Posts Tagged ‘9th District’

2011 Michigan Redistricting: Gerrymanderliscious

June 22, 2011

Well, it’s been quite a while since my last post, but I figured this topic is important enough to warrant a return to the blogging world (even if it’s a brief return).  The Michigan Legislature recently released their maps for the 2011 redistricting.  For reference, here are links to the current boundaries:

Now, those were created by the 2001 Legislature, which was controlled by Republicans, and signed into law under Republican Governor John Engler.

They’re not bad, and look pretty good.  This year, it seems as if the Republican members of the Legislature have gotten a little more ambitious, and a little more creative.  So let’s take a look at what they’ve proposed.  Here are links to PDFs of all 3 maps, and I’ve copied the images below, where I’ll analyze them:

This first map is the proposed Congressional districts:

And here’s a zoomed in image of the Metro-Detroit area:

I’ll admit – I cringed when I saw the 14th district, and the 11th district isn’t exactly pretty either.  They’ve got some awkward separations, like putting Farmington Hills in the 14th, but keeping Farmington in the 11th; putting Bloomfield Hills in the 11th, while placing Bloomfield Township in the 9th; Southfield Township is placed in the 9th, while Southfield City ends up in the 14th; Clawson is split up; and Rochester Hills is split up.

In an attempt to squeeze Democratic Congressmen Sander Levin and Gary Peters into the same district and force a primary between the two, saving the Republicans from losing a seat, the map has turned into something I like to call gerrymanderliscious.

But it gets even more creative as we move on to the Michigan Senate map:

And again, a zoomed in view of the Metro-Detroit area:

For the most part, this one isn’t too bad until you get to the Metro-Detroit area. District 1 is incredibly awkward, as is District 6. But the really weird ones are 14 and 25.  You can’t see it on my uploaded images, but if you view the original map at 100% zoom, you can see that Springfield Township and Waterford Township just barely overlap for the 14th to be contiguous.  As for the 25th district, I’m guessing they’ve just connected them along a strip of County Line Road, but I’m not positive.

So that brings us to the state House of Representatives:

And again, a zoomed in view of Metro-Detroit:

And a zoomed in view of Grand Rapids and the southwest corner of the state:

The House map isn’t too bad, other than more awkward county splits than I’m really comfortable with. The Grand Rapids area looks pretty decent, although 86 is a bit wacky. And Metro-Detroit looks pretty good with the exception of the 13th.

So, by far, my biggest complaints are with the Congressional map, but what was really sad was the Republicans claims that they had to draw the lines like that to abide by the Voting Rights Act, which mandates 2 majority minority districts for Michigan.  That’s just nonsense.  There are plenty of ways to draw the lines so that you have decent looking districts that obey the VRA.

Obviously Democrats Sander Levin and Gary Peters weren’t happy with the maps, but even Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson is unhappy with the map, because as of the current proposal, Oakland County, the second most populous county in Michigan, would be represented by people who all live outside of the county.

Now, gerrymandering can be a lot of fun; I enjoyed playing around and making this little beauty for Maryland:

Photobucket

But when it comes to ACTUALLY redistricting, our legislature shouldn’t be drawing crap like this for partisan gain. Doing so takes the focus off of the good things the Republicans have done in Michigan and tells voters, “We know you voted for us in 2010, but we don’t trust you for the next 10 years, so we’re gonna cheat to win.”

Am I advocating that the legislature adopts a plan where we have 14 districts and each one is competitive at a 50-50 level?  Absolutely not; that’d be ridiculous.  The GOP won in a landslide in 2010, so it’s expected that the maps will favor us, but there’s no need to mangle the maps the way they’ve done.  That’s just petty politics, and when the people of Michigan see that, it gives them a bad image of the party.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford: “Don’t Bail Out My State”

November 22, 2008

mark-sanfordThe following in South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s (R) editorial that was posted in the Wall Street Journal, with my thoughts and analysis spread throughout:

I find myself in a lonely position. While many states and local governments are lining up for a bailout from Congress, I went to Washington recently to oppose such bailouts. I may be the only governor to do so.

You’re better than my governor, Governor Jennifer Granholm, one of the people leading the charge for the auto bailout right now.

But I suspect I’m not entirely alone, as there are a lot of taxpayers who aren’t pleased with Christmas coming early for politicians. And I hope these taxpayers make their voices heard before Democrats load up the next bailout train for states with budget deficits.

Several questions led me to oppose bailing out the states. They are worth asking, even if you supported bailing out Wall Street.

