Jack Lessenberry Essays and Interviews

Essay: Supreme Justice? - 1/21/2009

In my opinion, one of the best things to happen to the pursuit of justice in Michigan in the last few years has been the election of Marilyn Kelly as the new chief justice of the high court.

I have known Justice Kelly slightly for a long time, and have been very impressed by her intelligence, judicial temperament, and integrity. For years, both parties have used the court as a dumping ground for over-the-hill politicians. That’s not who she is.

She had been a brilliant young high school French teacher when she was unexpectedly elected to the state board of education at age 26. She told me she quickly learned that to really make a difference in this society, you need a law degree.

So, she went to Wayne State University and got one. She practiced law for a long time, spent six years on the Michigan Court of Appeals, and then was elected to the Supreme Court a dozen years ago. From time to time, I have talked to her about interesting past cases. She has never discussed with me any business then before the court, and I’ve never asked.

Michigan has just gone through a disgraceful period in which the court has been entirely dominated by a majority of four partisan ideologues, who were all too willing to endorse anything the Republican Party or the state Chamber of Commerce was for.

Their plan was to elect one of their number, Justice Robert Young, chief justice this year. But last fall, the leader of the gang of four, Justice Cliff Taylor was unexpectedly defeated for reelection.

That left the court with four Republican and three Democratic justices. But when the election for chief justice was held this month, the one independent-minded GOP justice, Elizabeth Weaver, crossed party lines to help elect Marilyn Kelly by a single vote.

That display of non partisanship was an encouraging sign. But unfortunately, that won’t be enough to fix one of the biggest problems affecting the court: Judicial elections, especially at the highest level, have become increasingly partisan and expensive. What‘s more, they are more and more subject to outside influences.

The American Justice Partnership, or AJP, is a conservative, pro-business interest group which, Bill Ballenger reported last week, funnels millions into high court races in various states, including Michigan. AJP failed last year in its main mission here, to re-elect then-Chief Justice Cliff Taylor, who lost in a landslide.

But by spending large amounts of money, AJP succeeded in ousting justices it didn’t like in Mississippi and even liberal Wisconsin. That’s not to say only conservatives are guilty of trying to influence judicial elections. Under Michigan law, a trial lawyer can contribute huge sums to finance Democratic ads without his - or her - identity being disclosed. Does that mean Geoffrey Fieger helped finance the famous sleeping-on-the-bench ad that did Cliff Taylor in?

What do you think? I think, as Chief Justice Kelly does, that citizens should have the right to elect their judges. But if what I just told you doesn’t bother you, I’d be surprised.

Hear Audio Story   

Essay: Bipartisan Spirit - 1/13/1009

I think we ought to be encouraged by House Minority Leader Kevin Elsenheimer’s attitude. He seems to recognize that Michigan is in a profound economic crisis, and that we are all in this together.

If his caucus in the legislature acts accordingly, that will be a powerful and positive change. And one that, in the long run, will be good for the Republican Party. Two years ago, many of our lawmakers -- especially Republicans -- embarrassed themselves all year by engaging in cynical partisan games instead of making an honest bipartisan effort to solve a huge deficit problem.

That’s not to say that the Democrats deserved any prizes for statesmanship -- they didn’t. The governor, who had just been reelected by a landslide and had political capital to spend, wouldn’t spend it. She appeared weak and vacillating, and wasn’t even willing to fight for a tax increase she proposed and which everybody knew was necessary. Much of the time, she even appeared out of sync with her party’s leaders in the legislature.

However, the Republicans were not only defiantly not part of the solution, they were utterly hypocritical. Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop and the man who was then House Minority Leader, Craig DeRoche, insisted the budget be balanced without tax increases, even though they offered no real solution as to how to get there. Privately, many Republicans admitted the state couldn’t survive without a tax increase.

Not, that is, without damaging essential programs. But they wanted Democrats to take all the blame. At the very last minute, just when the state was about to shut down, a few GOP votes were found to raise taxes -- but in an appallingly bad way.

