Every week, I open beautifully scripted correspondence from folks telling me to shove it.
And no, not all of it’s from my boyfriend, U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg. (Yes, Howdy Doody, R-Tipton, is such a charmer).
Officials of all political stripes can threaten not to talk to me, as if that will keep them out of the story.
Folks, as any good flack will tell you, the easiest way to skirt the line of fire is not to do something stupid.
But take your shots. I can take ‘em.
That’s what take-no-prisoners columnists like H.L. Mencken and Molly Ivins did. And if there’s a missing ingredient in journalism today (besides money for emaciated newsrooms), it’s fearlessness.
The most common and effective PR tactic by any politician, business, lobby or bored, but motivated individual is to beat reporters and media outlets down. Fight them on every controversial story; instigate a boycott; circulate politically spun “fact checks”; threaten to sue; threaten to get the writer fired; pen libelous blog posts against them.
Some unlucky reporters have entire Web sites dedicated to disparaging their work, typically the handiwork of swaggering campaign operatives. (Personally, I savor the anonymous posts that Walbots have gotten me canned from my last two gigs. Nice try, boys).
Yep, kill the unfavorable coverage by any means necessary. Especially, of course, if it’s the truth.
Why do you think so many editorial pages nowadays lack any spunk, soul or actual opinions, even when taking on mostly irrelevant issues like, “The iPhone: cool or supercool?”
Taking positions and telling it like it is tends to ruffle feathers. Folks who prefer the dumbed-down world of the blogosphere, where you can shop around for the facts of your choosing, don’t like the harsh slap of reality that a hard-nosed newspaper can deliver.
And interest groups, fat and spoiled by politicians who give them carte blanche to write laws, seem shocked that they don’t have control of the media, too.
These shrill voices and heavy-handed tactics can wear on journalists, who work crummy hours for circus peanuts. But this exercise in masochism actually makes perfect sense to most of us.
We love what we do. We believe in truth and justice. It’s our job to dig to the bottom of corruption and deceit and bring it to light.
Mencken, as always, said it best, that it’s journalism’s job to “afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.”
That is why I write this column.
This is my life. I don’t share stories about my 10 children, 22 cats and two iguanas. Life’s too short to bore you with sickeningly saccharine anecdotes about today’s tiff between Mrs. Puffers and Scaleystilskin.
But I have the privilege to write every week about art and presidents and books and human nature and the perennial quest for sound public policy. Things that may seem abstract, but are intimate facets of all our lives.
Politics isn’t a game to me. My Capitol press corps colleagues warn I’ll burn out for sure because you have to recognize the divine comedy of it all. And I do – that’s where my endearing satire kicks in.
But I am a shameless idealist. And I think the stakes are incredibly high in an era of massive debt, globalization, failing education, terrorism and astronomical health care costs.
So when our esteemed leaders foul up, I’m gonna hit ‘em hard and hit ‘em fast.
And I don’t care if I’m called the next Ann Coulter or a commie traitor by my venerable fan base.
At the same time, I think a politician’s character counts immensely - and shouldn’t be an oxymoron. Here’s a dirty little secret: Lots of the folks you think are right on the issues are vicious SOBs and many on the other side are decent, well-intentioned people. (For the record, Mr. Recall, Leon Drolet, is a droll chap who’s far cleverer than his adolescent adversaries on liberal blogs).
And often it’s leaders’ egos, nastiness and guile that gets in the way of compromise and critical policy.
In crafting this column, I’ve thought about doing measured, policy-wonk fare fit for the Economist. There’s certainly a place for that (it’s my day job) and we need more of it.
But here, I’ve chosen to write a weekly wake-up call, mercilessly skewering those hucksters annihilating our economy, education system, environment, health care and quality of life. Analyzing why it’s happening - and who’s winning and losing.
After extracting a titter about the tragic absurdity of it all, I try to lay out some constructive solutions.
Battle Creek Unlimited CEO Jim Hettinger once said I don’t write with a pen – I write with a sword.
Well, that’s about the best compliment I’ve darn well ever received. And I know that’s the very reason my inbox gets jammed with hate mail.
