MarkGrebner.Org

FLASH! Draft Re-Do bill is out

—

by

Violet
in
by: Grebner

Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 13:38:27 PM EDT

Same details as have been previously mentioned, with a few twists:

1) abolishes May School elections

2) abolishes changes election process for precinct delegates 

3) all lists will be public – INCLUDING JAN 15 LIST

4) no cross-check requirement, but participants must affirm they haven’t participated in any other party’s nominating process.

What’s the deal they’ve given Bishop?

Please post corrections/additions as you hear them….

The lists will be “public”, but it will be illegal to do anything with them that involves any “expectation” of “remuneration”, which I think means it can’t be used for anything.

Needless to say, use by the two major parties is exempt from these limits.

Comments

47 responses to “FLASH! Draft Re-Do bill is out”

  1. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    So it’s Wide Open Then?
    So, if there’s no checking against the January list, and only an “affirmation” requirement without penalty, it’s a contest that is ripe for meddling. Do Republicans and Democrats that voted in the Republican primary effectively get to vote twice? Is it a primary or a caucus? Anything on who pays?
    by: Bluesman Johnson @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:55:18 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      You’d have to sign a document that says you didn’t vote Republican Jan 15.
      In theory, it’d be perjury to lie about it. I think the chance of a successful prosecution is exactly zero, but you could make the argument it was a valid declaration. I suppose the bill might specify some other penalty – if I get a chance to read it.
      Requires “somebody” to donate $12 million into a fund by April 17, or it’s called off.

      by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:35:06 PM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        Call-Off Date is After 29 March
        District Conventions, so it looks like we’ll have to have two Congressional District Conventions — one based on 15 January and held as scheduled on 29 March and one based on the Mulligan and held probably sometime in June.

        West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast
        by: philgoblue @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:50:31 PM CDT

        Reply
      2. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        Interesting
        Hmmm, maybe something like that might scare away GOP meddlers who actually care about things like ” theoretical perjury”.
        (Loads of GOP are “law and order types” who might actually consider lying on the document to be “wrong”)

        I’m in favor of anything that, even in “theory”, holds down GOP mischief.

        “Those who attempt to censor free speech by filtering the Internet, are… the… TRUE… “tiny cats” of cyberspace.”

        by: detroit tiger @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:52:51 PM CDT

        Reply
      3. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        It doesn’t look to have teeth
        Playing enough hookey at my desk to look over the draft, and I read it as being toothless, or as creating an honor system.
        I did catch the Blanche Dubois-like reliance on the kindness of strangers to the tune of 12,000,000. I also caught the part where Nark Brewer gets to pick who is on the re-do ballot. Though he has guidelines on who to put on there, the decision is all his. What the …???

        by: Bluesman Johnson @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:23:16 PM CDT

        Reply
        1. Violet Avatar
          Violet

          I meant Mark – not Nark

          by: Bluesman Johnson @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:24:41 PM CDT
          [ Parent ]
          They’re threatening perjury for cross-overs. (4.00 / 2)
          615c (1) In order to vote at a presidential primary, an elector shall indicate on a printed form prescribed by the secretary of state and signed by the elector both of the following:
          (A) A selection of which participating political party ballot the elector wishes to vote when appearing to vote at the presidential primary.

          (B) A sworn statement or affirmation that the elector has not and will not participate or vote during the same presidential election nominating process for a political party other than the participating political party associated with the participating political party ballot selected by the elector.

          The penalty would fall within the election code’s catchall penalty for swearing falsely.

          by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:45:25 PM CDT

          Reply
          1. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Right Again
            Damn, if there isn’t a little section of our election statutes that indicates (at least on its face) that making a “false affidavit” or “swear[ing] falsely under oath . . . for the purposes of voting in an election” makes you a perjurer.
            MCL 168.933

            Nice. Maybe that’ll keep out the riff-raff after all (not like anyone will ever be prosecuted for such a thing). But still, there it is.

            by: Bluesman Johnson @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 16:53:55 PM CDT

          2. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Money… it’s a gas
            Who’s gonna pay $12 million, or however much it costs? Is that a real estimate, or a number someone pulled out of their wazoo? How is this not some kind of short-term loan by state government? I don’t see how explicit language like:
            A PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY UNDER THIS ACT IS A STATE ELECTION AND A PARTICIPATING POLITICAL PARTY IS NOT LIABLE FOR THE COSTS OF A PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
            is going to do anything but lead to a screeching halt from at least 1/3 of the legislature.