Much of the increase came from a last-minute, half-baked surcharge on the Michigan business tax, something that hurt our ability to compete, damaging it much more than boosting the state income tax a little more would have done.

Republicans, however, reaped no political benefits. They were already a minority in the state house, a body whose districts were supposedly drawn in order to guarantee them a majority. Last year, they lost nine more seats. They are outnumbered 67 to 43.

So what can they do now? Their new leader is smart enough to realize that his party will gain nothing by merely continuing to denounce everything the Democrats propose.

That doesn’t mean the Democrats have any monopoly on wisdom. There certainly have been times when Republicans in Lansing have been both more prudent and more innovative.

We are going to need a lot of prudence, innovation and courage in the next few years. We are facing a national and state financial crisis more severe than anyone under age 75 has seen.

Things are going to get worse before they get better. Today’s voters need leaders who are statesmen. What’s ironic is that if Elsenheimer does fill that role, it won’t matter in two years.

Thanks to term limits, he’ll have to leave office, forever. If you want to fix our constitution, that’s precisely the place to start.

Hear Audio Story   

Interview: Kevin Elsenheimer - 1/13/09

Kevin Elsenheimer is the new House Minority leader in the Michigan Legislature. And, he’s got his work cut out for him. There are fewer Republicans in the House than at any time since 1980 and the state is facing a major budget deficit. Michigan Radio’s Jack Lessenberry spoke with the Republican leader about what he hopes to achieve in this year’s legislative session.

Hear Audio Story   

Interview: Mike Prusi - 1/9/09

State Senator Mike Prusi got an unexpected promotion to minority leader this year, after Mark Schauer was elected to Congress. That makes Prusi the top Democrat in the only part of state government that the Republicans control. Michigan Radio’s Jack Lessenberry spoke with him about what he hopes to achieve in the new legislative session. We'll hear from the New House Minority Leader next week.

Hear Audio Story   

Essay: New Senate Leader - 1/9/09

Mike Prusi, the new Democratic leader of the Michigan state senate, spent twenty years as an miner, five of them below the earth, mining iron ore. Some might say that being in the dark and the dirt for so long was excellent training for government.

Naturally, I would never say anything nasty like that. Prusi’s elevation to a leadership role represents both the best and the worst of term limits. What I like is the diversity his choice brings. He is from the most remote part of our state, and has a different background than the law and real estate pedigrees of many of our elected leaders.

He got the Democratic leadership job after six years in the senate and five in the house, which makes him one of the most experienced officeholders in Lansing. But alas, he has virtually no chance to grow on the job, or to try to turn his minority status into that of Senate majority leader in two years.

That’s because, thanks to term limits, he will be gone forever after next year’s election. In the meantime, he has to rally his little band of sixteen senators to do what they can.

Trouble is, they can’t do very much. Undoubtedly, every one of those senators, plus their Republican colleagues, have things they would like to get accomplished. There are projects they would like to see passed to benefit their constituents.

Many would like to see a comprehensive state health care plan, as Governor Jennifer Granholm promised a couple years ago. But there isn’t any money for any of that. There isn’t enough money to do the things they are doing now. This year, nobody is talking about raising taxes. Some lawmakers are hoping for a sudden windfall in the form of a big stimulus check from new President Barack Obama. But the smart ones aren’t holding their breath.

No - it is all about budget cuts. The question is, what to cut and where? Some tend to think we should try to protect education, especially higher education, at all costs.

Our state’s young adults are less educated than the national average, and we are moving into a century when Michigan will need an ever-more-highly educated work force, if we are to have any chance at attracting the jobs of the future.

Everyone knows this, and, incredibly, there is still a great temptation to cut higher education.

Everybody also knows that we spend more on prisons, and keep more people locked up, that any of our surrounding states.

There are cost savings that could be had here, such as releasing non-violent prisoners and putting them on tethers. But too many lawmakers fear seeming soft on crime.

But now we face a financial crisis of a scope not seen since the Great Depression. The fact is that unless the parties cooperate, Democrats are essentially irrelevant in the state senate; Republicans even more so in the house. And if they don’t learn to work together this year in a constructive way, they may well doom the state of Michigan to political irrelevance and financial disaster, as well.