Who bails out the “bail-outor”?

Washington is short on cash these days and will borrow every dime of the $150 billion to $300 billion for the “stimulus” bill now being worked on. Federal appetites may know no bounds. But the federal government’s ability to borrow is not limitless. Already, our nation’s unfunded liabilities total $52 trillion — about $450,000 per household. There’s something very strange about issuing debt to solve a problem caused by too much debt.

A very good question.  The answer, in my opinion, is eventually the taxpayers.  If we keep this set of bailouts going, we’ll ultimately just crumble the economy and economic infrastructure.  Heck, there may not even be a United States to bail out any more if we keep this up.  We’re entering dangerous territory economically, and if we aren’t careful, it may cost us permanently.

Do you now have to be a financial “bad boy” to win?

Community bankers tell me that they are now at a competitive disadvantage for being careful about who to lend to, because others that were less disciplined will get a federal bailout. This is also true for states. Those that have been fiscally responsible will pay for or lose out to the big spenders. California increased spending 95% over the past 10 years (federal spending went up 71% over the same period). To bail out California now seems unfair to fiscally prudent states.

But this has been the whole mindset since the beginning.  “I’ll take the risk, and if I suffer, they’ll HAVE to bail me out.”  I’ve been warning about this from the beginning!  But economically/fiscally dumb and irresponsible lawmakers in Washington have given in and now think, “If __________ fails, the whole economy will suffer, and we can’t let the economy suffer.”  Let companies go bankrupt.  Let people lose their homes.  It’s called a free market.  Companies and people never should’ve bought more than they could afford or taken risks that they couldn’t handle.

Was the economist Herb Stein wrong when he said that if something cannot go on forever, it won’t?

Medicaid grew 9.5% annually over the past 10 years. That’s unsustainable. But if Congress opens the checkbook now, there will be no reform.

Isn’t government intervention supposed to be the last resort and come only when it can make a difference?

EXACTLY!  And even then, in my opinion, the government probably shouldn’t intervene.  But it’s visible in the proposed auto bailout: Some in Congress are saying that the auto companies shouldn’t try bankruptcy first (even Represesntative Joe Knollenberg [R-MI9] said this!).

In 2008 bailouts became the first resort. Over the past year the federal government has committed itself to $2.3 trillion (including the tax rebate “stimulus” checks of last February) to “improve” the economy. I don’t see how another $150 billion now will make a difference in a global slowdown. We’ve already unloaded truckloads of sugar in a vain attempt to sweeten a lake. Tossing in a Twinkie will not make the difference.

That’s a really good analogy.

However, there is something Congress can do: free states from federal mandates. South Carolina will spend about $425 million next year meeting federal unfunded mandates. The increase in the minimum wage alone will cost the state $2.6 million and meeting Homeland Security’s REAL ID requirements will cost $8.9 million.

Based on what I saw in Washington, the bailout train is being loaded up. Taxpayers will have to speak up now to change its freight, tab or departure.

I feel that it may already be too late.  While Congress won’t give in to everybody who asks for a bailout, I think they’re going to give in to a lot of them, and who knows how detrimentally that will affect our economy.

Mr. Sanford, a Republican, is the governor of South Carolina.

So, there you have it.  Governor Sanford’s op/ed.  I couldn’t agree more with what the Governor said.  We need more people like him (although I don’t agree with all of his stances, I think he’s absolutely right when it comes to this issue).

If we continue these reckless bailouts, we’re all going to suffer.  And we may not be able to recover.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Michigan Congressman Joe Knollenberg Supports Auto Industry Bailout

November 19, 2008

So, I was watching the news last night, and they had Representative Joe Knollenberg (R-MI9) on Neil Cavuto’s show discussing the bailout of the auto industry.  Watch this and I’ll discuss it below:

He talks about bankruptcy not working, because Delphi has been in bankruptcy for years, and then says that if a company goes into bankruptcy, people won’t buy cars from them.  Well, why would somebody STOP buying cars just because the company is in bankruptcy?  That makes absolutely no sense.  People would still buy cars.  People still bought tickets on Northwest Airlines when they were in bankruptcy.

And then here’s the biggest line I heard:

Cavuto: Where do you draw the line with our money?

Knollenberg: It is not your money.

Cavuto: It is!  It is taxpayers money.

Knollenberg: You’ve said you wanted me on this show.  Let me have a little chance to talk.