That’s my job, really, to make you outraged – to make you pay attention.
Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blogs. Show all posts
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Attack of the right-wing cannibals
It’s the electability, stupid.
Conventional wisdom says ideology is king and Republicans must wheezingly lurch to the right to win in November. John McCain better pick Mitt Romney, Sean Hannity or Tom DeLay (if he’s not in the slam) as veep if he wants to perk up the base.
The same debate is bobbing up in the 7th Congressional District. In the most overlooked story last week, some Michigan GOP poobahs are fishing for a candidate to knock off freshman U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg in a primary.
The preacher’s problems evidently go beyond the congressional cafeteria mucking up his coffee, as he recently whined to the media. The darling of the Religious Right is a top 10 Democratic target, has burned through a lot of green and is desperately struggling to raise more.
Walberg just might be able to accomplish a feat no one thought possible: He could lose the blood-red 7th District.
Though there are several good prospects – popular former state Rep. Clark Bisbee of Jackson, is rarin’ to go – a primary remains unlikely.
Why? Just look at 2006, when Walberg handily defeated then-U.S. Rep. Joe Schwarz, an almost universally respected public servant of four decades who had won his seat with almost 60 percent of the vote.
“Republican powerbrokers can’t go to the right of Tim and still be Republican,” says former state Sen. Phil Hoffman, a Walberg supporter. “And Tim’s shown that if you go to the left of him, he can beat you.”
Hoffman knows more about the 7th District than just about anyone I know. And primaries tend to be orgies for extremists.
But the times, they are a-changin’. Republicans can change with them or be left behind. After all, the (conservative) Weekly Standard soberly estimates only 3.6 percent of the electorate is very conservative.
It’s not 1984 anymore (sob) and the crazy-quilt coalition of Wall Street, the Moral Majority, fiscal conservatives, Reagan Democrats and old-fashioned moderates has fissured amidst competing and incongruous interests.
So the case against Tim Walberg is all about electability, baby. It’s something he’s wrestled with his entire career, barely eking out wins in the 2006 general election against Sharon Renier (a chicken farmer with $1.03 in the bank) and even as a state rep for the Bible Belt of Lenawee County.
“If Joe won in 2006, it would be a safe seat today and (Democratic challenger) Mark Schauer would be concentrating on being a good Senate Minority Leader,” Hoffman notes.
That’s why party elders should sit Timmy down and politely tell him to get the hell out.
Look, it’s no secret the state GOP brass preferred Walberg’s ultraconservative views to those of the moderate Schwarz and basked in his defeat. The 7th will always stay red, they chortled, so why not have someone who swizzles the Kool-Aid?
Not so fast, boys and girls.
Tim’s politics aren’t most people’s politics. Most of us don’t believe in abolishing the Department of Education or banning abortion without an exception for the mother’s health.
Most importantly, Walberg’s done nothing to create jobs in the depressed district by voting against a new runway for the Battle Creek Airport or save jobs at the Canadian National Railway Co.
It’s shaping up to be another colossal congressional year for Democrats, whose war chest is 13 times the GOP’s. Republicans keep retiring, leaving 28 open seats to defend.
The question for the right-wing is simple: Do you want to win or soak in self-righteous defeat?
In the 7th, they need someone who appeals to more than the Club for Growth and Right to Life lobbies. Otherwise, their only hope is to tar and feather Schauer, who’s made himself an easy target with votes to hike taxes and against a partial-birth abortion ban.
On the national front, Republicans need to let McCain be McCain – a straight-talking conservative who can woo the swelling ranks of independents.
But many party and talk radio kingpins will nihilistically sit on their hands for him. The idea of excoriating a pinko president for four years (particularly if it’s a Clinton, praise be!) will be boffo for ratings and fundraising.
Indignant ideologues will, of course, hiss that this is about principle. Indeed.
It makes me nostalgic for the University of Iowa in the ‘90s, when Socialists led the fight for free speech and against sweatshops. But they could never band together with non-believers to run a student government slate. In fact, the Marxists despised liberals (capitalist pig sellouts) even more than the radical right.