Hear Audio Story   

Views expressed in the essays by Jack Lessenberry are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Michigan Radio, its management or the station licensee, The University of Michigan.

Essay: Stem Cells Revisited - 1/6/09

Money, an old California politician once said, is the mother’s milk of politics. That was true enough, but money is also essential to everything else, especially perhaps scientific research.

When it came to embryonic stem cell work, Michigan was a special case until last November. It was illegal to create embryonic stem cells in Michigan, until the voters approved a new constitutional amendment allowing it.

Most other states didn’t have such a ban, but not much research went on. That’s because President George W. Bush was adamantly opposed to it, and had forbidden that federal funds be used for it. That is, except for a few so-called cell “lines” that were already in use in 2001.

Californians appropriated a few billion for the purpose, but most other states didn’t have that kind of dough. As time went on, it became clear that Mr. Bush was clearly out of the mainstream on this issue --even within his own party. Three years ago, both houses of a Republican-controlled Congress passed a law restoring federal funding for stem cell work. But President Bush vetoed the bill, and vetoed it a second time the next year.

Two weeks from now, however, George Bush will be gone. New President Barack Obama is a strong supporter of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, and is expected to lift the ban. But the question is how, and when. There are two ways he could do it. First of all, President Obama could merely issue a presidential directive allowing the funding. That, after all, is what President Bush did when he denied the funding eight years ago.

Simple, easy; no muss and little fuss. However, not everyone thinks that is best. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi thinks it should be done by passing a law which the president would sign.

That would seem the way to do it in a democracy. But there are problems with that, too. Opponents might wage a nasty fight, creating an atmosphere of bitter division at the beginning of a tough economic year when a spirit of unity will be sorely needed.

Then, too, legislation takes time. On top of which our new president is going to have a very full plate. There are wars waging in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Gaza strip.

Plus, his absolute top priority is going to be to keep the United States economy from sinking into something that might be much worse than a recession. Incidentally, we here in the Midwest need President Obama to give some attention to saving the domestic auto industry. In other words, he has limited time for stem cell wars.

If I were advising him, I would suggest he lift the ban on federally funded research, with an executive order, and then suggest that Congress pass a bill when it has time.

However, once that is done, places like Michigan’s Center for Stem Cell Biology are going to have another problem: Finding federal funds they can apply for. In today’s economy, good luck with that.

Hear Audio Story   

Interview: Sean Morrison - 1/6/09

Michigan is now much more open to embryonic stem cell research, after voters amended the state constitution last fall. Sean Morrison is Director of the University of Michigan’s Center for Stem Cell Biology. Michigan Radio’s Jack Lessenberry spoke with him about what’s next for the science here in the state.

Hear Audio Story   

Essay: Electoral College - 12/15/2008

They are gathering in state capitols across America today, the five hundred and thirty eight members of the Electoral College, an arcane institution the authors of Our Constitution created.

Seventeen men and women are meeting in Lansing today, in a session presided over by Lt. Gov. John Cherry, and cast our votes for President. In Ohio, electors will vote to the accompaniment of a color guard and a musical interlude. In Pennsylvania and New York, there will be long and involved ceremonies. But in Iowa, the seven electors will just troop into a conference room, vote, and go home.

What’s happening today is, in fact, the real presidential election, the one that officially counts. What we the people did in November was to choose 365 electors pledged to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, and 173 pledged to John McCain and Sarah Palin.

We think that‘s what the vote will be today. But there are sometimes surprises. Four years ago, one of John Kerry‘s electors voted for John Edwards instead. In 2000, one elector refused to vote at all. Back in 1976, one of President Ford’s electors voted for Ronald Reagan instead. None of these so-called faithless electors has ever made a difference in the outcome.

By the way, this wasn’t how the founding fathers intended for this to work. They were wise, but they were naïve in that they didn’t foresee political parties. They thought we, or more accurately the legislature, would choose the wisest people in our state.

