Many libraries have newsletters, for example. As do cities, schools and counties. This would likely forbid them from putting anything about an upcoming millage in there. For some cities, their libraries are entirely funded by a special millage. This could be highly detrimental to them.
And as far as what I assume, it’s irrelevant. Libraries, cities, schools and counties themselves all assume that could happen. Even the Republican-led ones.
Huh? It has nothing to do with Emergency Managers and their cuts.
I am sure it could be detrimental, but ISTM the idea of the law is to keep them from advocating against reducing their millage.
Is the idea that someone comes into the library, asks the librarian “When is the ballot going to be held?” and the librarian says “April 14”, the librarian will be arrested?
Since there were no public hearings, or input from the public or local officials, no one knows what the hell it really means. Why else do you think, for instance, Ottawa County officials have placed a gag order on all of their employees.
The state’s election law already forbade public funds (including salaries, printings, mailings, etc) to be used for advocating for or against ballot questions. If that was already in place-- and of the thousands of governmental bodies in Michigan, in the past three years, there were only five instances where this law was broken-- why the bloody hell did this law need fixin’? Short answer: it didn’t. It’s a bullshit power grab and scare tactic by right-wing anti-taxers.
This new law takes the old law a step further and forbids any public entity or its employees from communicating at all on ballot questions to their electorate, with ridiculous penalties attached, and it was passed in the dark of night (literally) with no public debate or explanation. If local governments advocating for tax increases were really a problem, why was this shoved down our throats so quickly that the legislators voting on it didn’t even have time to read it?
But hey! Now that any meaningful PACs (read: union) that might advocate for the passage of millages and bonds are hamstrung, and any governmental agencies that might provide the public with factual information on millages and bonds and charter amendments are effectively gagged, now the newly-empowered dark money donors and their PACs can REALLY tell the voters what to believe! Yay for our Republican overlords.
The example you gave (simply giving a date) is not realistic and you know it. But this isn’t just about giving a date to a patron, and you know it.
He could’ve done that without this law in place, totally irrelevant to the law. But now the *city’s *hands are tied even more than they were before.
Just forget the content of the law for a minute (as likely unconstitutional as it may be): You actually think the ends justifies the means here? Is this what conservatives have come to? Defending undemocratic bullshit just because it was perpetrated by their own kind? And is this what conservative lawmakers have come to? Sneaking legislation through without public hearings because they know it’s bullshit and won’t pass public approval?
The EM law was bullshit legislation when Republican lawmakers passed it in 2012, and this bullshit is just more legislation meant inflict right-wing nonsense on this state despite a majority of Michiganders voting for Democratic candidates in state legislative races.
Conservatives in Michigan know they don’t have the ability to take control of Lansing, pass laws, and inflict conservative ideology on the residents through honest governance, so they’ve continually resorted to skullduggery. I could give you more examples, but I don’t want to hijack this thread further.
Why is that not realistic? You said the law prevented libraries from giving any information about a ballot measure. The date of a ballot is information. Therefore it must be the case that the example is realistic, or else the law does not prevent giving out any information about a ballot.
I don’t understand you. AFAICT the law is there to prevent public officials from lobbying for or against ballot measures using city resources. That doesn’t seem out of line to me - why should a city official use public resources to campaign for things? On his own time, or using campaign donations, sure.
I thought Flint Michigan had had its first emergency manager back in 2003, and had six or eight since then.
Did a majority of Michiganders vote for a Democrat for governor? If not, what relevance does that have?
I’m not anti government. I’m anti placing too much power in the hands of the government without real oversight and real penalties for corruption and failure. Look at the BLM movement. That wouldn’t be necessary if society took the concept of oversight of the government properly.
From a moral point of view that’s what should have been done. Municipalities and states shouldn’t be allowed to fleece the general tax paying citizen or business to enrich themselves and cronies without harsh consequences. The city of Flint, Detroit, etc are not the US Congress.
A law was already there to prevent public resources from being used to campaign for things. This new law now goes well beyond that, and you know this.
Yes they did, that’s democracy. Republicans receiving 70,000 less votes in state house races but controlling the house 63-47 is bullshit. Republicans receiving 40,000 more votes (1.4%) statewide in senate races, yet boosting themselves to a 27-11 (71%) supermajority is bullshit. Passing legislation they know people don’t want, but attaching an expenditure making it referendum-proof, is bullshit. Voting to remove all staffers except for the majority leader’s from the senate floor before a 52-page bill is introduced and voted on is bullshit. Voting to keep the legislators in the chamber under threat of arrest until they pass a bill is bullshit. But this is what happens in a state that is controlled by inexperienced right-wing politicians in ridiculously gerrymandered districts and a governor who doesn’t appear to answer to anyone but his billionaire Amway donors. They know if they had to get elected and govern honestly, they’d never get anywhere. Nobody would have it. Therefore, skullduggery.
I’m done hijacking this thread with election reform, and I apologize for bringing it up. If you want to defend the bullshit emanating from Lansing in the name of “election reform,” it should be done in a new thread.
But that’s boring; it’s much more fun to blame the other side and come up with snarky quotes. Nothing makes me feel better than pointing out how dumb my opponents are. I hear that Republicans cause autism.
The phenomenon you are talking about (wealthy city centers and working class suburbs exist in places with highly unionized labor. The urban decay in the rust belt is not entirely the fault of labor so much as it is the fault of the decline of the US auto manufacturing industry. There really wasn’t much you could have done to save Pittsburgh and Detroit.
The European cities you talk about have large socialist governments with well paid municipal workers. and if you think OUR pension obligations are large you should get a load of what places like paris have to deal with. One difference is that these European countries are willing to have higher tax rates.