The race is on for the most coveted seat in Michigan: the governorship. But the question remains whether the candidates are good enough to energize voter turnout across the state. Since we were introduced to the various candidates running for both the Republican and Democratic parties I have been wondering if Michigan has been cursed this year, partly because of the most dismal economy the state has seen in a long time. None of the men running for governor appear to have any fire in their stomach, to make voters grasp the urgency of the issues at stake.
We’ve seen more bickering and the hurling of insults among the candidates, whether it is through television ads or press releases than a real exchange of ideas to help a sinking Michigan.
So in a real sense, people like myself who have been observing the process have concluded that the possibility of low voter turnout is real and the chances are higher that someone will slip into the governor’s mansion without real public scrutiny. When the public shows little appetite for change because those running are not motivational, there is a real danger that the next chief executive will be a clueless governor.
And like a train wreck we may be headed for a tragic experience because the ship of state would have lost its vision of driving Michigan to a comeback. If the candidates are not willing to lay all their cards on the table, the public must demand it because, make no mistake, this election has serious consequences.
Democrats Andy Dillon and Virg Bernero have not offered us a real insight into their plans through public debates, which is a serious blunder. While they are duking it out talking to voters, they missed an opportunity to make their cases clear in a public debate, describing how they will run Michigan if elected. The decision not to engage each other in debate does nothing to stimulate voter turnout. How can they expect voters to show up in mass numbers at the polls if they are not willing to make it clear what they are capable of doing? Voters want to analyze the candidates — when they are face to face with each other. Then they can make a better informed decision at the polls.
Republican candidates Pete Hoekstra, Mike Cox, Rick Snyder, Tom George and Mike Bouchard cannot come to terms with who would be the likely nominee, the same guessing game that is alive in the Dillon-Bernero campaign. But for some of the leading Republican candidates, such as Hoekstra, Cox and Bouchard, its clear that their run for the top office is more than saving Michigan. They also see their campaigns as a battle against President Obama.
For example, Cox joined a legal battle after the passage of the historic health care legislation in Congress to repeal the measure. He argued that Michiganders should have the right to choose if they want to be part of the health measure. He never talked about addressing the health care disparities affecting communities of color, including Detroit. Despite the fact that the health care reform will help 32 million people with health care needs, Cox is bent on removing Michigan from the list of states that would benefit. Certainly Attorney General Cox got a lot of national publicity in his challenge of the health care legislation, the kind of attention anyone challenging the president would get.
Congressman Hoekstra also made it clear that he supports Cox’s position on the health care issue. I’m yet to hear of any Republican candidate who supports the health care legislation. And, of course, there is immigration, the new political punching bag everyone wants to use for their benefit, and let’s not forget the economic stimulus package that Republicans have opposed every step of the way.
Indeed, the stakes are high for Michigan.
The GOP candidates, except for Synder, the moderate leaning candidate who has not been clear about his positions with reference to President Obama’s economic program, are set to wage a battle with Obama.
The questions must be asked: Will the next Republican governor pander to the right at the expense of Michigan taxpayers by rejecting federal programs aimed at easing the economic recession in the state? Will Michigan be forced to opt out of the health care legislation passed in Congress with a Republican governor in office?
There is a lot for voters to think about as they head to polls on Aug. 3. The candidates should have answered these questions in a real debate. If they love Michigan as they all profess to, they should put people’s lives ahead of partisan politics. It should not matter which president passed a health care legislation that will benefit thousands of Michiganders. What should matter is that those who have long been cut out of health care, including senior citizens, can now breath a sigh of relief.
The state right now needs jobs and if federal programs sanctioned by the Obama administration will help us recover, they should not be rejected like some Southern Republican governors were doing to get national attention. Some wrote Michigan off a long time ago and others will do so if the next governor spends his time pandering to partisan politics, thus playing with people’s lives.
Michigan cannot afford political games that have ordinary people’s lives on the edge and businesses deciding if they want to stay or leave.
It is clear that the major reason why the unemployment benefits have not been passed is because the GOP leadership in the U.S. Senate does not want to push forward anything that gives the Obama administration credit.
And that has developed, in part, to a dislike for the president. It’s okay to dislike the president as many in the Democratic camp did with former president Bush. But President Obama is not running for governor; he’s got a mandate that was given to him Nov. 4, 2008. The next governor must concentrate on reviving Michigan with all the help it can get from the federal government, not opposing any helping hand it receives.
But in order to do so, the public will have to demand that responsibility from all of the candidates. To quote Frederick Douglass, “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” That places the public without an option but to force the candidates to declare their real intentions.
IN THE 13TH Congressional District race there has been a heightened interest because incumbent Congresswoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, if polls are any indication, could lose to State Sen. Hansen Clarke, despite four other candidates being in the race.
Again this race has not yielded any debate that will afford voters the opportunity to hear and evaluate the candidates. After sitting down with Kilpatrick recently for an interview, I walked away with the impression that she is determined to not lose this race. She talked about her commitment to her district as the only member of the Michigan Congressional Delegation who sits on Appropriations. However, there is no doubt that the political scandal involving her son, former Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, could adversely affect her at the polls.
But I was a little disappointed that during the last congressional election — for which I moderated the debate at Perfecting Church that had Kilpatrick trailing former State Rep
Mary Waters — Kilpatrick, after winning, said she will decide when she wants to retire from Congress. That tone of political entitlement should not be suggested or implied by a veteran lawmaker, or any lawmaker. Now her words are coming back to haunt her. But in all fairness, she should be judged on the merits of her congressional representation. What has she done for her district? That is the main question voters should be asking.
Talking with Clarke, I observed his ambitious yet a steady approach to addressing the needs of the district. Clarke possesses almost all of the credentials to run, and he understands the issues facing the district as well as all of Michigan. Yet his candidacy might be risky to some because of his newcomer status. Does it put the congressional delegation a step back or forward is something voters have to ponder. But at the same time the wave of change taking over Washington may be just what the 13th District needs.
If Kilpatrick can convince voters that her reelection is not a public test of the overall Kilpatrick legacy in Detroit that has been stained because of the former mayor, she could win without much dificulty. If her supporters are willing to step out publicly and campaign and not just endorse her through press releases, she has a chance.
But if Clarke succeeds in painting her as belonging to the past and that it is a new era for politics, she could lose. If Kwame Kilpatrick appears in court two or more times before Aug. 3, she could be that much more likely to lose. One advantage Clarke has is that he and Kilpatrick are not far apart on the issues.
It remains to be seen if any game will change as the candidates pound the pavement for support.
Be sure to vote in the Aug. 3 Primary.
Watch “Center Stage With Bankole Thompson” on WADL-TV38 Detroit (Comcast Channel 4) Saturdays at 1 p.m. This Saturday’s show, July 24, will feature an exclusive conversation with leaders of Southwest Detroit’s Hispanic community about the battle to build a new bridge in their community that has riled Lansing. Jesse Brown of the Detroit Wholistic Center will share his view on how the alternative medical community is responding to the new health care legislation. E-mail bthompson@michronicle.com