michigan politics and economics, and a former chairman of the Michigan chapter of the Nature Conservancy. He is also the founder and president of The Center for Michigan, a centrist think-and-do tank which publishes the Michigan Scorecard. The opinions expressed here are Power’s own and do not represent the official views of The Center. He welcomes your comments at ppower@thecenterformichigan.net.
2 Comments
I like this sentence, Phil:
“3) Why do you think it has been so difficult for Michigan to adopt far-reaching strategies to reform and improve our state? Can you point to an occasion when you have bucked your party’s orthodoxy or stood up to the leaders of your caucus?”
…especially the phrase ‘party’s orthodoxy’.
It helps me think through the issues if I start with the body of liberal and the body of conservative thought — as imperfect as my understanding is of each. Democrats seem to ‘brand’ the body of liberal thought; Republicans seem to ‘brand’ the body of conservative thought; albeit in either case, the branding template appears to be a sloppy approximation for either party.
As a result, you cannot help but make ad hominum connections between personalities and the underlying liberal or conservative philosophies. (Frankly, I do not even know if liberalism or conservatism should even be regarded as polar opposite philosophies – you’d think so based on the ‘plebeian-versus- patrician’ monologues each party throws at each other.)
So when you say, ‘party orthodoxy’ I know exactly what you mean from a political branding point of view. I struggle with how a compromise position could be formulated in terms of liberalism and conservatism that would get Michigan out of its political deadlock. There is too much “noise” in the branding of each party.
I bought a copy of “The Conservative Mind” by Russell Kirk, last summar at Border’s and read it “for fun” on a very liberal beach in northern Europe. Kirk, by the way, is a Michigander, now deceased, who, early in his career took a swing at trying to compile conservative thinking over the centuries.
If you are looking for a book that gets mainly to the ideas of conservatism — without all that branding and ad hominum noise — you may be disappointed. I was; but I recognize the book as the best in class. (Michiganders should also be proud that we had such a mind working at MSU about 50 years ago.)
If someone out there knows of a book that tries to do something similar with the body of liberal thought starting from, say Gibbon — possibly by a Michigander — please let us know. (There I did it myself — I had to take an ad hominum shortcut)
Together, the two books might be required reading for those in Michigan seeking political office. It might help future leaders to see Michigan possibilities in terms of ideas instead of personalities.
Hope this helps.
There is a condensed version of Russell Kirk’s views calle Ten Conservative Principles avalable on the website http://www.kirkcenter.org track Russell Kirk then “Thougt” for a link to it. Reading The Conservative Mind is a major commitment but this essay gives the executive summary.