Anyone who questioned this calisthenics in logic was treated to a huffy, “You don’t understand the politics.”
They remained ideologically pure - and lost time after time. The left, as any student of history (and observer of the blogosphere) knows, has a dreadful habit of devouring its own.
Right-wingers, take note. That’s food for thought.
Conventional wisdom says ideology is king and Republicans must wheezingly lurch to the right to win in November. John McCain better pick Mitt Romney, Sean Hannity or Tom DeLay (if he’s not in the slam) as veep if he wants to perk up the base.
The same debate is bobbing up in the 7th Congressional District. In the most overlooked story last week, some Michigan GOP poobahs are fishing for a candidate to knock off freshman U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg in a primary.
The preacher’s problems evidently go beyond the congressional cafeteria mucking up his coffee, as he recently whined to the media. The darling of the Religious Right is a top 10 Democratic target, has burned through a lot of green and is desperately struggling to raise more.
Walberg just might be able to accomplish a feat no one thought possible: He could lose the blood-red 7th District.
Though there are several good prospects – popular former state Rep. Clark Bisbee of Jackson, is rarin’ to go – a primary remains unlikely.
Why? Just look at 2006, when Walberg handily defeated then-U.S. Rep. Joe Schwarz, an almost universally respected public servant of four decades who had won his seat with almost 60 percent of the vote.
“Republican powerbrokers can’t go to the right of Tim and still be Republican,” says former state Sen. Phil Hoffman, a Walberg supporter. “And Tim’s shown that if you go to the left of him, he can beat you.”
Hoffman knows more about the 7th District than just about anyone I know. And primaries tend to be orgies for extremists.
But the times, they are a-changin’. Republicans can change with them or be left behind. After all, the (conservative) Weekly Standard soberly estimates only 3.6 percent of the electorate is very conservative.
It’s not 1984 anymore (sob) and the crazy-quilt coalition of Wall Street, the Moral Majority, fiscal conservatives, Reagan Democrats and old-fashioned moderates has fissured amidst competing and incongruous interests.
So the case against Tim Walberg is all about electability, baby. It’s something he’s wrestled with his entire career, barely eking out wins in the 2006 general election against Sharon Renier (a chicken farmer with $1.03 in the bank) and even as a state rep for the Bible Belt of Lenawee County.
“If Joe won in 2006, it would be a safe seat today and (Democratic challenger) Mark Schauer would be concentrating on being a good Senate Minority Leader,” Hoffman notes.
That’s why party elders should sit Timmy down and politely tell him to get the hell out.
Look, it’s no secret the state GOP brass preferred Walberg’s ultraconservative views to those of the moderate Schwarz and basked in his defeat. The 7th will always stay red, they chortled, so why not have someone who swizzles the Kool-Aid?
Not so fast, boys and girls.
Tim’s politics aren’t most people’s politics. Most of us don’t believe in abolishing the Department of Education or banning abortion without an exception for the mother’s health.
Most importantly, Walberg’s done nothing to create jobs in the depressed district by voting against a new runway for the Battle Creek Airport or save jobs at the Canadian National Railway Co.
It’s shaping up to be another colossal congressional year for Democrats, whose war chest is 13 times the GOP’s. Republicans keep retiring, leaving 28 open seats to defend.
The question for the right-wing is simple: Do you want to win or soak in self-righteous defeat?
In the 7th, they need someone who appeals to more than the Club for Growth and Right to Life lobbies. Otherwise, their only hope is to tar and feather Schauer, who’s made himself an easy target with votes to hike taxes and against a partial-birth abortion ban.
On the national front, Republicans need to let McCain be McCain – a straight-talking conservative who can woo the swelling ranks of independents.
But many party and talk radio kingpins will nihilistically sit on their hands for him. The idea of excoriating a pinko president for four years (particularly if it’s a Clinton, praise be!) will be boffo for ratings and fundraising.
Indignant ideologues will, of course, hiss that this is about principle. Indeed.