            I have a hard time envisioning how big donors are going to pay $12 million for what would amount to a minor swing in either direction. Most big donors know how to do math, which has a lot to do with why they have money. Is the intent to hit up the Obama and Hillary campaigns? “You must pay $X million dollars for ballot access.”

            by: China Mig @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 16:22:04 PM CDT

          3. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Who will pay? Hillary’s folks.
            Money that can’t legally be donated to her campaign – because it exceeds the contribution limits can be donated without restriction to “party-building” or whatever.
            by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 16:25:48 PM CDT

  2. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Does it abolish the school elections…
    …or just reschedule to June? Will there be impact on the August non-presidential primaries?
    Though the lists will be public, they won’t be required to be checked? That seems wrong.

    And who’s paying, again? Do the county clerks get to write the MDP a big fat bill?

    by: China Mig @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 13:25:00 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      Moves all school elections to August or November.
      Not including THIS election.
      by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:42:02 PM CDT

      Reply
  3. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    The first one was dumb, and this one is dumber.
    The Democrats made sure I had no candidate in the first primary to vote for. Now, the Democrats won’t allow me to vote for the candidates they finally put on the ballot. However, some Democrats can vote twice; and any Republican who didn’t vote or is willing to lie, can vote in my place.
    Just what exactly does this accomplish? It doesn’t stop Republicans from crossing over, it only stops Democrats from crossing back. This is NO fix. Might as well split everythig 50/50, save the money, and forget it. Why Nader looks better and better.

    by: dkmich @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:11:36 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      At least that part should happen anyway
      Gaming the system by holding elections that 90+% of voters are guaranteed to miss has always struck me as a bad thing.
      by: helzapoppn @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:52:53 PM CDT

      Reply
    2. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      and what will that cost schools?
      Will this cost the schools/school districts money to move or change their elections? Doesn’t this often affect school days/schedules (some schools with polling places close on election days, some schools still operate but have to change their building schedules to accommodate an election).
      Besides the financial costs, I’m concerned about how it’s counter-intuitive to move school board elections to August or November. Many school districts like to have their elections in the spring, as then the board is set up before the school year begins.

      I know that many people also believe it is much more fiscally responsible to have the elections in November, so there’s just one election at a time. However, it can be rather difficult to shake up the school boards after the school year has begun. August is just a terrible time for any vote, as many people are on vacation – especially with the state law saying public schools don’t begin until after Labor Day.

      Having the MDP screw this whole thing up – not only disinfranchising Democrats this year with the primary debacle, but also now screwing with the school elections schedule, is just brilliant. What else can they muck with?

      by: land of the free @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 17:32:20 PM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        School money = state money
        School districts for years have held annual school-specific elections, mostly so that the voting constituency for school boards would be limited and controllable.
        Election consolidation made it possible to coordinate school elections with other elections, and there is no longer any reason for school elections to be separate.

        And now that schools are basically funded with state money, the legislature has less and less patience for letting locals spend a lot of that money on schools-only elections every year.

        by: Kestenbaum @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 21:37:35 PM CDT

        Reply
  4. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Crossovers
    How must participants affirm they have not participated in the other party’s nomination process?
    Does this mean, for example, that a Democrat who voted for Ron Paul in January cannot vote in this Democratic nomination process?

    by: petrolcide @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 13:30:38 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      Looks that way
      Not that you asked me or anything, but it looks like the “affirmation” requirement will ask you not to vote if you already voted in the “R” side. There’s likely to be no enforcement mechanism for that, from the sounds of it. That’s a tough place to draw a line in light of all the Dems that jumped over for one reason or another (oh yea – because we were told that the vote in our primary wouldn’t count). However, lines have to be drawn somewhere – that always leaves someone on the other side of the line.
      I feel for you, as I was torn between Paul and Kucinich (out of those available); I assumed (and was correct that) “uncommitted” basically meant whoever the pro-Hillary state machine wants to appoint (i.e., “uncommitted” was a vote for Hillary anyway). I rewarded Kucinich for being right on the war, impeachment, FISA, the Patriot Act etc. etc., so I get to vote again -but you don’t.

      by: Bluesman Johnson @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:14:11 PM CDT

      Reply
  5. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Why on earth would this affect precinct delegates?
    They are elected in August…
    This part does not make any sense.

    by: memiller @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 13:37:53 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      Looks like it changes the election process, but doesn’t abolish precinct delegates.
      Changes who counts votes, how you run write-in, that sort of thing. I’m sure it’s at the request of local Clerks who are completely fed-up counting votes for thousands of uncontested elections.
      by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:07:25 PM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        got more on this?
        I’m running for PD.