Then Knollenberg goes on to say that people won’t buy cars because of the credit crisis, and Cavuto brings up the fact that giving $25 billion to the auto industry won’t help end that credit crisis.  In fact, it won’t touch it at all.  Knollenberg said it’s basically just a means of keeping the companies afloat until they can start selling more cars.

I have to say that I was deeply disappointed by Representative Knollenberg here.  I was also disappointed that he voted for the original bailout.

The fact that he said that this is not taxpayers’ money was just appalling.

I like Rep. Knollenberg, but he definitely went down a notch in my mind when I saw this interview.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Get Out and Vote Today (and Volunteer)!

November 4, 2008

Hey everybody – I just wanted to make sure you remember to get out and vote today.  I also want to make one final plea to voters (especially Michiganders): don’t vote straight ticket.  That is an uneducated vote.  Go out and research ALL of the candidates, and vote for the best one.

Also, to you conservative Michiganders: go out and  volunteer today.  People like Representatives Tim Walberg (MI-7) and Joe Knollenberg (MI-9) need your help.  So help them out – even if it’s only for an hour or 2.  And if you’re up near Mount Pleasant, go help out the Isabella County Republicans – they need it too.  We can’t let people like County Clerk Joyce Swan or Register of Deeds Sharon Brown lose, so please, go help them out if you can.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

It’s All Tied Up in Michigan’s 9th Congressional District!

October 23, 2008

Here’s my latest post on The Race for Michigan’s 9th District:

A poll that came out from Mitchell Research & Communications (done earlier in October) shows that the race for Michigan’s 9th Congressional district is all tied up at 43% each, which leaves 14% for undecideds and other candidates (who’ll probably get around 4-5%).  So that leaves around 10% still up for grabs.

To be honest, I never would have guessed that this race would be this close.  Which is why my plea to conservatives in Oakland County is more important now than ever: GET OUT AND VOTE!  I’ve hears some people say, “McCain pulled out, so my vote doesn’t matter anymore.”  Well, there’s 2 things wrong with that statement:

  1. You’re vote always matters.  I’ll give you 2 examples from my life: 1) Theresa Lannen, a friend of mine, ran for City Council a few years ago and won by ONE vote and 2) My grandfather, Clyde Inks, ran for school board back in the 60’s.  The original results said that he had lost by 8, but after a recount, he was found to be the winner by 2 votes.  So don’t go out and tell me that your vote doesn’t matter.  It does.
  2. There are VERY important races other than the race for President.  In this case, the Congressional race is HUGE.  Joe Knollenberg has been one of the best Representatives that Oakland County and Michigan has ever had, and to lose him because of a lack of voter turnout would just be an INSULT to him for all the service that he has given to Oakland County and the entire state.

If Oakland County falls, whether that be Representative Knollenberg or the County Commission, the state will no longer be a purple state.  Heck, we’re barely considered purple now.  I was just at a forum last night, and the subject was brought up, “Are we a blue state now.”  The majority of the panel said we probably were, but the point was brought up that we still have a Republican delegation in the House, and we still have a couple of large Republican areas (sure you still have Ottawa and Kent Counties, but combined, they’re only a little more than half as big as Oakland).

If Oakland slips fully into the hands of the Democrats, we will see this state go from falling in a recession to plumetting into pure disaster.  The only good thing that may come from that is the election of a Republican governor in 2010, but do we really want our state to have to flat line before we achieve that?  Absolutely not.

So, what can you do?  Well, I’m glad you asked.

  1. Donate to the campaign, right at Joe’s website.
  2. Sign up to volunteer, right at his website.  But don’t just stop there.  Get out and do stuff.
  3. Go pick up a bumper sticker and yard sign.  Show people who you’re supporting.  Show them how important this election is to you.  Stand up for Oakland County.  Stand up for this state.  Stand up for your ideals.  Stand up for principles.  Stand up for what you believe.  Stand up and fight.  Don’t sit idly by and just let this election happen.  Take a stand, and don’t back down.
  4. Get out and vote.  If you don’t do this, it’s a smack in the face to everybody who has worked so hard to keep the 9th District in the hands of a good conservative representative.  But more importantly, it’s a smack in the face to those who have sacrificed to guarantee that right for you.  It’s a smack in the face to our troops who have died defending that right.

With your help, Representative Knollenberg can win this election.  It may not be easy, but I have confidence that he will pull win.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

A Plea to All Michigan Voters (And Any Other Voters, Really)

October 7, 2008

Folks, I’m going to be straight with you here.  I think we all know that it’s going to take a miracle for McCain to win Michigan (I won’t say it’s impossible – I’ve learned my lesson once before).