They then would get together, probably over some Madeira, and choose the best man in the country to lead us. If nobody got a nationwide majority, the House of Representatives would then pick the President from the top three candidates.

However, it took about five minutes for political parties to take this over. For many years, the electors have been nominated by the parties, and are expected to vote for that party’s candidates for president and vice-president if they win the popular vote in the state.

Mostly, the electors are relatively unknown party stalwarts, though this year, two of them are Teamsters leader James Hoffa and United Auto Workers’ president Ron Gettelfinger.

There are those who want to do away with the electoral college, and have the president elected by the national popular vote.

But if that were the case, Sterling Heights and Ada and Owosso would never see a candidate for president. Neither would Nevada.

They would spend all their time in TV studios, or in major metropolitan areas. What if we got rid of the electors themselves, the people, and have the awarding of electoral votes be automatic?

I don’t like that either. Some day, if our nation lasts long enough, some winning candidate for president will die, or have to be replaced between the day the people vote and the electoral college meets. When that day comes, the electors that year may have to do the job the founders intended, and pick the best person for the job.

And I think George Washington would like that.

Hear Audio Story   

Interview: John Kelly - 12/15/2008

You may have voted last month, but the real presidential election takes place today. All across America, members of the Electoral College are gathering in their state capitols to officially cast their ballot for President of the United States. Former State Senator John Kelly served as an elector from Michigan in 2000. Michigan Radio’s Jack Lessenberry spoke with him about what it’s like to take part in this official, political act.

Hear Audio Story   

Essay: Marijuana Mess - 12/4/2008

Dianne Byrum, who was just elected a Michigan State trustee, was a capable leader during her years in the state legislature. But last year, she played a new role as the spokesperson for two really messed up ballot initiatives.

She was first associated with the infamous Reform Government Now proposal, which attempted to rewrite much of the state constitution on the cheap in a way designed to improperly benefit the Democratic party. The courts rightly tossed that turkey off the ballot before it ever saw the light of day.

What is surprising to me is that some court, or the state board of canvassers, didn’t do the same thing with the medical marijuana ballot proposal, which passed almost two to one. For me, the problem isn’t medical marijuana.

The problem is that a high school civics class could have done a better job writing a proposal. It doesn’t specify how the patients are supposed to get the marijuana, other than saying that those eligible can grow small amounts.

Nor are there any standards for making sure the marijuana isn’t really some other kind of plant, or that it hasn’t been grown in a brownfield and just sprayed by the highway department. Instead, we’ve got officials scratching their heads and trying to figure out some way of implementing this poorly constructed law. What’s needed is legislation that would spell all this out.

Frankly, the state ought to be growing and selling any approved marijuana. For that matter, it would be a good idea to have some sort of clinic where patients could go smoke marijuana under approved supervision. That would make sense. And that’s not going to happen, even though you could easily structure this whole program to make money for our cash-strapped state. That’s primarily because our legislators don’t want to touch this with a ten-foot roach clip.

They fear being tagged as friendly to the drug culture, even though medical marijuana was overwhelmingly approved.

So what we have is a vast legal gray area. Most policemen and most police departments probably will observe a de facto don’t ask, don’t tell attitude.

Except, that is, when the marijuana buyers are under age. But you just know that somewhere out there, Patrolman Hot Dog will bust some poor glaucoma sufferer for trying to buy his marijuana. That will then turn into some sort of precedent-setting case, or maybe not. And then there will be another.

Anyway, that’s our crazy system. Meanwhile, a disbarred Michigan attorney who lives in Boston wants to open a medical marijuana distribution service. Carl Swanson even got the voters in Ferndale, a small but zany working-class Detroit suburb, to approve the idea.

That’s not going to fly, however, and the cops have put everyone concerned on notice that they aren’t going to tolerate one joint being handled by Swanson’s National Organization for Positive Medicine.

Clearly, all this will take some time to sort out. I only have one wish. When they get around to writing the auto bailout legislation, let’s hope those drafting the language do a better job.

Hear Audio Story