        West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast
        by: philgoblue @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 16:17:20 PM CDT

        Reply
        1. Violet Avatar
          Violet

          I can email it to you.
          Can you figure out some way to post the bill and analysis to this diary? Send me an email to: Mark dot grebner at Gmail dotcom.
          by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 16:22:41 PM CDT

          Reply
          1. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Link to Bill
            http://www.politico.com/pdf/PP…
            pdf warning

            West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

            by: philgoblue @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 21:00:35 PM CDT

          2. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            I just read the .pdf
            The changes to the PD process are minuscule. These are literally the only changes:
            Sec. 607. (1) The required number of electors who
            12 receive RECEIVING the highest number of votes for delegates to
            13 the fall county convention of a political party shall be
            14 declared by the board of primary election inspectors COUNTY
            15 CLERK to be elected.

            19 Sec. 608. (1) The board of primary election inspectors
            20 COUNTY CLERK shall certify to the county clerk the names of the
            21 electors elected as delegates,..

            italics removed, UPPERCASE added.

            by: memiller @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 19:44:52 PM CDT

          3. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            I think they changed some provisions relating to write-ins.
            I didn’t quite follow it, but there were a bunch of edits pertaining to filing a notice that you’re running write-in. Maybe they weren’t substantial.
            by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 20:36:27 PM CDT

        2. Violet Avatar
          Violet

          page 25-26 and 31-32
          looks to be just standardizing and streamlining how to register write-in candidates.

          West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast
          by: philgoblue @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 21:05:46 PM CDT

          Reply
          1. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Precinct delegate write-ins
            The bill summary says the new provisions eliminate the option of becoming a precinct delegate write-in candidate on election day. Precinct delegate candidates will have to file affidavits in advance as do all other write-in candidates.
            by: alanfox @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 07:03:08 AM CDT

  6. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Michigan and Florida
    I’m usually among the last people to be pessimistic about anything, but I don’t see a chance of this bill passing. It’s not Republicans that will be the problem, it will be a combination of reasons among House Democrats that will keep it from moving.
    Michigan won’t have a new election. It’s delegates will not be split 50/50. They will only be seated to vote for the nominee if it’s very clear that Hillary Clinton has enough automatic/superdelegates/PLEOs to win the nomination. And that will only happen if she’s able to both recapture the popular vote majority and make the the successful argument that she’s more electable and cut a deal with Obama to be VP.

    Florida on the other hand will be seated based on the results of its January primary. The reasons given will be that all the candidates were on the ballot there even if they couldn’t actively campaign and that the Republican legislature and Republican Governor scheduled the January primary. The real reason though will be the loss of fundraising to the DNC if Florida’s delegates aren’t counted and the fact that Florida won’t alter the pledged delegate count that much anyway.

    I hope no one made alternative plans for March 29.

    by: Brady @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:03:48 PM CDT

    Reply
  7. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    A Wise Person Once Predicted . . .
    A wise person on this blog recently predicted that there was no way the Legislature could get everything lined up in order to hold another primary election. The few comments here are starting to identify the difficulties. I bet we will end up with a long list of problems.
    by: Bluesman Johnson @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:05:17 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      I assume that’s a reference to somebody else, but…
      I still don’t understand how they can pull it together, but where there’s a will – and sufficient sleaze – there may be a way. In this case, certainly there’s a lot of pressure to get something done. And I don’t think they’d have gone this far without reaching accommodations with both DeRoche and Bishop.
      Eventually, we’ll see what deals they’ve made, and then we’ll find out if they’ll hold together in the face of all the public hostility this will generate.

      The bill, by the way, is ALREADY in conference committee – it doesn’t have to go to standing committees in either the House or Senate, because the amendments being considered to HB4507 are “so minor”.

      by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:15:16 PM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        Read my latest diary
        for a link to the draft legislation.

        Hillary speaks for me.
        by: XavierLA @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:34:01 PM CDT

        Reply
  8. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    I don’t think it will happen QUITE this way
    Michigan won’t have a new election. It’s delegates will not be split 50/50. They will only be seated to vote for the nominee if it’s very clear that Hillary Clinton has enough automatic/superdelegates/PLEOs to win the nomination. And that will only happen if she’s able to both recapture the popular vote majority and make the the successful argument that she’s more electable and cut a deal with Obama to be VP.
    Any situation under which the MI delegation will be decisive to tip the nomination, to either candidate, will result in the delegation not being seated until after the nomination is decided.