It makes me nostalgic for the University of Iowa in the ‘90s, when Socialists led the fight for free speech and against sweatshops. But they could never band together with non-believers to run a student government slate. In fact, the Marxists despised liberals (capitalist pig sellouts) even more than the radical right.
Anyone who questioned this calisthenics in logic was treated to a huffy, “You don’t understand the politics.”
They remained ideologically pure - and lost time after time. The left, as any student of history (and observer of the blogosphere) knows, has a dreadful habit of devouring its own.
Right-wingers, take note. That’s food for thought.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Inconvenient truths taint blogosphere
"Blogs are nothing more than writing on the bathroom wall," so says my former editor, Jack Lessenberry.
The avowed curmudgeon, who ironically serves as patron saint of several left-wing blogs, has a point. If you want to read mind-numbing, inscrutable "analysis" of everything from Britney Spears' baby drama to Barack Obama's choice in underwear, then the blogosphere is for you.
Nowadays, truth is where you find it.Witness the explosion of the term "truthiness" — what you know in your gut without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination or facts — coined by satirist Stephen Colbert.
That's the biggest draw of political blogs. They'll tell you what to be outraged about for the day — no research, interviews or objectivity required. It's all the news that fits within the ideological prism of your choice.
Tired of thinking for yourself? Blogs can be a huge time-saver, like joining Right to Life or MoveOn.org.
If you consider reporting on troops killed in Iraq a violation of the Alien and Sedition Acts, for heaven's sake, don't read the newspaper. Just scroll right-wing blogs to reassure yourself liberals (who control the media) hate those soldiers, as well as freedom, America and all that is good and holy.
If seeing George W. Bush's face is too much to bear, turn off the news. Turn to left-wing blogs, which unlike conservatives (who control the media), only depict the president as a diabolical Alfred E. Neuman caricature, hell-bent on destroying children, the elderly and all that is holy and good.And of course, there's plenty of room for the tin-foil hat crowd to vent. (Yes, Hillary Clinton really does want to poison your guinea pig.)
The Internet's echo chamber is a dream come true for political operatives and party hacks. Sweet-talk a sympathetic blogger, and get your talking points or shaky video commentary posted instantly and unchecked.
Even better, you can now find a home in cyberspace (instant credibility, baby!) for that whisper campaign you started portraying your opponent as a gay, dog-molesting, illegal immigrant-lover who hates America and all that is good and holy.
Sure beats that pesky mainstream media that insist on fairness, facts and filtering out partisan crap.God forbid you be forced to read opinions that differ from your own. It's only a critical part of relating to others and understanding the world in which we live.
I know it's not politically correct to blast bloggers. They're the extreme reporters of the new millennium, too cool to follow old-school rules like journalistic ethics or basic grammar.
And besides, who wants to invite chronically misspelled hate mail?
Well, like anyone who's graduated from elementary school, I've survived playground taunts. Liberal bloggers already have anointed me "Wanker of the Day," and I'm also a "liberal socialist facist," according to some reactionary poster in desperate need of a dictionary.
I field complaints from self-important politicians and their overbearing flacks every week.So I suppose I'm not terribly impressed by bloggers who sport porn star-worthy pseudonyms instead of owning up to the dribble they spew. If you're so proud of your work — you know, finding the truth we in the evil mainstream media conspire to cover up day after day — pony up your name, address, e-mail and phone number.
Because when we in the media mess up — and let's be clear, we have — you know where to find us. In the Enquirer, corrections are front-page news because that's our commitment to accuracy and accountability.
That's the way it should be. Blogs need to wise up to those standards if they want to be taken seriously.Like any good Gen Xer, I spend hours online and am impressed by a handful of bloggers — those who go by their actual names and have experience writing sans emoticons.
I enjoy Andrew Sullivan's dry wit and contrarian conservatism and Eric Alterman's accessible, yet professorial liberalism. But they are rare voices of reason in the wilderness.
Most bloggers really aren't breaking new ground. They're just the progeny of 18th-century pamphleteers who viciously libeled political foes under the guise of anonymity. Savvy, flush folks will always find a way to game the system, so now it's open season online.