And I’m still hearing McCain and Republican Party people saying, “We can win Michigan!”  Well, true, we can, but I don’t think we will (I will say that things could change after tonight’s debate – tonight’s debate will be McCain’s best debate).

First, my appeal to Obama supporters (especially those of you who have registered at your college – I know up here at Central Michigan University, around 5,000 students have registered to vote putting their permanent address as Mount Pleasant): Don’t just vote straight party ticket.  I don’t do this, and I’m a hard core Republican.  Either 1) Don’t vote for the races that you don’t know anything about (county races) or 2) Do some research and vote for the best candidate.

I’m not trying to keep you from voting for Obama – I realize that you’ll vote for him.  I don’t like it, but I’ve accepted it.  But people like the Register of Deeds, Sharon Brown, and the County Clerk, Joyce Swan, who have been in office for years, and have perfected the jobs that they do.  Having a bunch of college students (most of whom will leave the county in 4-6 years) elect 2 people who have no clue what they’re doing over 2 competent public servants is WRONG!  But do you know why it might happen?  Because Students for Obama and the College Democrats here at CMU are telling people to vote straight party ticket Democrat.  Now, I’ve gone up and asked the Students for Obama President, Matt Sous, if he’s doing this and he’s told me no.  But I’ve heard him encourage students to vote straight party ticket while he’s getting people registered to vote.  So again, I implore students (all over the state): look into these local races.  Don’t vote straight party ticket (don’t even do it if you’re going to vote for all Democrats – just vote for them individually).

Now, to my Republican friends: I’ve heard people now saying, “Now that McCain’s out, I don’t need to vote.”  HOLD IT!  There’s still races for the House of Representatives, as well as State Senate and House.  There’s races in the counties and in the cities (but like I said before, don’t vote stupid – don’t just vote party – vote candidate).

People like Representative Joe Knollenberg (9th District) still need your votes.  These are still close races.  Go out there and vote for McCain/Palin, even IF we’re going to lose (and again, we may not).  Go out there and VOTE on these other issues.  We also have 2 very important ballot issues.  Don’t give up your right to vote, the right that our troops have died for just because you think that the Presidential candidate that you support might lose!

This election is far from over.  Tonight’s debate (which I will live blog) will probably go well for McCain (he does well in town hall settings), and he could rebound.  Who knows.  I don’t think he’ll win Michigan, but stranger things have happened.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Jack Kevorkian Lives: the Obscure Congressional Candidate Has Started Campaigning

August 5, 2008

OK, so the title was a little cheesy.  Anyway, this is my next segement in my series on the Race for Michigan’s 9th Congressional District.  Dr. Jack “Death” Kevorkian had a town hall-type meeting with about 35 people in Birmingham last week.

He started off by saying, “Okay, so what do you want to know?”  He was asked questions about loss of freedoms.  He was asked about the bailout of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae mortgage companies.

Kevorkian replied to that with a fitting libertarian (although he’s running as an independent) response, “What bailout?  You’re kind of sheep-like.  You’ve all been conditioned to think and act like sheep.”

Another person “asked about a scientist who believes that four countries control the equipment that controls weather and climate” (Free Press).  What kind of people were at that meeting!

Kevorkian later went on to say, “I don’t want to be a congressman.  I only want to serve two years. I’m here to educate and inform the public. … You are enslaved, but you don’t know it.  You don’t want to admit it because you’re walking around free, eating good dinners.  As long as you’re comfortable, you’re controllable.”

Again, a very libertarian (although VERY extreme) stance overall.  I’m not sure why he didn’t run as a Libertarian, whether the party wouldn’t let him, or he just didn’t want any political party connection.

I’ll see if I can get a quote from the campaign on that.

Asked if he is fit to serve, Kevorkian had the following conversation with a FOX 2 reporter:

Reporter: In 2006, one of your petitions to be paroled was that you’re gravely ill.

Kevorkian: At the time I was.

Reporter: Are you fit to serve?

Kevorkian: Well, how do I look?

And here’s the full FOX 2 story:

So, there you have it.  Kevorkian is essentially running a libertarian/limited government involvement, independent campaign.

What effect will Kevorkian have on the general election?  That depends on what he emphasizes and how much money he spends.  He’s sure to get some Democrats who supported euthanasia.  He’s sure to get the libertarian vote, but will that come from Republicans who are sick of Joe Knollenberg, or former Republicans who would’ve voted for Gary Peters?  We’ll have to wait and see.