    Florida on the other hand will be seated based on the results of its January primary. The reasons given will be that all the candidates were on the ballot there even if they couldn’t actively campaign and that the Republican legislature and Republican Governor scheduled the January primary.
    They won’t be seated based on the Jan. 29th election, because to seat them, as is, would advantage Clinton.
    Plus:
    1) Obama will control the credentials committee
    2) If the entire convention votes to adopt a “minority report” seating the delegates, then, the “supers” will have, already, decided to give it to Clinton.

    The real reason though will be the loss of fundraising to the DNC if Florida’s delegates aren’t counted and the fact that Florida won’t alter the pledged delegate count that much anyway.
    The distribution I’ve seen of FL’s 185 pledged delegates based on the results Jan. 29th is:

    Clinton 105
    Obama 67
    Edwards 13

    In a delegate race as tightly contested as this, giving Clinton a net of +38 will CERTAINLY alter the pladged delegate count.
    (Not to mention, she’d probably net (at least) +15 “Supers”).

    Once again, the seating of FL will be a credentials issue.

    I hope no one made alternative plans for March 29.
    When Jen Granholm constitutes a delegation with Hillary getting, at least, 50% of the uncommitted?

    “Those who attempt to censor free speech by filtering the Internet, are… the… TRUE… “tiny cats” of cyberspace.”

    by: detroit tiger @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 14:46:44 PM CDT

    Reply
  9. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    This is a recipe for vote contamination by Republicans
    I am already feeling disfranchised.
    by: ypsi-blue @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 15:26:45 PM CDT

    Reply
  10. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    What’s in it for the Republicans?
    Today’s rumor: McCain is pushing hard for this – that’s their hope for lining up the Republicans. I guess he sees it either as helping Hillary, or at least keeping the Democrats busy a few extra months.
    If true, this would be almost reassuring, since we wouldn’t have to wonder who and what were sold out to make it happen.

    by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 16:29:32 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      Mixed Motives
      On the one hand, you would think Republicans would love to see this happen, under the “distraction” theory. Further, those that would rather run against Hillary in the fall (which remains most, but not all Republicans), would love to give her a helping hand in making her claims to the nomination more legitimate.
      On the other hand, do they really want Michian to spend about a month in the news, and have Hillary and Obama camping out here for a month, and mending all the fences that were broken by our first go at this? Obama would be pouring coffee at Beaners downtown – Hillary would be outside Dimitri’s with a “Vote Hillary” sandwitch board. That woudl go on for about a month. That might be the last thing the republicans want. I think they have a better shot at turning this state red if the dissatisfaction continues. A June do-over at least puts this issue to bed in June. No do-over keeps us in the lurch through the convention, and keeps most of us in a perpetual state of pissed-offedness.

      Which would you pick if you held the cards? If I were them, I’d vote against this (i.e., kill it), and spend all summer talking about how Democrats don’t think Michigan’s votes should count.

      The more I think about it, it’s a no-brainer for Republicans.

      by: Bluesman Johnson @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 17:08:12 PM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        That would be “Biggby’s”.
        “Beaners”? We aren’t aware of a coffee shop called “Beaners”.
        by: Grebner @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 17:39:51 PM CDT

        Reply
      2. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        But if they (Republicans) kill it
        how can they spend the summer talking about what Democrats did. That’s the beauty in this. If Bishop and the Republican party block the do over from happening, then Dems have a scapegoat, and a place for pissed off Democrats to vent their anger. What better way to bring the Democratic party in Michigan together than to bring a common enemy to the forefront. Saul and Bishop will be the target of our ire instead of the Clinton and Obama campaigns or the MDP and DNC leadership.