Sincere citizen journalists protest they're heirs to "Common Sense."I wish.
Because you have about as much chance of reading a Thomas Paine in the blogosphere as you do bumping into a Thomas Jefferson beneath the Capitol dome.
The avowed curmudgeon, who ironically serves as patron saint of several left-wing blogs, has a point. If you want to read mind-numbing, inscrutable "analysis" of everything from Britney Spears' baby drama to Barack Obama's choice in underwear, then the blogosphere is for you.
Nowadays, truth is where you find it.Witness the explosion of the term "truthiness" — what you know in your gut without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination or facts — coined by satirist Stephen Colbert.
That's the biggest draw of political blogs. They'll tell you what to be outraged about for the day — no research, interviews or objectivity required. It's all the news that fits within the ideological prism of your choice.
Tired of thinking for yourself? Blogs can be a huge time-saver, like joining Right to Life or MoveOn.org.
If you consider reporting on troops killed in Iraq a violation of the Alien and Sedition Acts, for heaven's sake, don't read the newspaper. Just scroll right-wing blogs to reassure yourself liberals (who control the media) hate those soldiers, as well as freedom, America and all that is good and holy.
If seeing George W. Bush's face is too much to bear, turn off the news. Turn to left-wing blogs, which unlike conservatives (who control the media), only depict the president as a diabolical Alfred E. Neuman caricature, hell-bent on destroying children, the elderly and all that is holy and good.And of course, there's plenty of room for the tin-foil hat crowd to vent. (Yes, Hillary Clinton really does want to poison your guinea pig.)
The Internet's echo chamber is a dream come true for political operatives and party hacks. Sweet-talk a sympathetic blogger, and get your talking points or shaky video commentary posted instantly and unchecked.
Even better, you can now find a home in cyberspace (instant credibility, baby!) for that whisper campaign you started portraying your opponent as a gay, dog-molesting, illegal immigrant-lover who hates America and all that is good and holy.
Sure beats that pesky mainstream media that insist on fairness, facts and filtering out partisan crap.God forbid you be forced to read opinions that differ from your own. It's only a critical part of relating to others and understanding the world in which we live.
I know it's not politically correct to blast bloggers. They're the extreme reporters of the new millennium, too cool to follow old-school rules like journalistic ethics or basic grammar.
And besides, who wants to invite chronically misspelled hate mail?
Well, like anyone who's graduated from elementary school, I've survived playground taunts. Liberal bloggers already have anointed me "Wanker of the Day," and I'm also a "liberal socialist facist," according to some reactionary poster in desperate need of a dictionary.
I field complaints from self-important politicians and their overbearing flacks every week.So I suppose I'm not terribly impressed by bloggers who sport porn star-worthy pseudonyms instead of owning up to the dribble they spew. If you're so proud of your work — you know, finding the truth we in the evil mainstream media conspire to cover up day after day — pony up your name, address, e-mail and phone number.
Because when we in the media mess up — and let's be clear, we have — you know where to find us. In the Enquirer, corrections are front-page news because that's our commitment to accuracy and accountability.
That's the way it should be. Blogs need to wise up to those standards if they want to be taken seriously.Like any good Gen Xer, I spend hours online and am impressed by a handful of bloggers — those who go by their actual names and have experience writing sans emoticons.
I enjoy Andrew Sullivan's dry wit and contrarian conservatism and Eric Alterman's accessible, yet professorial liberalism. But they are rare voices of reason in the wilderness.
Most bloggers really aren't breaking new ground. They're just the progeny of 18th-century pamphleteers who viciously libeled political foes under the guise of anonymity. Savvy, flush folks will always find a way to game the system, so now it's open season online.
Sincere citizen journalists protest they're heirs to "Common Sense."I wish.
Because you have about as much chance of reading a Thomas Paine in the blogosphere as you do bumping into a Thomas Jefferson beneath the Capitol dome.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Readers deserve better government reporting
Ladies and gentleman, your leaders have failed you, and we in the media have failed you.