Done Reporting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

I Think Congressional Candidate Gary Peters Needs Some New Staff

July 28, 2008

This is the next segment in my Race for Michigan’s 9th District series, also being posted on RightMichigan.com:

Back in June, I sent 2 e-mails to the Gary Peters for Congress campaign, asking 3 questions about the polo shirt ad “scandal”:

I am the administrator of the blog Republican Ranting, and I have been following the race for the 9th District.  I am interested in hearing a response from Mr. Peters on the issue of possibly photoshopping a picture that was used on campaign literature (http://www.oaklandpolitics.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=5D880FB79AD9E84B58AC4A66C6F38C01?diaryId=200).
My goal in blogging about this is not to criticize Mr. Peters, but to just give the facts to the voters of the district.  I have stood up for Peters in the past … and I simply want the truth.

Mr. Peters’ answers to the following questions would be greatly appreciated:
1. Are the allegations of editing the picture(s) true?
2. If so, did you add in or remove the polo logo?
3. If so, why did you do it?

Thank you for your cooperation,
Nathan Inks

On June 17th, I called Peters’ office and spoke to a young woman about who to talk to to get a quote about the “scandal.”  She told me that one of their “communications people” would get back to me” and took down my number.

I waited and never heard back.  So I called again on June 19th, and spoke with Bob, another receptionist.  I told him I had called before and told him my story about doing a blog post.  He went to go look for the communications director.  He came back, and told me that ***** [I promised him that he could remain anonymous] was in a meeting.  So I assumed that ***** was the communications director.  Bob took down my phone number.

Well, ***** never called me back, so I sent an e-mail and he told me that I had contacted the wrong person, and that I wanted to speak with Anna.  So I sent her an e-mail.  No response.  I called, and she told me that I wanted to speak with Clark Petting (who is now listed on the website as the Media Contact, but back in June it was Julie, or somebody like that).  So I sen him an e-mail.  When I got no response from him, and was unable to call the office (due to my work schedule), I gave up.  I fail to see how a Congressional candidate’s campaign staff can send me around to that many people and have them not respond to me or not be the person I’m looking for.

So, Clark, or anybody in the Peters campaign, if you’d like to answer my questions, because I really DO want to do the story in a fair and balanced way, e-mail me at n.d.inks@gmail.com.  I hate to bring attention to it like this, but I’ve run out of ideas on how to get a quote from the campaign.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Gas Prices Are Too High, and Joe Knollenberg Has a Plan to Fix That

June 19, 2008

Alright, this is the next segment in my series on  the race for Michigan’s 9th District.  Although it doesn’t directly tie into what’s going on in the race, gas prices are rising and that’s making it an important issue (especially considering the current economy).

Knollenberg himself, outlined a plan to reduce gas prices, saying, “These high gas prices are totally unacceptable.”

Knollenberg held the press conference with House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO).  Blunt shared Knollenberg’s thoughts about adding to the refinery capacity for refineries in the U.S., to stop placing oil into natural reserves, urging foreign countries to increase their oil output, and accessing oil resources under public land and water through environmentally safe methods, saying, “It’s foolish not to use the oil and natural gas both [under] the ground and in deep water.”

But, Knollenberg (like anybody who knows something about energy), doesn’t want to simply rely on oil.  He has supported wind and nuclear (my personal favorite – I’ve been a HUGE advocate for nuclear power) power plants as well as conserving energy at home and on the road (through simply turning off lights to carpooling).

Knollenberg introduced The New Bridging Industry and Government Through Hi-Tech Research on Energy Efficiency Act, the “New Big Three Act,” which will promote more energy efficient technology, both in the public and private sectors.  Among other things, the act would:

  • Provide $750 million in grants over 5 years for research and develop advanced vehicle batteries.
  • Provide $250 million over 5 years to add hydrogen fuel stations to existing gas stations.
  • Spend $150 million over 3 years for the government to purchase hydrogen vehicles.
  • Help auto makers meet federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.

Knollenberg showed confidence in his plan, saying, “My plan will turn the tide [and] bring gas prices back to reality.”

The law is currently being reviewed by the House Ways and Means Committee, and Knollenberg is expected to push for a vote on the floor later this week.

Personally, I think it’s a great plan.  Although I’d like to see more of a push for nuclear power, many people don’t like nuclear power, and it suffers  from the “just not in my back yard” argument more than any other type of power.