        The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

        – Ralph Waldo Emerson
        by: michmark @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 18:49:30 PM CDT

        Reply
  11. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    This Blog Tells Me People are on to the DNC
    I don’t think there’s any effective spin on this to place Democrats’ troubles on the Republicans in the Legislature. I think it’s pretty clear that we made our own bed on this. I like the idea of getting a chance to spin this by playing the victim card, but I think that argument is so flimsey that nobody is going to but it. I am still of the opinion that Republican opposition is a “no brianer,” unless – as Grebner posits – our leadership secretly gave something else away in exchange for their help on this one.
    by: Bluesman Johnson @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 09:16:45 AM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      Knowing the brillance
      of our leadership…I would imagine they let them put a right-to-work ballot on the ballot for November.
      What with them being such masters of strategic thought.

      by: Nazgul35 @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 12:07:26 PM CDT

      Reply
  12. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Florida just announced they will NOT have a re-do
    I just heard on MSNBC that Florida has offically announced they will not have a new election – primary or caucus.
    My guess is that if FL can’t get it together to make it happen, MI will not. This a complicated process in a short timeframe. Also, FL Democratic Party was forced into having an early primary, whereas MI Democratic Party chose to do it – meaning there is less political motivation to allow MI to have a do-over than there is for FL to have a do-over.

    Once I heard that FL is not going to pursue the process, I figured that MI’s do-over process will die a quick death. Dingell and her buddies might try to keep the proposal alive for another week, but it’ll be a worthless PR effort. I think it’ll be declared dead by April.

    by: land of the free @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 17:24:33 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      To keep things moving along at the fast paced plan … it HAS to be passed by this Thursday. Friday starts a 3 week break for the legislature.
      They have about 35 days to raise the funds.
      On April 17th, the State Treasurer has to certify to the Secretary of State that the Presidential Primary Administration Fund created under Sec. 624h to receive private donations to pay the costs of administering the June 3, 2008 presidential primary has $12,000,000.

      Sec 624h. Creates the new Presidential Primary Administration to receive and accept money or other assets from any person or entity other than the State of Michigan for deposit into the Fund, including gifts, grants, bequests, assignment of money, and other donations.

      by: Cole6015 @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 17:59:51 PM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        Fast Track
        Just to clarify, break only begins for the House next week. The Senate is in session next week and begins its two week break a week later. Also, a five day layover is required between chambers for any bill. So the Senate would not be able to take it up this week. If the bill were to become law in time, it would need to pass the House this week and the Senate next week. That’s a big if since it’s unclear if the bill will even have majority support in the House Democratic Caucus.
        by: Brady @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 18:49:40 PM CDT

        Reply
        1. Violet Avatar
          Violet

          Thursday? Doomed do-over
          this thing is either destined to not be confirmed by the Thursday deadline, or worse yet – they rush it through and it ends up being a mess for the next month, wasting more time, effort, and money.
          The MDP should wipe the egg off its collective faces. They’re not going to save face with the voters by creating another debacle.

          by: land of the free @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 18:52:16 PM CDT

          Reply
          1. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            The timeline
            The bill that will be used as a vehicle for this is the fix-the-primary bill that has already passed both houses, in different forms and without immediate effect, in November. I’m a little rusty on legislative procedures but I think that means they can short-cut the process a bit.
            The bill is currently in the Senate, which laid it over ‘for a day’ on November 27. This Thursday, when the House leaves, may be the practical deadline for a resolution but if the Senate is in session next week it could ratify anything the House has already adopted. For that matter, the House could arrange for a session next week to ratify something the Senate does by voice vote. Of course that requires unanimous support for whatever emerges and that does not seem likely.

            Within the bill itself the first specific date is March 31, which is when the parties have to say whether they are participating and who should be on the ballot. That might be the real drop-dead date.

            by: alanfox @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 19:32:19 PM CDT

          2. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            A new DSP plan has to be written, have the 30 day period for public comment (or whatever the 30 days is for) and then go on to the DNC. The clock is ticking.

            by: Cole6015 @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 19:43:14 PM CDT

          3. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Excellent Point
            Given the information you provided, the five day rule no longer applies. The Legislature technically could have this done by Wednesday morning. However, given that the House has the GLC/water bills, electric re-regualtion, the Capital Outlay budget and the Tourism financing package on the schedule for passage this week, if they are able to accomplish a new primary as well they’ll have more than earned the two week break.
            by: Brady @ Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 20:56:19 PM CDT

  13. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Do-Over: DEAD.
    MIRS just announced it’s over. No agreement, not enough votes, no fall-back.
    Governor Granholm says, “It’s on life support”, but suggests the family is being consulted, and soon the machine will be disconnected. No funeral plans have been announced.

    by: Grebner @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 12:12:33 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      who killed my democracy?

      West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast
      by: philgoblue @ Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 12:19:23 PM CDT

      Reply

Leave a Reply

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