This Richard Clarke-esque epiphany crystallized somewhere in a 3 a.m. haze at the Capitol on Monday against the backdrop of infantile threats and finger-waving on the floor of Michigan's greatest deliberative body.
Afterward, everyone was left to bemoan what had gone wrong in our great state to make us shut it down for five hours, costing us upward of $1 million, when we were already almost $2 billion in the hole.
Culprits were, quite correctly, fingered as term limits, hyper-partisanship and gerrymandering.
Our neophyte legislators clearly had no concept of what it took to piece together a $42 billion budget without the aid of accounting tricks, even though they had 10 months to learn.
Thanks to term limits, which remain wildly popular, there are no old bulls left in the chambers to help steer the state from disaster. Former House Appropriations Poobah Don Gilmer paced helplessly on the sidelines Sunday night as he watched tadpole reps flail about.
Few, if any, lawmakers bothered to consult the erudite Emergency Financial Advisory Panel headed by former Govs. Bill Milliken and Jim Blanchard.
Pols would rather play the game of poisonous partisanship than make policy, pushed by the two parties and lobbies entrenched on both sides.
It's a dysfunctional system bolstered by redistricting, which is controlled by the party in power at the time of the census. Amazingly enough, the GOP last time managed to sketch state and federal districts that secured majorities, just as the Dems had before.
But enough about them. Flog the media, too.
We are your last line of defense against politics run amok. When the people are informed, it's a lot harder for leaders to run roughshod over us.
Sadly, too many media outlets view politics as a horse race and lack basic understanding of policy, so we figure you don't have to get it, either.
As an ignorant former editor of mine put it, "I view politics like baseball. The exciting time to cover it is during elections, like the playoffs. Otherwise, it's pretty much the off-season and no one's paying attention."
Wrong. I know poodles with a more nuanced take on public affairs.
You deserve to read about the history of the budget crisis, dating back to the '90s, when legislators — many who did know better — capitulated to what was easy and politically expedient. They slashed taxes to unsustainable levels to win elections. They raided $4.2 billion from reserves so they wouldn't have to make real reforms.
You deserve to read how budget cuts and higher taxes affect your life — how much you pay, how much you gain. That means connecting the dots from the state budget to all those local millages you've been asked to OK, program cuts at your local elementary school and the business that didn't open in your neighborhood because a tax structure wasn't in place.
You deserve to read about bills when they're introduced, not after they're law — from HPV vaccinations to pop-up tax reforms — so you know what your lawmakers are up to in Lansing and can be involved in the process.
In the last month, Michigan's press has been a model on all counts. But as soon as this crisis evaporates, so will our policy coverage.
Because just as the Legislature doesn't look like it did in 1983, neither does the Capitol press corps. It's been downsized by at least half, often the first victim in newspaper and affiliate cutbacks. Most media only run copy from wire services, which have taken big hits, as well.
What kind of message do we send to you, the people, when we don't do justice to the most important issues of the day?
In part, that's what's led to the explosion of political blogs, but most just litter the hyper-partisan wasteland. Anonymous posters at Right Michigan and Michigan Liberal routinely run propaganda the mainstream media normally wouldn't (and shouldn't) touch, such as the unbiased (ahem) state GOP poll showing Democrats are doomed with a tax hike or the Senate Dems whining about not being allowed to snap pics for political gain of the tax-hike tally.
We at the Enquirer, a small but scrappy paper, try to do our part, and I think we succeed more than any other in our weight class. But all journalists need to do more.
Because the stakes are too high in Michigan right now for us to fall down on the job.
Cowards and courage: I took aim in Tuesday's column at Sen. Glenn Anderson, D-Westland, for stalling on a vote for immediate effect of the new services tax. But Anderson did vote for it, though not for the actual bill, a move which could cost the freshman his seat.
That's what lawmakers are paid to do. But it's worth contrasting that with Rep. David Agema, R-Grandville, who decided embarking on a Russian hunting excursion was far more important than voting on Michigan's fiscal future.
Anyone who thinks the sheep slayer deserves another term should volunteer as his target practice.
This Richard Clarke-esque epiphany crystallized somewhere in a 3 a.m. haze at the Capitol on Monday against the backdrop of infantile threats and finger-waving on the floor of Michigan's greatest deliberative body.
Afterward, everyone was left to bemoan what had gone wrong in our great state to make us shut it down for five hours, costing us upward of $1 million, when we were already almost $2 billion in the hole.
Culprits were, quite correctly, fingered as term limits, hyper-partisanship and gerrymandering.
Our neophyte legislators clearly had no concept of what it took to piece together a $42 billion budget without the aid of accounting tricks, even though they had 10 months to learn.
Thanks to term limits, which remain wildly popular, there are no old bulls left in the chambers to help steer the state from disaster. Former House Appropriations Poobah Don Gilmer paced helplessly on the sidelines Sunday night as he watched tadpole reps flail about.
Few, if any, lawmakers bothered to consult the erudite Emergency Financial Advisory Panel headed by former Govs. Bill Milliken and Jim Blanchard.
Pols would rather play the game of poisonous partisanship than make policy, pushed by the two parties and lobbies entrenched on both sides.
It's a dysfunctional system bolstered by redistricting, which is controlled by the party in power at the time of the census. Amazingly enough, the GOP last time managed to sketch state and federal districts that secured majorities, just as the Dems had before.
But enough about them. Flog the media, too.
We are your last line of defense against politics run amok. When the people are informed, it's a lot harder for leaders to run roughshod over us.
Sadly, too many media outlets view politics as a horse race and lack basic understanding of policy, so we figure you don't have to get it, either.
As an ignorant former editor of mine put it, "I view politics like baseball. The exciting time to cover it is during elections, like the playoffs. Otherwise, it's pretty much the off-season and no one's paying attention."
Wrong. I know poodles with a more nuanced take on public affairs.
You deserve to read about the history of the budget crisis, dating back to the '90s, when legislators — many who did know better — capitulated to what was easy and politically expedient. They slashed taxes to unsustainable levels to win elections. They raided $4.2 billion from reserves so they wouldn't have to make real reforms.
You deserve to read how budget cuts and higher taxes affect your life — how much you pay, how much you gain. That means connecting the dots from the state budget to all those local millages you've been asked to OK, program cuts at your local elementary school and the business that didn't open in your neighborhood because a tax structure wasn't in place.
You deserve to read about bills when they're introduced, not after they're law — from HPV vaccinations to pop-up tax reforms — so you know what your lawmakers are up to in Lansing and can be involved in the process.
In the last month, Michigan's press has been a model on all counts. But as soon as this crisis evaporates, so will our policy coverage.
Because just as the Legislature doesn't look like it did in 1983, neither does the Capitol press corps. It's been downsized by at least half, often the first victim in newspaper and affiliate cutbacks. Most media only run copy from wire services, which have taken big hits, as well.
What kind of message do we send to you, the people, when we don't do justice to the most important issues of the day?
In part, that's what's led to the explosion of political blogs, but most just litter the hyper-partisan wasteland. Anonymous posters at Right Michigan and Michigan Liberal routinely run propaganda the mainstream media normally wouldn't (and shouldn't) touch, such as the unbiased (ahem) state GOP poll showing Democrats are doomed with a tax hike or the Senate Dems whining about not being allowed to snap pics for political gain of the tax-hike tally.
We at the Enquirer, a small but scrappy paper, try to do our part, and I think we succeed more than any other in our weight class. But all journalists need to do more.
Because the stakes are too high in Michigan right now for us to fall down on the job.
Cowards and courage: I took aim in Tuesday's column at Sen. Glenn Anderson, D-Westland, for stalling on a vote for immediate effect of the new services tax. But Anderson did vote for it, though not for the actual bill, a move which could cost the freshman his seat.
That's what lawmakers are paid to do. But it's worth contrasting that with Rep. David Agema, R-Grandville, who decided embarking on a Russian hunting excursion was far more important than voting on Michigan's fiscal future.
Anyone who thinks the sheep slayer deserves another term should volunteer as his target practice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