Although I don’t know his policies, I’m fairly confident that Knollenberg’s opponent, Gary Peters, would side with most of the Democrats in their proposed tax on the oil companies, which will do nothing for consumers and only hurt workers of the oil companies.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Race for Michigan’s 9th Congressional District: A Look at Money and Fundraising

June 3, 2008

Alright, after a moderately severe housing disaster last week (who knew flushing a toilet could cause so much chaos), I am back and blogging about THE RACE FOR MICHIGAN’S 9TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT!  This week, I will be looking at the money (wishing that some of it were my own).

Who is giving who money?

I looked at the top 19 industry sectors (information from the U.S. Census Bureau).  In 7 of the 8 sectors that the census bureau and OpenSecrets.org looked at, Knollenberg raised more money than Peters (in terms of percentage, not total.  Total would be unfair to Peters because Peters has raised less than half of what Knollenberg has).

Here’s some information from OpenSecrets.org:

Knollenberg received contributions from the following sectors.  I have highlighted the sectors that appear  on the Census Bureau’s list (the Census has Real estate and Finances as separate.  If they were combined, they would rank 5th, instead of 12th and 8th, respectively):

Sector

Total

Finance/Insur/RealEst

$269,200

Transportation

$238,149

Ideology/Single-Issue

$178,974

Lawyers & Lobbyists

$148,530

Misc Business

$135,050

Construction

$108,200

Other

$87,700

Health

$58,972

Energy/Nat Resource

$54,625

Defense

$33,250

Communic/Electronics

$23,550

Agribusiness

$15,500

Labor

$7,500

Now, let’s look at Peters:

Sector

Total

Labor

$132,500

Lawyers & Lobbyists

$103,921

Ideology/Single-Issue

$81,818

Other

$73,587

Finance/Insur/RealEst

$37,367

Misc Business

$35,943

Health

$15,750

Communic/Electronics

$5,300

Construction

$4,300

Agribusiness

$2,847

Transportation

$1,500

Energy/Nat Resource

$1,168

Or, let’s look at it this way, 41.99% of Knollenberg’s money has come from industries that make up a major  part of the district, while only 26.76% of Peters’ money did.

So, where is Peters’ money coming from?

Well, when we look at specific industries, we see that his #1 contributing industry is lawyers/law firms.  Then come leadership PACS (after retired contributors), then a  whole slew of…

Unions!

Now, no offense to any union members, but unions don’t have the 9th District as their focus.  Unions have gone from advocates for decent rights of workers to greedy organizations that border the category of corrupt organizations.  Take the UAW for example, which is now advocating fair trade because “China sells dangerous toys.”  Bull crap!  The real reason that you’re advocating fair trade is because you need tariffs on imports so that companies don’t ship your jobs overseas.  You want the ability to get paid $30/hour plus great benefits but still retain the right to strike anytime you want a 30 cent raise.  Get a life!  OK, sorry – back on track…

Peters has also received money from some of the most liberal politicians and organizations:

  • $4,000 from Representative Charles Rangel (NY-15)
  • $4,000 from Representative Nancy Pelosi (CA-8)
  • $5,000 NARAL Pro-Choice America
  • $4,000 from Representative John Dingell (MI-15)
  • $2,000 from Representative Sander Levein (MI-12)
  • $4,000 from Senator Carl Levin (MI)
  • $500 from Representative John Conyers (MI-14 – my future Representative after I move.  YIKES!)
  • $4,000 from Steny Hoyer (MD-5)
  • $10,000 from AmeriPAC: The Fund for a Greater America
  • $5,000 from Victory Now PAC
  • $10,000 from Our Common Values PAC
  • $10,000 from National Leadership PAC

So, we have Peters receiving money from some of the most liberal politicians and PACs in the country – scary.

Is there any hope, Republican Ranting?

Well, there’s always hope up in Oakland County (I’ve given up on hoping for Republicans down here in Wayne County).  Fortunately, Peters is being out-raised by nearly 2-1.  Knollenberg has raised $1,847,146 against Peters’ $750,162.  Knollenberg still has $1,336,212 on hand, while Peters has $644,931.

So, Knollenberg’s got this in the bag then?

Not quite.  Although I think he’ll win, it should be noted that Peters is benefiting from ActBlue, the online  Democratic fundraising site.  He has 1,004 supporters and has raised $228,540.  The online aspect, combined with his being on the DCCC’s RedtoBlue list, could help him where he needs it in the fundraising  area.

Overall, I still think that Knollenberg is doing great and is headed for a victory, but Republicans have to step it up and make sure that they’re supporting Knollenberg, not only at the voting booth but in the check books.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::


%d bloggers like this: