DennisLennoxDiary.com | Dennis Lennox's official website

Christmas in Cheboygan County under threat — again

2011-12-28T07:21:00.001-05:00

After targeting Cheboygan County when I was the elected drain commissioner for observing the lawful holiday of Christmas, the Freedom from Religion Foundation is now coming after the City of Cheboygan for displaying a crèche in a downtown park.

The Cheboygan Daily Tribune reports the Wisconsin-based secular progressive group sent a threatening letter to city officials last week after it purportedly received a complaint.

As with its other cases, the Freedom from Religion Foundation doesn't divulge the identity of those who complain. And to the best of my knowledge, the group has no members or any sort of presence in Cheboygan County.

Hopefully, Mayor Sangster and city officials will stand strong against the Freedom from Religion Foundation's extremist agenda to ban Christmas from the public square.

— Dennis Lennox

Ignoring the Neanderthals

2011-12-08T12:02:00.001-05:00

If you missed it, please take a few moments to read an outstanding column by Detroit Free Press scribe Ron Dzwonkowski on the importance of Detroit.

It has essentially the same thesis as my “Michigan is Detroit” [emphasis added] article of last month.

There are regretfully too many Neanderthals, particularly in out-state Michigan, who want Detroit to fail. Their mindset is most unfortunate.

If they prevail, families will continue waving goodbye to their children and grandchildren, who emigrate from Michigan in pursuit of a better future in places such as Chicago.

When I ran for the House of Representatives in 2010, I took some criticism on the husting circuit from those same Neanderthals, but I also received a lot of praise and support from sensible Michiganders who understand that a strong, vibrant, prosperous Detroit means a strong, vibrant, prosperous cottage country.

— Dennis Lennox

House-passed road reform ill-thought and driven by special interests

2011-12-01T10:29:00.004-05:00

In an unexpected move and without holding any substantive debate, the House of Representatives passed several bills on November 30 under the pretext of reforming the 81 county road commissions that radically alter the structure of government.

While I have long advocated innovative, outside-the-box solutions to Michigan’s dysfunctional structure of government with its patchwork of fiefdoms and bailiwicks, these bills are not sound public policy nor are they the sort of good-government reforms that are needed to improve infrastructure.

Worse yet the measures (House Bills 4029, 4030, 4031, 5125 and 5126), which are now before the Senate for approval, will further complicate an already complicated structure of government. Most troubling though is the injection of divisive partisan politics into the governance of local roads that will occur should these bills pass the upper house of the Legislature and receive the governor’s signature.

Abolishing road commissions or in the alternative allowing counties to retain an elected road commission with political party bosses drawing districts for road commissioners to be elected from are reactionary proposals aimed at addressing isolated situations in a couple of counties with long-standing political feuds and turf wars between road commissions and the rest of county government.

In their zeal to help county commissioners in their hometowns seize more power with little to no input from local citizens, members of the House never held a substantive debate on the bills nor were there any committee hearings with testimony from experts in sound public policy and good-government reforms.

There is no question that reform is needed, but such reform should be prudent, thought out and grounded in good-government, reform-minded principles.

If the Senate passes House Bills 5125 and 5126 and the governor gives his assent, a county’s board of commissioners could abolish its road commission and seize its powers without a vote of the people let alone a deliberative, fair and transparent process.

Their coup d'état would be immune from a referendum of the county’s electorate and it could not be reversed down the road if a new majority on the board of commissioners deemed the experiment a failure. More importantly, this would cost taxpayers more money because most major infrastructure projects are bonded over a number of years and many road commissions have a higher bond rating than their respective county governments.

Under House Bills 4029–4031, a county that retains its road commission could elect the members by districts drawn up by local political party bosses.

According to published reports, this legislation came about after two road commissioners, who live in the same neighborhood, were elected in a single county. Despite the fact that this coincidence didn’t bother the local electorate, our benevolent legislators — and a shadowy special interests group that backed the losers of that election and who likely wrote this bill — decided they know best.

In Michigan, county roads are just that. They were established as a county-wide network of infrastructure and at present road commissioners are charged with overseeing roads throughout an entire county.

If these bills passed, a road commissioner’s focus would change from county-wide to ensuring his district had the best roads to the detriment of those living elsewhere in the county. No longer could disgruntled citizens on one end of the county hold responsible a road commissioner from another hamlet of the county.

This would surely result in the sort of pork barrel spending and pet projects that plague the upper echelons of government, where politicians are often measured by the number of improvement projects they bring back to their district rather than the overall job performance of that particular branch of government.

And because the districts would be drawn in a partisan manner, you can expect the same allegations of gerrymandering and partisanship that occur at the state and federal levels, where politically-drawn maps have absurd looking districts.

Quite simply: Changing the way road commissioners are elected will not improve roads.

If those who push these bills are serious about reforming local governance of infrastructure by making it more accountable and transparent then I would urge them to consider a proposal I have long advocated.

My proposal would abolish each county’s appointed or elected road commission, elected drain commissioner, elected surveyor and unelected board of public works. In their place would be an elected commissioner of public works, who must be professionally qualified as a licensed surveyor or engineer.

Not only would this give the citizenry a single politician to hold responsible for local infrastructure — no longer could the blame be passed on to another agency or worse yet to another board member — but it would also take partisan politics out of the equation by requiring the office-holder to be a licensed professional.

It is clear that the state’s current patchwork of government is broken and needs fixing, but the solutions should be driven by what is the best way to reform government for the twenty-first century and not by what is needed in one of the 83 counties.

If the Senate truly wants to take up good-government reform, senators will reject the House bills and instead begin a substantive discussion on solutions for Michigan’s dysfunctional and heavily fragmented government.

— Dennis Lennox

Happy St. Andrew's Day

2011-11-30T15:31:00.001-05:00

As an American of Scottish descent, I celebrate the thirtieth of November as St. Andrew's Day.

While St. Andrew's Day celebrations pale in comparison to those of St. Patrick's Day, today is an opportunity to remember the important contributions of Scottish-Americans to our country.

Secretary of State Clinton did precisely that in her statement, issued on behalf of the White House:

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to send best wishes to the people of Scotland as you celebrate St. Andrew’s Day this November 30. In Caledonian Societies and Scottish clubs from New York to Chicago, across America and the world, people of Scottish origin will be celebrating with you.

The United States has been enriched by Scottish influences since its founding. For more than two centuries, we have enjoyed strong ties of kinship, commerce, culture and discovery. We are proud to count many of our Founding Fathers among the trail-blazing Scottish-Americans who have helped shape our country. From Andrew Carnegie and Alexander Graham Bell to David Dunbar Buick and Ginger Rogers, Scottish-Americans have strengthened our bonds of friendship and cooperation. Today, we are working together to develop scientific breakthroughs, promote business, encourage energy security and expand educational opportunities.

As you celebrate this special day, know that the United States is a partner and friend. I wish the people of Scotland and those of Scottish descent around the world a happy St. Andrew’s Day celebration.

Because my kilt no longer fits me, I chose to wear a tartan necktie today to celebrate St. Andrew's Day.

And in case you missed it, here is a special St. Andrew's Day message from the first minister of Scotland:

— Dennis Lennox

Michigan is Detroit

2011-11-21T11:23:00.007-05:00

As Detroit goes, so goes Michigan. It’s really that simple.

Yet for years too many Michiganders who live past Eight Mile Road — the main boundary separating Detroit from the rest of the state — have more or less turned their backs on Detroit.

This is probably when you ask why someone who lives four hours away up here in the heart of cottage country would care about Detroit.

Where I live is not important because all of Michigan is connected to Detroit in some way or another.

That is why it pains me every time I read or hear about the struggles of the city whose entrepreneurship, ingenuity and innovation made America.

For me it is sort of personal. While I grew up in Northern Michigan, my family comes from the Motor City. My father is grew up in Redford Township and attended Redford Union High School. Unlike some Michiganders on the Lake Michigan shoreline who often have a cultural affinity for Chicago, I grew up with a real connection to Detroit. I heard the stories from my father, aunts, uncles and cousins of taking the bus downtown and spending a day in city, when it was something hardly recognizable from today’s city.

As a child, I went to Detroit Tigers games when the ballpark was on the corner of Michigan and Trumbull. I remember going to Joe Louis Arena for the Red Wings and eating a pre-game meal at the famed Lindell AC.

I won’t attempt to explain the troubled history of Detroit, as it would take too much time, though certainly there’s enough blame to go around — and much of it is indeed rooted in the infamous riot of 1967.

So while Detroit has changed a lot in recent years, the negative perceptions persist in out-state locales amongst those who have never been to Detroit or haven’t seen the city in decades.

Back in 2010 when campaigning for the Legislature, I emphasized the importance of a united Michigan that wasn’t balkanized, as it has been for too many years.

Sadly, not everyone shared this outlook.

At a debate late in the campaign, Triston Cole, an opponent for the Republican Party nomination, summed up a typical ignorant, anti-Detroit viewpoint by stating that “the black leadership of Detroit” was responsible for that city’s woes.

Of course I immediately objected and condemned the statement, though I was the only one to do so and was actually booed by Cole supporters. Not only was Cole’s racist sentiment ludicrous, but it confirmed the stereotype played up in the mainstream media by those who wanted to marginalize the tea party in last election.

Racist or otherwise ignorant perceptions of Detroit have no place in the discussion on turning around the Motor City. Nevertheless, these perceptions do exist. And as everyone in politics knows, perception is reality.

To fight these perceptions sensible Michiganders must be ambassadors for Detroit.

When I travel both across the country and abroad, I almost always describe myself as being “from Detroit” because like it or not Michigan is Detroit.

I always tell people about the positive things in Detroit and try my best to avoid diversions into the negative perceptions of Michigan’s largest city.

Instead of negatives — the population loss, crime, a dysfunctional government and appalling school system — I prefer to share what’s great about Detroit: Amazing views on the waterfront. The Red Wings, Tigers and Lions. The historic Book Cadillac Hotel. The amazing Eastern Market. The arts and culture of the Fox Theatre and Detroit Institute of Arts. Greektown, Corktown, Mexicantown and Belle Isle Park. And last but not least is the beautiful architecture that one discovers when while walking the sidewalks of downtown Detroit.

All of these things and much more — Campus Martius Park and Wayne State University to name but a few — make Detroit a city on the rebound. She may never be what she was before, but it is safe to say that a brighter future is in store for the Motor City.

— Dennis Lennox

In case you missed it

2011-11-04T10:37:00.001-04:00

My recent article on reforming the way Michigan governs infrastructure has been published as an op-ed in Mount Pleasant's Morning Sun, The Muskegon Chronicle and most recently today in the Port Huron Times Herald.

— Dennis Lennox

The end of the Special Relationship?

2011-10-31T12:47:00.000-04:00

In this Sunday's edition of The New York Times Magazine, the British man of letters Geoffrey Wheatcroft predicted the end of the Special Relationship.

However, his argument was weak at best, especially as he overlooked the strongest argument for an inevitable weakening of the Anglo-American alliance.

There is no doubt that some at Foggy Bottom and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, particularly in the administration of President Obama, have largely ignored our British cousins, but the greatest threat to the Special Relationship is not from the halls of government.

Notwithstanding the foreign policy blunders of President Obama, the fact remains that America's public culture is still at its core fundamentally British — some could even say America is, at least classically, more British than Britain is British today. (Debaters in the public square concerning limited government, natural rights, the role of representative government, the rule of law and the like — often name-dropping notable British thinkers — occur far more frequently on this side of the Atlantic.)

While the country's demographics have changed, America will forever be connected to her cousins across the pond.

Though Mr. Wheatcroft passively acknowledges President Obama’s ignorance of the Special Relationship, he ignores the reality that changing demographics pose the greatest threat.

For as long as Britannia exists independently of a federal European Union, there will be a need for politicians in Washington and London to symbolically pose together for photographs as they talk about working together in the spirit of predecessors to tackle the international issues of the day.

Despite some popular notions, there is still a genuine appreciation for America amongst many in Britain — particularly Britain’s Greatest Generation and their children — for rather obvious reasons.

I recall the conversation I had with a 60s-something London cab driver who picked me up outside London’s St. Pancras during the midst of the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign.

“A Yank, it's always great to have our American cousins here,” he said before I told him my destination was near Parliament, which inevitably led to a discussion on politics.

Passing a protest by Parliament, which had some anti-American signs, he bluntly stated he “was ashamed of those who forget what you Yanks, our cousins, did in our time of need.”

The younger generations in multicultural Britain have all too often been educated to deny their country’s glorious history and simply have no appreciation of the common Anglo-American heritage. And it’s through no fault of their own.

The same is true here in America, where young people now learn Western civilization — be it in America, Britain or the continent — is nothing exceptional. They have been indoctrinated to believe that cultures elsewhere were — or are — as great, if not greater, than those found on both sides of the Atlantic.

There is an indifference amongst those of a certain age, which is most unlike previous generations who had an affinity — a deep reverence and cultural attachment — to the great ties that bind Americans and Britons together.

As young generations begin to enter the halls of government, there will be an instinctive inclination to look elsewhere.

The results of such a re-orientation are dangerous, especially at a time when an uncertain world needs a strong and vibrant Western power.

A world without a strong Anglo-American alliance is a world where the West is left without a sentinel.

In such a world there would scarcely be a power left to ensure stability and carry out the Reagan–Thatcher mantra of “peace through strength.”

Germany, despite her economic might, is incapable of projecting the strategic and military presence needed, which would leave France as the last best hope of the Western world — a prospect I shan’t want, especially in a post-Sarkozy French Republic.

Thus the Special Relationship is not a choice, though these austere times of significant cuts to the Pentagon and Ministry of Defense make the alliance even more necessary.

So contrary to what Mr. Wheatcroft and others in the leftist-dominated chattering class think, the obituary on the Special Relationship is most certainly premature.

— Dennis Lennox

Governor's proposed voluntary abolishment of road commissions not practicable

2011-10-27T09:01:00.005-04:00

Governor Snyder’s latest special message regretfully doesn’t go far enough in reforming the way Michigan oversees infrastructure.

While I applaud the governor for once again coming down on the side of reform, it’s doubtful that voluntary consolidation of the autonomous road commissions with the rest of county government will actually ever happen.

Sure the proposal may become law, but politicians likely won’t vote to eliminate the jobs of fellow politicians, except in a few counties with long-standing tension between road commissioners and those in the rest of county government.

The structure and system of government in Michigan is broken.

There are simply too many politicians — in fact, nobody in Lansing seems to actually know how many politicians we elect — and too many layers of government.

With key Republican and Democratic legislators saying they are comfortable with voluntarily abolishing the archaic structure of county road commissions, Snyder’s proposal should be mandated on the 81 counties without home-rule charters (Wayne and Macomb being the exceptions).

And instead of transferring the duties and responsibilities of road commissions to general county government, which in 79 of those 81 counties is the unmanageable board of commissioners, Snyder should consider a sensible reform that I first proposed as drain commissioner of Cheboygan County.

Unlike many states where a single governmental agency handles roads, drains, public works and surveying, Michigan splits these functions up between road commissioners — elected or appointed depending on the county, elected drain commissioners, unelected public works boards and in some cases elected surveyors.

This makes for a lot of unnecessary red tape that could easily be cut once and for by all doing away with road commissioners, drain commissioners and surveyors.

In their place, a single county official — an elected commissioner of public works — would be charged with overseeing local infrastructure.

Besides being a commonsense reform that saves real money at a time of deep budget cuts, it would drastically improve accountability and ensure sound county-wide infrastructure.

No longer could a board member blame another board member for poor roads, which is what currently happens with multi-member road commissions and would continue to happen if each county’s board of commissioners took over. (Just imagine if counties had a board of sheriffs instead of a single elected sheriff.)

By challenging the status quo, government can once again focus on its core functions — public safety, education, infrastructure — and be a positive force in the life of Michiganders.

— Dennis Lennox

A visit to Ed Rehmann & Sons

2011-10-04T22:18:00.010-04:00

Editor's note — The following article was also reprinted in The Saginaw Valley Journal.

Driving through Chesaning it’s easy to picture the ville — located near the center of an imaginary triangle connecting Lansing, Saginaw and Flint — as the epitome of small town America.

Best known for the 74-year-old Showboat Music Festival, Chesaning is also home to a charming family-run clothing store.

In continuous business since 1919, Ed Rehmann & Sons claims to be Michigan’s oldest clothing store. (The previous owner’s store, in the same location, opened in 1882.)

Summing up the history as well as the changing reality of the clothing business, Ric Rehmann, who practically grew up in the store and has worked there for 43 years, said: “At one time we used to carry everything, but we had to change things to stay alive.”

Competing with the big-name chains isn’t always easy, but the store has done just that by offering a variety of clothing that meets the demands of its customers.

Not only does the store sell clothing for everyday life, it is also known for its made-in-America suits, manufactured by Tennessee-based Hardwick Clothes. Besides classic American suits, blazers and sport jackets, Ed Rehmann & Sons is a long-standing outfitter of Michigan-based Carhartt clothing and Minnesota's Red Wing Shoes.

While the haberdashery end of the business has declined over the years with the general trend away from suits, Rehmann says the store still does a good business with local lawyers, doctors and other professional types.

But he couldn’t help opine that at one point over 500 suits were stocked.

Old-fashioned service has helped Ed Rehmann & Sons remain competitive at a time when many prospective customers simply head to the mall.

“You can’t put a price on the service aspect of our business,” said Rehmann, who also noted that the made-in-America tag is a draw for many customers. “We are an old-time store with old-time service.”

The store has even been a destination for what Rehmann called “Japanese pickers,” who visited to pick up deadstock offerings from Levi’s and Red Wing that were then likely re-sold at significantly higher prices to clothing enthusiasts in Japan.

Walking through the basement and upstairs storeroom makes one want to crawl around looking for an obscure dust-covered box of vintage Nike sneakers or a suit from long ago.

In fact, that’s what happened when I spotted a storage closet with upwards of a dozen jackets. My eyes quickly scanned what was hanging — I was full of sartorial delight.

I instantly spotted a wonderful deadstock tweed jacket, which Rehmann said had been in storage for a while, though there were no signs of dust and the tags weren’t faded, as some sartorialists have reported upon discovering deadstock at O’Connell’s Clothing in Buffalo.

Normally I wear a 40-short jacket, but this particular one was a 40-regular and fit well. With natural shoulders and a single so-called hook vent in back, all that was missing was a traditional three-roll-two lapel.

I also found a wonderful corduroy sport jacket that was very professorial. Regrettably, it was a 40-large and thus too big for me.

When I went to buy the tweed jacket, I was rebuffed and Rehmann offered it to me at gratis by joking that they normally donate “the old stuff” to local resale shops and charities.

Back on the floor, Rehmann showed me the Hardwick stock, which included a splendid Harris Tweed sport jacket.

He also told me the store could special order anything a customer wanted from Hardwick with prices around $300. That presumably includes the three-roll-two Max cut of jackets.

If you’re anywhere near Chesaning, it’s worth paying a visit to Ed Rehmann & Sons, even if it’s just to have a look around.

Sure you can get more expensive suits elsewhere, but it’s doubtful you can surpass the service of this 92-year-old family business and frankly you won’t find made-in-America at too many other places, at least in Michigan.

— Dennis Lennox

The Mackinac Declaration

2011-09-21T10:35:00.000-04:00

As Republicans from across the state begin to gather here for the biennial Mackinac Republican Leadership Conference, a coalition of center-right leaders released a major position statement aimed at shaping the party and the wider conservative movement through next year's election and beyond.

The eight-point Mackinac Declaration affirms traditional conservative beliefs while emphasizing a good-government, solutions-driven agenda:

At this crucial point in the history of our grand republic and our great state, we, the undersigned, do affirm our beliefs in the following:

A broad, inclusive and open Republican Party is the natural home of conservatism.

Winning electoral majorities requires a party of ideas and an opposition that proposes alternatives to the policy of those who govern and legislate.

An informed and engaged electorate that holds all those who seek their vote to account is necessary in our system of representative government.

While partisanship is a time honored aspect of our political tradition, discussions of public importance must remain civil and constructive. The politics of division must be avoided.

Though change is necessary, reforms of those governments seated in Lansing and Washington must be grounded against the whims of the moment.

Carelessly throwing away ageless ideals — religion, morality, self-restraint — in the pursuit of unrestrained liberty is imprudent and will contribute to an increasingly broken society.

Efforts to limit the federal government’s role to that envisioned by the framers of the Constitution will be championed by a new generation of leaders — committed to the first principles — who will emerge from the fifty states.

Government is not only important, but fundamentally necessary to maintain order and protect our rights and property. By limiting government to its core functions — which at the state and local levels are education, infrastructure and the preservation of the public safety — government can be a positive force.

Signed this twenty-first day of September in the year of our Lord two thousand and eleven, and of the independence of the United States of America two hundred and thirty-five.

Schoolcraft County Republican Party

Randy Bishop
Northern Michigan Patriots

Timothy Boyko
Chairman, Charlevoix County Republican Party

Craig Burgers
Ingham County Republican Party

Dan Gremore
Kent County Republican Party

Keith LaCosse
Member, Michigan Republican State Committee

Dennis Lennox
Executive Committee Member, Cheboygan County Republican Party

Greg Ostrom
Chairman, Saginaw County Young Republicans

Dennis Pittman
Executive Director, Oakland County Republican Party
Member, Michigan Republican State Committee

Trevor Pollo
District Director, Michigan FairTax Campaign

Scott Saionz
Treasurer, Wayne County Republican Party
Member, Michigan Republican State Committee

Rob Sisson
National President, Republicans for Environmental Protection

Jack Waldvogel
Chairman, Emmet County Republican Party

Paul Walker
Chairman, Schoolcraft County Republican Party

Chris Wicker
Allegan County Republican Party

— Dennis Lennox

Grosse Pointe Shores to consider leaving Wayne County; discussion should prompt wider reforms

2011-09-14T08:22:00.001-04:00

The decision by city government leaders in Grosse Pointe Shores to consider moving from Wayne County to Macomb County is a discussion that will hopefully spur other reform-minded Michiganders into questioning the status quo.

With 1891 being the last time the artificial boundaries of the state’s 83 counties were changed, I think it’s safe to say that it’s about time to change a few things in the landscape of government.

Those in Grosse Pointe Shores should take their thinking a step further and ask if county government is really necessary.

With cities politically autonomous from county government, it makes sense to eliminate the remaining ties between the two levels of government — namely city taxpayers footing the bill for county government while receiving little, if any, services in return.

This simple reform would reduce the average taxpayer’s burden by more than 25 percent, which is a significant sum of money. And it isn't hard to imagine the impact Detroit taxpayers — and those in other overtaxed cities — would have if they were freed of their overlords in county government and allowed to spend the 25 percent savings in the economy.

And while we are on this subject, it's also a good time to decide whether Michigan really needs 83 counties.

Perhaps it's time to embrace sensible reform and abolish county government and devolve its duties and responsibilities to either existing local government or new regional governments (each consisting of two or three former counties).

With Governor Snyder expected to unveil further reforms of government this fall, now is the time to engage in this critical discussion on how to make Michigan’s structure of government reflect the realities of 2011 and not 1891.

— Dennis Lennox

Peter Konetchy's bigotry has no place in the Republican Party; he must end his Senate campaign

2011-09-13T18:02:00.005-04:00

UPDATE (9:28 a.m., September 14) — MIRS wrote about my condemnation of Mr. Konetchy in the Tuesday evening edition of Capitol Capsule (subscription required):

Konetchy Supports Cap On Muslim Immigrants

Long-shot Republican U.S. Senate candidate Peter Konetchy, a Roscommon businessman, said during a candidate forum in Grand Rapids that a he supports limits on the number of Muslims who should be allowed to immigrate into the United States, according to the Grand Rapids Press.

"The Muslims are setting up their own little groups that don't want to assimilate," Konetchy said. "Right now, we're at war with Islam."

The comments elicited a sharp response from Cheboygan County Republican official Dennis LENNOX, who said the "offensive comment has no place in politics.

"Sir, if you are truly one who is concerned about the direction of the Republican Party, you will end your candidacy for the United States Senate and publicly apologize to the people of Michigan for your hateful rhetoric," Lennox wrote. "Continuing your candidacy will only damage our party and help Sen. (Debbie) STABENOW, who we must defeat."

I sent this letter to Peter Konetchy, a Republican candidate for the United States Senate seat held by Debbie Stabenow, in response to appalling comments he made in a recent candidate forum.

Dear Mr. Konetchy:

Your bigoted, xenophobic comment, as quoted by the Grand Rapids Press and Politico, against Muslim Americans cannot be tolerated.

That sort of offensive comment has no place in politics. You have caused great embarrassment to Republican Party members who have worked to build an inclusive party that is open to all Americans regardless of race, religion, ethnicity or creed.

Your comment is also ironic, as you proclaim to be a strict constitutionalist. Certainly any person who has studied the Constitution would know that our Founding Fathers did not tolerate the sort of religious bigotry that you propose.

I would remind you of what President Washington said on the matter: “It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”

Sir, if you are truly one who is concerned about the direction of the Republican Party, you will end your candidacy for the United States Senate and publicly apologize to the people of Michigan for your hateful rhetoric. Continuing your candidacy will only damage our party and help Senator Stabenow, who we must defeat.

I trust you will do the right thing.

Yours very truly,

Dennis Lennox

I have already heard from numerous party leaders and members, all of whom have joined me in condemning Mr. Konetchy's bigotry.

— Dennis Lennox

Lest we forget

2011-09-11T08:41:00.000-04:00

On this tenth anniversary of that day that will never be forgotten by my generation, I think back to my emotions when I first learned of the terrorist attacks that forever changed our country. The terrorists did not and must not win. Lest we not forget that this is a war for Western civilization. Everything that we hold precious and sacred is threatened by these Islamofascists.

— Dennis Lennox

In case you missed today's Financial Times

2011-09-09T09:13:00.002-04:00

I have a letter to the editor in today's edition of the Financial Times, which is one of my favorite quality newspapers.

Ignoring a handful of edits — involving changes from American English to British English — the letter is what I published Wednesday here on DennisLennoxDiary.com concerning the proposal by the Dutch prime minister to create a powerful E.U. “commissioner of budget discipline.”

You can read the letter by clicking here. Please note that you may be required to register with the Financial Times. If you don’t have an account or don’t want to register, you can click the image below to read the letter, as it appeared in today's Financial Times iPad edition.

— Dennis Lennox

Dutch prime minister's 'budgetary discipline' proposal would ultimately hurt both Europe and America

2011-09-07T16:39:00.002-04:00

The Prime Minister of the Netherlands.

Wednesday’s call by the Dutch prime minister for further European integration by requiring eurozone countries to submit national budgets to a “commissioner for budgetary discipline” for prior approval is unprecedented and should deeply alarm those on both sides of the Atlantic.

I commend the prime minister for this thoughtful and deliberate approach, however, I am deeply troubled by what could happen if such a “régime” — his words, not mine — is established.

While the need for fiscal discipline and economic growth across the continent cannot be overstated, Mr. Rutte’s proposal would cede absolutist, and dare I say tyrannical, powers to an unaccountable czar.

Spain is a perfect example. Imagine the center-right winning forthcoming elections. Upon taking office, Prime Minister Rajoy announces an austerity program that cuts taxes, repeals anti-growth policies and regulations and reforms the welfare state. Perhaps Mr. Rajoy’s government even reverses some of the controversial social policy changes enacted by the incumbent socialist government.

Not withstanding the sensible cuts, the head of Mr. Rutte’s proposed “régime” — perhaps someone affiliated with the defeated socialist government’s sister parties in Socialist International — disagrees and instead implements draconian cuts on what’s left of the Spanish military and raises taxes because, in the group-think world of government, revenue and not spending is the problem. (The reverse could happen with a new socialist government and its democratic mandate being blocked by a functionary from an opposing political tradition.)

In short, the prime minister’s proposal would likely result in pan-European partisanship — there are after all established multi-national political party alliances — used to revere the will of democratically-elected sovereign governments.

Considering the European consensus to cut defense spending instead of the more-than-generous welfare state, this would surely result in even further strains in an already strained NATO.

The political calculus may be good for Mr. Rutte’s minority government, but it is bad for Europe and bad for America.

— Dennis Lennox

Recommended: S. Cohen

2011-09-07T10:41:00.003-04:00

As a young professional, I know many peers are often confronted with the sartorial dilemma of quality verses price when shopping for tailored clothing.

Unless you are at the point in your professional career to purchase bespoke garments — and in that case Savile Row is the place to go — you are likely looking in the racks for something that is ready-to-wear.

If that is the case, I recommend you consider S. Cohen the next time you purchase a suit, blazer or sport jacket.

Too many gentlemen focus on the big-name labels, which are generally overpriced and often have no connection to the name that adorns the label. (S. Cohen has made tailored clothing for J. Press, the iconic American menswear store, and other familiar brands for a while now.)

For starters, S. Cohen is 100 percent made in North America. The company, located in Montréal, is also a union shop, if that is important to you.

In an age when just about everything is made in the Far East, it is refreshing to know S. Cohen is a fourth generation, family-run company with employees that could otherwise be your family, friends and neighbors.

And unlike others, S. Cohen stands by its offerings and provides a lifetime guarantee against “defects in workmanship or materials.”

For reviewing purposes, S. Cohen provided me with an off-the-rack suit from its Suits for the Cure line, in which $20 from the sale of every suit is donated to cancer research.

My suit had a two-button charcoal jacket with side vents and so-called kissing sleeve buttons, although the jacket sleeve didn’t have functioning buttons — also known as surgeon’s cuffs in sartorial parlance. It had notch lapels, darts and a slimmer cut. It came with a welted breast pocket and two flapped waist pockets. Though the shoulders were padded, it did not have the look of football pads.

The cloth had been treated with S. Cohen’s renowned stain resistance, which literally stops the cloth from absorbing liquid. Normally this sort of treatment gives cloth a rough feel, but the pure-wool cloth of my suit was very soft to the hand. While a fall 2011 offering, the cloth was light enough for use in three, if not four, seasons.

At this price, the suit’s inner workings are fused with glue. Some may consider fusing a turnoff, though most suits these days are made in this manner unless you buy bespoke or high-end off-the-rack. It is also worth noting that modern fusing is vastly improved.

Notwithstanding, it would be advantageous for S. Cohen to offer non-fused jackets as rival Jack Victor, also of Montréal, sells almost all half-canvassed. This puts Jack Victor at a slightly higher price than S. Cohen, though there is not much of a difference outside fusing to warrant the price difference.

Inside the jacket, there are the de rigueur pockets (three full-size plus a fourth for an ink pen) and soft-as-silk bemberg lining, which was medium gray. From a visual standpoint, I would have preferred a different color thereby giving the jacket a more bespoke look.

One thing to keep in mind if purchasing from S. Cohen is the company’s new Custom Cuts program.

This is essentially halfway between what-you-see-is-what-you-get and bespoke. While not made-to-measure in the full sense of the word — made-to-order is probably better — it allows one to order a customized suit. (A bespoke suit on the other hand involves a pattern created from scratch based on the customer’s measurements.)

Options include hundreds of cloths and dozens of linings and buttons. It also allows one to select options such as notch or peak lapels, pickstitching, hacking pockets, a ticket pocket, surgeon’s cuffs and natural shoulders.

I did note that some of these options were not available when other choices were selected. I could order a two-button jacket with natural shoulders, side vents, and a ticket pocket, however, I could not order hacking pockets with a natural shoulder. Custom Cuts also did not allow me to select a three-two roll, which S. Cohen makes for J. Press. This classic choice involves the jacket lapels rolled past the top button rendering it functionless and in essence creating a two-button jacket.

It also should be noted that some of these choices come with a surcharge — $25 for surgeon’s cuffs and $7.50 for a pen pocket. Even with this added cost, the overall price of your customized suit is still far below what one would expect and if done right it should not require any alterations upon delivery. (An experienced tailor will often charge upwards of $80 to make an off-the-rack suit fit well.)

All of this is done through a new, state-of-the-art website accessible by S. Cohen retailers. Once the order is placed, the company delivers the finished garment within 10 working days — an incredible turnaround time that competes with Far East made-to-order shops such as Indochino.

Overall, I was thoroughly impressed with my suit and can, without hesitation, recommend S. Cohen. It is not difficult to imagine a suit of lesser quality than what I had being sold for between $400 and $500 in department stores.

In the future though I will go with the Custom Cuts program, which offers an exceptional value that far exceeds the any of the bland off-the-rack suits one finds at department stores and mass-market menswear stores.

— Dennis Lennox

Newest additions to my personal library

2011-08-31T19:17:00.001-04:00

I still have a couple of books to get through, but I recently took advantage of the liquidation sales at Borders to add several books to my personal library.

Here's the full list in no particular order:

And yes, it may take me until this time next year to finish them off.

— Dennis Lennox

Tim Melton: A man without a party

2011-08-30T21:26:00.003-04:00

There was a lot of buzz amongst the Michigan political chattering class Tuesday when Democrat Tim Melton announced he was resigning as a member of the House of Representatives to take an out-of-state lobbyist job.

The storyline that’s garnering most of the attention is that Melton’s departure is a result of term limits (he’s in his third and final two-year term).

While that’s one explanation — and it does have some merit — the more likely storyline in the case of Melton is something completely different.

Melton, who has been described as a moderate Democrat by some despite a liberal voting record, simply doesn’t have a home in today’s Democratic Party.

The mainstream media routinely run stories on some Republican-in-name-only who supposedly left the party because of its conservative inclinations yet the same reporters seldom talk about the Democrats who no longer have a party. (Rick Perry, the governor of Texas, included.)

Today’s Democrats are considerably to the left of Melton and Andy Dillon, the current state treasurer who, as speaker of the House, was a political ally of Melton.

Melton likely did the political math and realized there wasn’t much of an opening for him in today’s political landscape.

With Republicans controlling the governor’s mansion and both houses of the Legislature, the Democrats remaining in town are considerably more leftist than liberals Melton and Dillon.

You could even call these gentlemen Democrats-in-name-only, though it cannot be emphasized enough that they are by no means conservative.

Sure there was talk Melton was going to run for Congress, but the leftist grassroots of today’s Democratic Party weren’t too enthused about that prospect.

Opining on Melton’s resignation, one leftist blogger said: “It’s one thing to have ideological diversity within a party; it’s entirely another for someone to show barely veiled contempt for some of the key platforms of your party and its constituents.”

I must confess that as a conservative Republican, it’s always nice to watch a Democratic civil war, but in a way it’s sad.

Despite being endorsed in past campaigns by the usual suspects, Melton is a lone voice for sensibility in an increasingly socialist political party.

Such trends will surely help Republicans, though this partisan advantage comes with a cost to good governance.

Melton’s replacement will surely be as leftist and big-government as they come, which won’t help the struggling community of Pontiac.

And in the end, it’s his soon-to-be former constituents who will suffer.

— Dennis Lennox

In case you missed it

2011-08-24T10:19:00.000-04:00

I had letters to the editor published in two newspapers today.

Both letters relate to the illegal strike that Central Michigan University professors engaged in on Monday.

You can read them in The Detroit News and Muskegon Chronicle.

— Dennis Lennox

Central Michigan University profs go Greek

2011-08-22T09:01:00.000-04:00

Tenured professors at Central Michigan University and public sector employees in Greece now have something in common: They both want to continue milking the taxpayer teat.

Though one doesn't see burning cars or riot police deploying tear gas in Mount Pleasant, the Ivory Tower inhabitants decided an illegal strike on the first day of classes was the best way to preserve their lavish wages and benefits.

Increasing the pay and benefits of professors is absurd when working families — the moms and dads struggling to get by so their child can attend CMU — are worried about keeping their job in these tough economic times.

If the union had turned its attention to CMU's overspending — particularly under immediate past president Michael Rao — it may have been more successful in getting its message across. While the professors should make sacrifices, the administration must also cut unnecessary spending.

A few examples of immediate cost savings include:

Elimination of the taxpayer subsidy for the student newspaper.
Closing the plethora of so-called diversity offices that only serve a very tiny percentage of students.
Privatization of CMU’s bookstore.
Modernizing the curriculum to eliminate unneeded programs.
Doing away with the multi-million dollar funding for student organizations and student entertainment, as college should be about academics.

As a former Chippewa, I am proud that the Board of Trustees and administration are holding the line and not giving in to the extortion racket that union bosses are running.

While there are legitimate issues, jeopardizing the learning experience of students is the wrong approach especially when the union's main talking point is an increase in compensation.

CMU professors should be happy they at least have a job, unlike millions of other Americans.

— Dennis Lennox

Cameron, Obama, London riots and the broken society

2011-08-21T14:11:00.001-04:00

In this weekend’s edition of The Wall Street Journal, Lord Sacks has a must-read article on what is truly behind the recent rioting in London.

He correctly argues that the broken society — the cause championed by Prime Minister Cameron since his days as leader of Her Majesty’s opposition — is at the crux of this spat of criminality and hooliganism.

Lord Tebbit, the former British politician and ally of then-Prime Minister Thatcher, summed it up best when he said the “permissive society of the 1960s has become a drunken, violent, yobbish society of schoolgirl mothers and schoolboy fathers.”

What is facing Britain is important notwithstanding the Anglophobe tendencies of contemporary American society. Britain is after all home to Anglo-American culture and so much of our country’s beliefs, heritage and values are derived from the mother country.

Our president, Mr. Obama, is committed to implementing the sort of big government programs and utopia vision that has caused much of the broken society in Britain.

Too many Americans simply do not understand the major challenges facing Britain. This is partially because dream up an almost Victorian image of Britain that no longer exists. (Mohammed was the mostpopular baby name in 2010.)

In Michigan, the big government proponents are objecting to a recent decision of Governor Snyder’s administration to stop providing food stamps — welfare assistance — for collegians after widespread abuse and fraud was discovered at universities and colleges across the state. This is small potatoes compared to the welfare state across the pond, where one can truly profit off of having illegitimate children and never working.

The recent Daily Mail story on the mother who let her then-12-year-olddaughter engage in smutty, sexually suggestive swimsuit modeling is a good example of what’s wrong. Because the daughter, now 15, is pregnant and unmarried, the family can now move into a bigger house courtesy of Britain’s welfare programs.

Prime Minister Cameron’s crusade against the broken society has been criticized on both sides of the Atlantic often by leftists, who deny the fundamental problem, and sometimes by conservative critics, who claim it smells of leftism.

Some even blamed his zeal for fixing what’s wrong and not focusing on poll-tested, bread-and-butter issues as the reason for his plurality in the 2010 election.

The prime minister now has an opportunity, with a tri-partisan parliamentary commitment, to stop what happened of late in London from happening again. It is recognition that there is a problem and something must be done sooner than later.

Unfortunately, too many U.S. politicians ignore the real reform that is needed and instead gravitate toward electorally safe issues.

If America is to remain the world’s greatest country, it must take action now to avoid the societal plagues of today’s Britain.

For without a change in direction, the big government mindset of President Obama will cripple our country.

— Dennis Lennox

In case you missed it

2011-08-18T13:59:00.003-04:00

I was quoted in today's edition of The Wall Street Journal. The story was written by reporter Ray A. Smith:

Fall's New Tune: To Every Suit There Is a Season

With Summer Ending, Top Men's Fashion Brands Push Thick, Wool Suits; Moving Away From Year-Round Fabrics

Thick, woolly suits will soon begin showing up in stores as designers push fall collections to persuade men to buy a suit for every season.

Brands including Burberry London, Hickey Freeman, and Dolce & Gabbana are moving away from the year-round suit and instead are pushing heavy-fabric suits and sport coats for fall, in thick English and Scottish tweeds and wools. The trend aims to resurrect the idea of the seasonal suit and pay homage to menswear heritage.

In the past, men bought suits according to season, with fabrics that reflected the weather. In fall and winter, that meant chunky, substantial wools. But beginning in the 1950s, with the advent of air conditioning in offices, many mainstream menswear brands moved toward year-round suits made of fine, soft and lightweight Italian fabrics that could be worn in any season, says Joseph Abboud, chief executive of HMX Group, owner of the Hickey Freeman brand. They were popular with men and less costly, in the long run, for brands to produce. The concept of buying a suit specifically for fall and winter became quaint.

"We've forgotten some of the great things that came out of menswear," says Mr. Abboud, who has launched a Hickey Freeman collection of suits and sport coats made of weightier fabrics called Best of Britain. "For so many years, we looked for year-round weights that can travel from Atlanta to New York to California. We wanted to bring back the idea of seasonal dressing. It's been missing from the market for a long time."

By promoting fall and winter suits, fashion brands may be able to get men to feel they have to buy a new suit or two. That may be a tough sell. Many men have gotten used to the idea of lighter-weight, year-round suits and may not warm up to the idea of wearing a suit made of thick, heavy fabric.

"I prefer suits with cloth that can be worn in at least three, if not four, seasons...which allows me to stretch my dollar," says 27-year-old Dennis Lennox, of Topinabee, Mich. Buying a suit specifically fabric-weighted for fall would depend above all on the price, followed by quality and features, since a seasonal suit is a bigger financial commitment than a year-round one, says Mr. Lennox, a spokesman and consultant at Sterling, Hoffman & Co., a media and publishing firm. [Emphasis added.]

Some men may perceive suits made of a heavy fabric to be too hot and uncomfortable to wear.

Mr. Abboud says that while the fabrics are heavy, they aren't the same as those used 20 years ago. "They are softer to the touch and use softer linings and canvases so it feels loosened up," he says. Still, Mr. Abboud acknowledges that a heavy-fabric suit "is not for everybody" and emphasizes that Hickey Freeman isn't abandoning year-round suits. "It's an add-on, not a replacement item," he says of the seasonal designs.

Eric Jennings, men's fashion director at Saks Fifth Avenue, says the retailer has ordered some of the heavy-fabric suits for fall. But, he says, "we have to be careful with the markets. This is geared toward the Northern market in the U.S., the colder weather stores. You can't do that in stores in the Sun Belt where half of our stores are. We're cognizant of weights and will give stores the appropriate weight for their climate."

Mr. Jennings says younger, contemporary customers are more likely to take to the heavier fabrics because of their novelty. "It would be a new sensation" for them in terms of how it feels to wear, he says. Older men, who have grown used to years of wearing smooth, light-weight, year-round suits may be more reluctant to switch, he says.

But the new designs could also appeal to men young and old who are attracted by the idea of heritage, Mr. Jennings says. "The buzzwords this season were authenticity and heritage and these fabrics were full of heritage and are authentic," he says.

— Dennis Lennox

Champlain's legacy defined

2011-08-15T16:43:00.002-04:00

I just finished reading the historian David Hackett Fischer’s book on Samuel de Champlain, the seventeenth century French explorer-cum-Ancien Régime functionary-cum-polymath.

“Champlain’s Dream” was an outstanding read. It gave me a greater appreciation of the role of France in colonizing what later became Canada and the United States.

New France is often overlooked, as Wolfe’s victory on the Plains of Abraham — named after a contemporary of Champlain — gradually erased the memory of New France from the minds of those outside La Belle Province.

One cannot help but wonder what might have happened had it not been for Champlain's determination to defy the odds and settle what is now several Canadian provinces and U.S. states.

Fischer’s book was also a much easier read than Gordon S. Wood’s “Empire of Liberty,” which at times strayed off and detailed seemingly inconsequential details.

“Champlain’s Dream” had the same easy-to-read rhythm as David McCullough’s “The Greater Journey: Americans in Paris” — another summer read of mine.

— Dennis Lennox

A letter from an American in London

2011-08-10T18:20:00.005-04:00

Editor's note — The following is a letter from Allyson Portee, a friend of mine who is an American expatriate living in London. She shares her thoughts on the recent riots in London.

It was Sunday afternoon when I checked my Facebook account. My aunt had written on my wall, concerned for my safety, because she had been watching CNN from Texas regarding the riots that were occurring in London. I immediately went to the BBC site.

Being a post-graduate student in student housing has left me without a TV. After watching live news feeds on the BBC site, reading Twitter updates, and seeing the arson damage that occurred in Tottenham the night before, made the situation all too clear. As I read more of how the riots were sparked from the death of a black man, Mark Duggan, last Thursday night, I thought that it was a race issue that would die over and I did not think any more of the situation.

Allyson Portee.

By Monday night, things were getting worse. Returning to the BBC site, the gravity of the situation became even clearer to me. Rioting, burnings, and lootings in Hackney, Lewisham, New Cross, Clapham, Croydon, Woolwich, and reports of incidents in Notting Hill, Camden, Oxford Circus, and Highbury/Angel were all over the news.

I live close to Camden, and Angel and I have friends that live in the parts of London that were being seriously attacked. The violent youths had moved out of the minority areas to the gentrified less minority areas, and that’s what made me start to worry a little. I prayed, contacted my parents, and tried to make sense of it all. Could all of this violence be over the death of one black man? I wasn’t buying it.

I’ve begun to try to understand the social reasoning behind London’s youths taking to the streets. Like me, most of my friends and I did not understand what these violent youths were trying to accomplish. I do think that race was the beginning factor that sparked the youth in Tottenham to engage in acts of violence in their own community because they feel that the police had unjustly killed a black man that had done nothing to them. However, in time and after a proper investigation of the death of Duggan, will tell what the causes of his death were.

Looking back at the 1981 Brixton riots, when blacks took to the streets of their own community in South London, looting, burning, and rioting, it became all to clear — blacks then, like the youths on Saturday in Tottenham, have for years had strained relations with the police. They feel that for so long, they have properly voiced their frustrations of their unequal living conditions, lack of a proper education, and the inability to find jobs to government officials, but that nothing has really been done for them. And finally, their suppressed frustrations, like in any community riot erupted in the form of violence towards their own communities and other London communities.

But the spread of the youth violence to other London communities, I think, was not solely over race. I think that it was over the frustration of the lack of opportunity, lack of education, poor living conditions, and lack of jobs for today’s British young people. A lot of these young people come from single parent homes with little income and lack of parental guidance. Ultimately, when people burn and destroy their own communities, like what has been done in London, Birmingham, Liverpool, and Manchester, they are only hurting themselves. Nevertheless, the anger, bitterness, annoyance of these young people, and their feeling that they are not being equally treated the same as other privileged youths sparked them to resort to violence because they simply want answers.

All the while, some of the adults in their communities have silently supported their actions. One black guy, during Mayor Boris Johnson’s visit to Clapham on Tuesday firmly told the mayor, “Listen to the black youth!”

This is certainly not going to be the last riot in London if there cannot be healthy dialogue between the two sides. There will always be a divide between those in power and those who feel that they are not being fairly heard.

Violence is not the answer, it never is because it only hurts other people, and in this case, hard working shop owners were hurt the most. But just like with terrorism, violence in rioting is the inevitable and illegitimate conclusion of asymmetric warfare, if the two sides cannot learn to work together for the better of the country.

In case you missed it

2011-08-05T11:04:00.002-04:00

I have a letter to the editor in today's edition of the Morning Sun, rebutting the partisan smears of guttersnipe Eric Baerren, a practitioner of the political black arts.

Centralized planning and zoning doesn't work

2011-08-03T15:30:00.003-04:00

Later tonight, a public hearing is being held in Topinabee, a small hamlet on Mullett Lake in Michigan's Mullett Township, to consider amendments to a planning and zoning ordinance.

The changes have sparked controversy in the otherwise politically apathetic Topinabee, which numbers well under a 100 year-round residents.

So why am I against the proposal?

First, I reject the basic premise that any change is needed. There is no so-called “village center” in Mullett Township.

In Michigan, a village has a distinct legal meaning apart from its colloquial use and Topinabee is, by no legal definition, a village. While I believe the intent in the use of village is in the colloquial sense, I do not believe a community with no legal personality or distinction needs the sort of planning and zoning provisions that are proposed tonight.

Because Topinabee is legally nothing, the accepted boundaries of what constitutes this hamlet are disputable. If the aim of this proposal is to improve the part of Mullett Township commonly known as Topinabee then why not include all of Topinabee in the proposal?

My second objection to this proposal rests with the fact the county's Planning Commission, which will be responsible for overseeing its implementation and enforcement, is — and I mean this with all due respect — unelected and unaccountable to the people of Mullett Township.

This troubles me. I believe that decisions concerning Mullett Township should be handled by the government of Mullett Township through its elected and appointed office-holders.

I live in a largely undeveloped township because I enjoy the peace, serenity and independence that comes with it. If I wanted centralized planning and zoning, I would live in a city. If I wanted an apparatchik from the City of Cheboygan or some other jurisdiction of the county telling me what I can and cannot do on my own property, I would leave Mullett Township and live in that place.

It also troubles me that the county official overseeing the Planning Commission — the director of community development — has a significant amount of control over development in our county yet he doesn’t even live in our county.

To me, this goes against the fundamental principle of self-government that has been enshrined in local government since the our state’s territorial days in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

My third objection rests with the simple fact that these proposed changes will do absolutely nothing to spur economic development, job creation and increased prosperity in Mullett Township.

It is a truism that centralized planning and zoning doesn't, by and large, work despite what those in Ann Arbor and Berkeley, California, may think. It may at times create picture-perfect vistas, but the results are dubious.

Look at Houston, Texas. Houston is literally everything Topinabee and by extension Cheboygan County is not. It is a thriving community — the fourth largest city in these United States — with over 2 million people. Yet this metropolis has no planning and zoning — you heard me right . . . Houston, Texas, has, and I repeat, no planning and zoning whatsoever.

Planning and zoning doesn’t create jobs. In fact, the most positive changes to this wonderful community of Topinabee in recent years have had nothing to do with planning and zoning.

The railroad trail didn’t open because a new planning and zoning regulation was passed.

The handcrafted furniture store didn’t open up because of planning and zoning changes. The improvements to the Topinabee Market or Breaker’s Bar and Grill didn’t come as a result of planning and zoning.

All of these changes came through free-market forces — not through benevolent leaders making irrational calculations.

In fact, Cheboygan County’s centralized government with its red-tape and apparatchiks with nothing to do except regulate, regulate and regulate have forced at least one business in Topinabee to close because of job-killing regulations. This cost Mullett Township jobs and much-needed tax revenue.

At a time when Cheboygan County has one of the worst economies in a state with one of the worst economies in the country, we must embrace sensible policies that embrace deregulation and limit the government’s role in economic affairs.

Notwithstanding, I also have a specific objections to the wording of the proposed changes.

In section 13C.1, it states that these changes are needed to lessen “the effects of sprawl.” What sprawl is there in Mullett Township? All I see is Cheboygan County losing population. I don’t see any haphazardly new development caused by a sudden jolt in the local economy. And if there is any sprawl in Topinabee, it is the proposed construction of new commercial airport hanger-sized pole barns, but I digress.

This section also states that only “small-scale commercial uses” are welcome in Topinabee. I strongly object. At a time of prolonged economic depression, any job creator should be embraced and welcomed with open arms be they small or large.

The whole list of so-called “permitted uses” in section 13C.2 is absurd. Why is the government picking and choosing who can or cannot create jobs, pay taxes and be a good member of the community? It is no wonder that Cheboygan County is suffering when there is this sort of mindset in local government.

A plain-reading of Section 13C.4.3 prohibits some forms of constitutionally-protected free speech. This troubles me and I can see this provision becoming a slippery slope toward an unelected, unaccountable government apparatchik determining what type of speech — commercial, personal, religious, political — is permissible in Mullett Township.

I would draw your attention to a recent court ruling, which struck down a similar ban on sign advertising for adult businesses in the City of Detroit. While obscene and against this community’s standards, the courts generally have a thin tolerance for encroachments on our free-speech rights under both the Michigan and federal constitutions.

I also object to section 13C.4.5, which unnecessary limits outdoor seating. Topinabee barely has a sidewalk — and what’s left of it is hardly used by pedestrians. I also question whether this could apply to the library, which has installed outside seating for patrons in a public right-of-way.

Section 13D.1 and section 13.D.4.2 again unnecessarily restrict development. I frankly don’t care if an office wants to open in Topinabee. I cannot believe we are trying to pick who can and cannot come to this community.

Our economy is in shambles. We cannot achieve a better, brighter future with anti-growth policies and regulations that restrict private property rights and hinder development.

For all of these reasons, I urge the Planning Commission to reject this proposal. Not only is it not needed, but these changes will not result in economic development, job creation and increased prosperity in Mullett Township or this wonderful hamlet otherwise known as Topinabee.

— Dennis Lennox

A summer update

2011-07-29T19:43:00.001-04:00

It's been rather quiet here of late, but I have been on a much-needed summer holiday that took me to Toronto, Québec City — the capital of La Belle Province, Fort Lennox in Saint-Paul-de-l'Île-aux-Noix, Québec, and Fort Ticonderoga in Ticonderoga, New York.

Here is a self-portrait of yours truly at Fort Lennox, which is named after His Grace the (4th) Duke of Richmond and Lennox.

Fort Lennox was constructed shortly after the duke died in service to the crown as governor general of British North America (Canada).

— Dennis Lennox

Michigan's 'Summer of Discontent' highlights recall flaws

2011-07-28T21:00:00.002-04:00

The Middle East may have had Arab Spring, but Michigan is in her “Summer of Discontent,” in the words of Calhoun County Clerk Anne Norlander.

Norlander is of course referring to wave of recall filings that have targeted legislators, Attorney General Bill Schuette and Governor Rick Snyder. (The vast majority of these recalls are initiated and funded by Democrat-aligned special interests through various local front groups.)

The sheer number of recalls highlight the need for real reform of Michigan’s recall provisions, according to many observers.

Recalls, as the Constitution’s drafters envisioned, were the electorate's tool of last resort — a mechanism to hold elected office-holder who engage in infamous and grave acts accountable.

Most states with recall provisions limit such action to an officeholder who commits malfeasance, nonfeasance, misfeasance or some other sort of malversation. This is also the historical standard in Michigan, as exemplified by the Supreme Court’s ruling in People, ex rel Elliot v O’Hara, which stated in part: “A [recall] petition is insufficient which merely charges an officer with doing what he has the legal right and duty to do.”

The Court of Appeals concurred in Noel v Oakland County Clerk by ruling that “incompetence in administering his/her duties as an elected official and in a manner not conducive to the betters interests” of constituents is not grounds in and of itself for a recall. This standard is necessary to “prevent an abuse of the elective franchise.”

However, conflicting judicial opinions have created a loose standard that is inconsistently applied across the state. Additionally, many recall targets, especially at the local levels of government, simply cannot afford a legal challenge and thus legally questionable recalls often go unchallenged.

The applicable standard requires a recall petition to have “enough language” for the targeted politician to identify the transaction to defend against and the electorate “the ability to make an informed decision about the recall petition.”

This standard is suppose to prohibit vague generalities and in theory should be uniformly applied throughout the state’s 83 counties. Yet, as the “Summer of Discontent” has shown, recall language can be approved in one county while identical language — literally word-for-word — is rejected by another county’s board of election commissioners.

Despite a state statute limiting a recall to “official conduct,” there’s a perception that an office-holder can be recalled for anything regardless of the truth of the accusation. If this were the case, a politician could be subjected to recall for a whole host of irrational reasons, including wearing a navy blue suit instead of a charcoal-colored suit. Nonetheless, this is a standard that some county board of election commissioners have used.

That clearly was not the intent of the constitutional provision reserving the right of the electorate to recall office-holders. However, drafters of the Constitution failed when they didn't provide guidance on the proper use of recalls. This has resulted in frivolous recalls that only serve as a chilling effect on public policy-making.

This sort of ambiguity has turned a tool meant for use in only the most grave of circumstances into a political soapbox, as most recalls fail to collect the requisite number of signatures to force a special election yet succeed in getting media coverage and tarnishing the personal and professional reputation of the targeted politician.

Thus the Legislature must act and reform the process governing recalls.

Notwithstanding the lack of consistent standards, there are also significant constitutional issues that must be resolved.

The speaker of the House of Representatives, Jase Bolger, is raising perhaps the strongest of the constitutional claims in litigation aimed at blocking a recall filed against him.

Through his attorney, Gary Gordon, a former deputy attorney general, Bolger is arguing the statute that tasks the board of election commissioners — the clerk, treasurer and probate court judge of the county where the office-holder resides — with determining whether language on the proposed recall petition is sufficiently clear for circulation amongst the electorate is unconstitutional on the grounds that is violates the separation of powers doctrine.

The clerk and treasurer are members of the executive branch of county government while the judge is a member of the judicial branch. By sitting together, as the board of election commissioners, there is an apparent conflict under article 3, section 2 of Michigan’s 1963 Constitution, which expressly prohibits a “person exercising powers of one branch” from exercising “powers properly belonging to another branch.”

It is an interesting argument that cannot be dismissed at face value.

This argument has been heard before — and the Supreme Court concurred with it in a 1968 case. In this ruling, which came only five years into the life of the Constitution, the court ruled the participation of a judge of the county’s probate court in gubernatorial proceedings to remove a county office-holder unconstitutional.

“The framers of the Constitution did not expressly provide for the joint exercise of the removal power by two or more branches of government,” the Supreme Court held in Buback v Governor.

If it is unconstitutional for a judge, acting jointly with the governor, to remove an office-holder, it should also be unconstitutional for a judge to partake in the recall process alongside the clerk and treasurer. It is constitutionally impossible for a judge to exercise executive, administrative and ministerial functions without running afoul of the separation of powers doctrine.

The Legislature could simply amend the statute and remove the judicial branch’s role in the county board of election commissioners.

But legislators should also consider additional reform that ensures a consistent and uniform standard in recall proceedings across the 83 counties.

Some areas of the state are experienced in recalls, which have become de rigueur in local politics, while others seldom, if ever, experience a recall. Because of this legislators should transfer the responsibility for determining the clarity of recalls from county board of election commissioners to the state’s Board of Canvassers.

The most urgent reform, however, is a constitutional amendment — ideally placed on the statewide ballot for a vote of the people in 2012 — that limits recalls of office-holders, including judges, to malfeasance, nonfeasance and misfeasance.

With county-wide recall elections costing on average $25,000, it has become necessary to ensure this important mechanism of accountability is used as intended and not abused by partisans seeking to rehash the results of a recent election.

And this year's “Summer of Discontent” provides legislators with a convenient opportunity to pass such reform.

— Dennis Lennox

'Michigan Matters' appearance

2011-07-11T08:51:00.000-04:00

In case you missed it, I joined Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson and Wayne County Executive Bob Ficano as panelists on "Michigan Matters" Sunday.

The weekly program, hosted by Carol Cain, airs weekly at 11 a.m. on CBS Detroit.

To watch yesterday's show, click here.

— Dennis Lennox

Federal ruling striking down constitutional ban on 'affirmative action' an affront to Michiganders; Schuette to appeal

2011-07-01T14:00:00.010-04:00

Editor's note — Updated to reflect the statement of Attorney General Bill Schuette.

Judges aren’t suppose to be politicians, yet today’s decision by the federal Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit striking down a voter-approved state constitutional amendment was conveniently released as Michiganders make the ritual drive up to Cottage Country for Independence Day weekend.

Any good politician or political spin-doctor knows the best time to take controversial action or release politically unpopular news is a Friday. A long holiday weekend? Even better.

The timing of the 2-1 decision is beyond queer and it could have been released the same day the Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of Obamacare.

Not only is the court’s ruling a direct affront to the federalist underpinning of the union, it ignores the 58 percent of Michiganders who approved Proposal 2 of 2006, as it was then known, to ban so-called "affirmative action" in public university admissions and government hiring and contracting.

In its ruling, the court deemed Proposal 2 "political restructuring" in violation of the fourteenth amendment of the federal Constitution. This is just absurd. Proposal 2 wasn't "political restructuring" — it was a ban on state-sponsored racism and inequality.

Because the political establishment of both parties and the Lansing chattering class fought passage of Proposal 2, it’s unlikely there will be much fuss in the halls of government as both houses of the Legislature are now on summer recess.

Declaring that Proposal 2 is grounded in "the fundamental premise of what America is all about: equal opportunity under the law," Attorney General Bill Schuette said his office would file an appeal, which means this case will ultimately head to the federal Supreme Court.

Despite the court’s attempt to muzzle public outcry by releasing its ruling on a Friday, it’s safe to say that Proposal 2 will be back in the news between now and November 2012, when it’s bound to become a national lighting rod between those who advocate racism and inequality and those who want no government preferences whatsoever.

Let’s just hope those in the Ivory Tower don't reverse all the gains made in the wake of Proposal 2’s passage between now and commencement of the school year late next month.

— Dennis Lennox

Proper attire for the bridegroom and groomsmen at an afternoon wedding

2011-06-28T17:13:00.008-04:00

Author’s note — While this blog has traditionally focused on matters of politics, public policy and governance, I decided to write this article after several friends have become engaged of late and sought my sartorial advice on what to wear at their wedding. I also hope that this will serve as a transition to the blog becoming multi-faceted with added cultural and lifestyle content in the weeks and months to come.

With a wedding ceremony set for an August afternoon in a Roman Catholic cathedral, it is not appropriate to wear a dinner jacket — a "tuxedo" to gentlemen without sartorial intelligence — as it is evening wear and must be relegated to post-6 o’clock occasions.

This will certainly come as a surprise to those who believe no wedding is complete without a "tuxedo." As GQ humorously opined, marriages that begin with a gentleman wearing a dinner jacket "incorrectly at daytime weddings" typically "end in divorce."

So unless you want a divorce, you are left with two options: morning dress or a lounge suit.

The time-honored choice would be morning dress, which while not a common choice amongst Americans is the appropriate daytime formal attire.

Unlike a traditional suit, morning dress consists of a coat — not a jacket, waistcoat and trousers which are generally striped and not of a matching cloth as the coat. (Grey morning coats can be worn with a pair of matching grey trousers to form a morning suit, however, coats of other colors should be worn with striped, non-matching trousers.)

Proper morning dress.

The coat itself, made of charcoal, grey herringbone, or midnight blue cloth, has tails, is single-breasted and has no waist pockets. It is fastened with one button and has peaked lapels. The waistcoat — a vest in common vernacular — is usually buff or sky blue and is preferred to be double-breasted with lapels. Uncuffed Trousers are worn at the natural waist and are secured by braces or side tabs — a belt is not appropriate. A regular dress shirt with a semi-spread or cutaway collar and French cuffs is worn along with a tie. A plain pocket square is folded and inserted into the breast pocket of the coat. Finally, the ensemble is completed with regular black Oxford shoes. Under no circumstances are patent leather shoes worn nor should the bridegroom consider loafers.

By far the most timeless of options, morning dress does present a significant challenge in its lack of versatility.

Because most formal rental shops are unlikely to have proper morning dress, you will likely have to purchase the attire. Despite being an investment, you are unlikely to wear morning dress more than a couple of times in your lifetime unless you regularly appear before the Supreme Court or move to a Commonwealth country, where daytime social affairs almost always require morning dress. (By tradition the government’s lawyer — the solicitor general — wears morning dress before the federal Supreme Court. Some state high courts also follow this tradition.)

Nevertheless, morning dress would create a memorable wedding and would separate your ceremony on the social calendar from the other drab, cookie-cutter weddings. Though expensive, traditionally only the bridegroom and his groomsmen would wear it with other guests adhering to a dress code of a lounge suit for gentleman and dress for ladies.

The second and arguably more practicable option is a simple lounge suit for the bridegroom and groomsmen.

While not as original as morning dress, such attire would be both more affordable and versatile. Depending on the quality and make, the cost range for an off-the-rack suit is approximately $200 to $800.

Going this route would also allow the wearer to use the lounge suit in the future to supplement existing suits for personal and business wear, though it is advisable that the bridegroom avoid an overt business suit with boardroom details such as pinstripes.

Instead, the wedding could be used as an opportunity to purchase a seasonal and somewhat whimsical suit — think seersucker or madras — made of linen, cotton or a blend thereof. If you option for a solid color and not a seersucker or madras, look for something that is more bespoke than normal with peek lapels, side vents or a ticket pocket. These luxuries give a relaxed dress code an air of formality.

A seersucker wedding.

The ultimate decision on what gentlemen should wear should be made by the bridegroom.

Just as he would not dare impose his wishes on the bride’s gown, she should not influence the decision of her soon-to-be husband.

One also should not be influenced by cost or pressure by clothing store or rental salesclerks, as there are plenty of affordable options in both the morning dress and lounge suit ranges.

Because a wedding is — at least intended to be — once-in-a-lifetime, the bridegroom should err on the side of ensuring a memorable and special event.

Lastly, the would-be husband and wife should also take great caution to ensure that guests to the ceremony are properly attired. It is worth consulting a proper guide on etiquette and dress codes, as many common practices are incorrect or result in confusion amongst guests.

— Dennis Lennox

Let the people have their say on county government

2011-06-23T14:26:00.002-04:00

With a vacancy in the position of county administrator, it's time for a serious discussion on which type of county government chieftain is best for Cheboygan County.

When I served as drain commissioner, one of the reforms that I introduced gave the people a vote on having either an elected or unelected head of county government. Unfortunately, Mr. Overton and then-members of the Board of Commissioners blocked it from appearing on the ballot.

Currently, the day-to-day operations not overseen by an elected executive branch officeholder — sheriff, prosecutor, clerk, treasurer, drain commissioner, surveyor — are run by the Board of Commissioners — the legislative branch of county government — who hire an administrator to carry out these duties.

The administrator, who is unelected and cannot be held responsible by the people, has significant power and often breaches the constitutional separation of powers that is suppose to exist between county government's legislative and executive branches.

This arrangement has also isolated the commissioners from political concerns, as the administrator, at least during Mr. Overton's tenure, has been their go-to man for responding to constituent complaints and serving as the public face of Cheboygan County even though that's the job they were elected to perform.

When something goes wrong or disgruntled constituents enquire about something of concern, members of the legislative branch blame the administrator, who in turn says he isn't responsible and commissioners are to blame. As one may imagine, this sort of runaround becomes very convenient in avoiding scrutiny.

Many nearby counties — Alpena, Charlevoix and Presque Isle — function without the costly expense of an administrator. In those counties, the commissioners actually do their job and any day-to-day management of county government is handled by either the elected executive branch officials or the appointed department heads. There's little need for a costly middleman.

Other counties have an elected head of county government, who functions essentially as a county mayor.

Unlike an unelected administrator, an elected executive has democratic accountability and serves as an important check-and-balance to the whims of the legislative branch. (This system also allows for considerable streamlining, which moves county government away from the archaic and heavily fragmented structure that exists in counties without an elected executive.)

Instead of rushing to fill Mr. Overton's vacancy, Cheboygan County's leaders should put a question on the ballot next August and allow the people their say. After all, it's their government.

— Dennis Lennox

Why I resigned

2011-06-06T11:18:00.002-04:00

Earlier today, I announced my resignation as drain commissioner of Cheboygan County in an interview with Norm Jones of WTCM AM-580.

My decision to resign was not driven by political concerns, as I am confident that I would have secured a renewed mandate from the electorate if I sought re-election. Having accepted a full-time professional opportunity in the private sector, it wasn't possible for me to dedicate the necessary time to carry out the duties and responsibilities of this office. Remaining in office for the sake of remaining in office is not what the people expect and deserve — and it's never the way I have carried myself as a public servant.

I am proud of my record of fighting tirelessly to reform county government and engage in a critical conversation on the future direction of our community. My reforms have included an elected head of county government; consolidating my office, the Board of Public Works and the Road Commission into one agency; a blue-ribbon citizen commission to review all facets of county government; an independent, citizen-led commission to set the pay of elected officials; reduction of the number of seats on the Board of Commissioners from seven to five members; and ensuring full transparency by posting the county's checkbook expenditures and budgets on the internet for taxpayer scrutiny and review. I am also proud of my record in conserving our water resources — a precious gift from God — and defending our traditional values against those who want a secular county government.

Looking ahead toward 2012, it's time for the people to come together and push the real change that Cheboygan County so desperately needs. We cannot allow our elected officials to plod along and appease those who stymie our community with the preservation of the status quo. Standing up and making your voice heard doesn't require a title. All it requires is a will to make a difference and get involved.

I leave office with an enormous respect for the people and the trust that they bestowed upon me as their voice in county government. I look forward to staying involved and making sure the voices for reform are heard in the halls of government.

My resignation was made formal in a letter to the county clerk, prosecuting attorney and Probate Court judge. Under state law, the prosecuting attorney and clerk will be tasked with appointing an acting drain commissioner, who will serve the remainder of my term.

— Dennis Lennox

Mackinac Policy Conference: Moving Michigan forward

2011-06-01T21:53:00.002-04:00

Governor Snyder delivers the opening address of the Mackinac Policy Conference.

I just returned home from day one of the Mackinac Policy Conference on Mackinac Island.

The annual event is a must-attend for anyone interested in public policy and state government. It brings together business leaders, political leaders and opinion-makers for a couple days of much-needed discussions on the future of Michigan.

While traditionally oriented toward Detroit — after all it’s hosted by the Detroit Regional Chamber — the conference has expanded its focus in recent years to encompass ideas and issues that impact all of the state.

Many up here in cottage country simply look the other way when it comes to the economic woes facing the state’s largest city. But that narrow-minded approach is bad for Michigan.

Let’s face it: A strong, vibrant and prosperous Detroit equals a better, brighter future for all of Michigan. What’s good for Detroit and by extensive southeastern Michigan is good for Cheboygan County.

This sentiment was best expressed in a simple gray t-shirt from Goodwill Industries of Greater Detroit. The shirt proudly proclaimed a simple message: “Outsource to Detroit.”

That simple message overtook the Mackinac Policy Conference — and became the talked about item on Twitter. More importantly, the shirt’s message recognizes the ship of state won’t float without Detroit.

All of the first day speakers except UAW president Bob King understood that real change is needed.

King took the stage about an hour after Governor Rick Snyder opened the conference with a strong speech outlining the reforms that his administration has achieved in the first six months of his term.

King tried his best to come off as a reformer. Literally every other word of his 24-minute speech was “moderate” or “pragmatic.”

Though union leaders have received lukewarm welcomes at past conferences, King’s reception was far from friendly and he received only courtesy applause.

Frankly, I believe King is a hypocrite. The UAW and its leaders believe raising taxes is the solution to much of government’s woes.

Unfortunately, the UAW doesn’t believe it has to pay its fair share of taxes, at least when it comes to the union’s lavish $33 million resort in Cheboygan County.

This is something that I have previously written about and spoken out against. It’s something very important to my constituents in Waverly Township, whose children are cheated out a quality education because King’s union constantly fights its property tax assessments.

Getting back to the Mackinac Policy Conference, the big takeaway is what a difference a year makes.

I know that sounds a bit cliché, but it’s true.

This time last year, Michigan was suffering under the failed old policies of then-Governor Jennifer Granholm.

Since then, state government has moved toward the right direction both literally and figuratively.

Governor Snyder has led the charge for real reform. He’s committed his administration to “reinventing Michigan.”

In the Legislature, the state’s budget was passed before June for the first time since William Milliken was governor.

And with the repeal of the Michigan Business Tax, the proverbial “open for business” sign has been posted at the state borders to let innovators and job creators known that they’re welcome here.

Sure there’s a lot more that can be done, especially in the area of government reform, but a lot of good has come since January.

Michiganders are finally realizing that we need to come together to solve our state’s challenges.

Balkanizing the state — Detroit verses the rest of Michigan — won’t work and must end.

And that’s why the Mackinac Policy Conference is so valuable.

It’s one of the few opportunities for sensible minds from across the spectrum to come together, share ideas and come up with solutions.

I’m confident that we can turnaround our great state if we continue moving forward and reject the divisive politics of naysayers.

— Dennis Lennox

Why I use Twitter

2011-05-27T10:47:00.000-04:00

Managing the complex web of bureaucracy and overlapping areas of state and local government can be tough even for the more seasoned of elected officials, which is why I use Twitter to help constituents in cutting red tape and solving real world issues.

Often I get a telephone call from a frustrated person who just wants someone — anyone — to solve their issue. In many cases, the calls deal with state government and often the best way to reach the state capital is through a public posting on Twitter.

I have used Twitter several times in recent weeks to report state highway drainage-related issues. The Department of Transportation has a dedicated Twitter moderator, who proceeds to pass the complaint on to the appropriate person.

It probably would have taken me two or three telephone calls and a couple hours of phone tag to get the same results. Not only does this get the attention of higher ups in the bureaucracy, it also lets the public know that something is being done — there’s full transparency.

I started using Twitter in instances such as this when a constituent had called virtually every local or state government agency imaginable after his property was regularly flooded because of poor roadside drainage.

After hearing of the situation, I sent a quick Twitter message to the Department of Transportation and within a day or two, work crews were dispatched to dredge out a new drainage ditch.

— Dennis Lennox

Setting the record straight

2011-05-13T13:30:00.000-04:00

I wanted to set the record straight on the latest vendetta political opponents are carrying out against me.

As drain commissioner, I’ve repeatedly stood up and advocated sensible reforms. I didn’t run to make friends or be Mr. Popular. I ran to make a difference, which requires making tough decisions that aren’t politically popular.

When the recall stunt fizzled out due to the $40,000 price tag of a special election, they had to find something else. Now it’s the unprecedented and unconstitutional step of removing an elected official.

I’m not going to give in to their political games. I’ll continue serving to the best of my ability regardless of what my opponents say and do.

I’ve made mistakes, but who doesn’t.

The idea that some are trying to remove me from office because they disagree with the tough decisions I have had to make is absurd. If you disagree with what I’ve done, run for my office at the election next year.

I have no intentions of seeking re-election. I’ve done my best to fight those who prefer the status-quo over real change all because I’m sick and tired of watching families and jobs leave Cheboygan County.

With or without the backing of political opponents, I’ll spend the remainder of my term working to improve our community by reforming county government and its job-killing red tape.

— Dennis Lennox

An update on county government

2011-04-27T08:07:00.003-04:00

Photograph by Zac Britton/Cheboygan Daily Tribune

On Tuesday, I appeared before the Cheboygan County Board of Commissioners to answer several questions the members indicated they had for me. While the political posturing that surrounded the event was unfortunate, it was an opportunity to engage in a constructive dialogue with my counterparts in county government and work toward the shared goal of bettering our community and ensuring a brighter future for the next generation.

Political opponents — mostly the vested status quo crowd; those who fear the sensible reform that I have long advocated — can say what they want, but my record as the drain commissioner of Cheboygan County speaks for itself.

In almost two and a half years of serving as drain commissioner I have yet to receive a single complaint from a constituent. Instead, my office continues to receive compliments from constituents pleased with the level of service I’m providing to Cheboygan County. This speaks volumes, as I don’t know of too many elected office-holders, at any level of government, who can say the same thing.

I believe the people want their elected officials to put aside political and ideological differences and work together. That's what I have done as drain commissioner. I'm ready and willing to work with anyone to improve our community.

The following are answers that I delivered to the Board of Commissioners:

There were a series of hypothetical questions about my office's plans for the future.

"I intend to inspect, repair and maintain county drains in accordance with the Drain Code."

. . .

A question was asked about whether I had a deputy drain commissioner.

"There is no deputy drain commissioner of the County of Cheboygan."

. . .

There were questions if my office had a fee schedule to off-set operating costs.

"The Board of Commissioners has declined its assent to a fee schedule for the Office of Drain Commissioner."

. . .

A question was asked about what type of meetings I attend as county drain commissioner.

"I regularly attend a variety of meetings in my capacity as drain commissioner. Since taking office these meetings have included, but are not limited to, township and other local government meetings, special meetings with constituents outside of office hours, field inspections to review pending permits, educational and training seminars, community organizations that have invited me to speak or answer questions related to my office and county government, testimony before committees of the Michigan Legislature, field inspections resulting from constituent reports of drainage-related issues, meetings with state and federal legislators as well as other officials to request state and federal funding and grants of public works projects, public hearings and other meetings from time to time."

. . .

There were submitted and follow-up questions concerning my office's annual report.

"The Drain Code requires my office to deliver an annual report by October of each year to the Board of Commissioners. I have delivered this report for 2009 and 2010 and provided courtesy copies to constituents, local governments and other interested parties and stakeholders. It is worth noting that I am the first drain commissioner in our county to submit a report in at least several decades. Curiously, the Board of Commissioners never inquired about the failure of past drain commissioners to deliver an annual report."

Additionally, there is a fair story on the Cheboygan Daily Tribune website recapping yesterday’s appearance. (And if you missed it, check out Tuesday's story on the public announcement by my office.)

— Dennis Lennox

What constitutes a conservative?

2011-04-18T14:04:00.002-04:00

One often hears that this person or that person isn't a conservative. Listening to these self-proclaimed judges of conservatism, you would think there was a clear cut authority on the matter.

In reality, the opposite is true. Most political theorists will further argue that conservatism itself isn't a political ideology, but rather a mindset; a way of life.

Perhaps the best authority on the matter is Michigan's late Russell Kirk. He was the definitive American conservative thinker of the 20th century.

The following is a must-read article adapted from Kirk's The Politics of Prudence:

Ten Conservative Principles

By Russell Kirk

Being neither a religion nor an ideology, the body of opinion termed conservatism possesses no Holy Writ and no Das Kapital to provide dogmata. So far as it is possible to determine what conservatives believe, the first principles of the conservative persuasion are derived from what leading conservative writers and public men have professed during the past two centuries. After some introductory remarks on this general theme, I will proceed to list ten such conservative principles.

Perhaps it would be well, most of the time, to use this word “conservative” as an adjective chiefly. For there exists no Model Conservative, and conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order.

The attitude we call conservatism is sustained by a body of sentiments, rather than by a system of ideological dogmata. It is almost true that a conservative may be defined as a person who thinks himself such. The conservative movement or body of opinion can accommodate a considerable diversity of views on a good many subjects, there being no Test Act or Thirty-Nine Articles of the conservative creed.

In essence, the conservative person is simply one who finds the permanent things more pleasing than Chaos and Old Night. (Yet conservatives know, with Burke, that healthy “change is the means of our preservation.”) A people’s historic continuity of experience, says the conservative, offers a guide to policy far better than the abstract designs of coffee-house philosophers. But of course there is more to the conservative persuasion than this general attitude.

It is not possible to draw up a neat catalogue of conservatives’ convictions; nevertheless, I offer you, summarily, ten general principles; it seems safe to say that most conservatives would subscribe to most of these maxims. In various editions of my book The Conservative Mind I have listed certain canons of conservative thought—the list differing somewhat from edition to edition; in my anthology The Portable Conservative Reader I offer variations upon this theme. Now I present to you a summary of conservative assumptions differing somewhat from my canons in those two books of mine. In fine, the diversity of ways in which conservative views may find expression is itself proof that conservatism is no fixed ideology. What particular principles conservatives emphasize during any given time will vary with the circumstances and necessities of that era. The following ten articles of belief reflect the emphases of conservatives in America nowadays.

First, the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order. That order is made for man, and man is made for it: human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent.

This word order signifies harmony. There are two aspects or types of order: the inner order of the soul, and the outer order of the commonwealth. Twenty-five centuries ago, Plato taught this doctrine, but even the educated nowadays find it difficult to understand. The problem of order has been a principal concern of conservatives ever since conservative became a term of politics.

Our twentieth-century world has experienced the hideous consequences of the collapse of belief in a moral order. Like the atrocities and disasters of Greece in the fifth century before Christ, the ruin of great nations in our century shows us the pit into which fall societies that mistake clever self-interest, or ingenious social controls, for pleasing alternatives to an oldfangled moral order.

It has been said by liberal intellectuals that the conservative believes all social questions, at heart, to be questions of private morality. Properly understood, this statement is quite true. A society in which men and women are governed by belief in an enduring moral order, by a strong sense of right and wrong, by personal convictions about justice and honor, will be a good society—whatever political machinery it may utilize; while a society in which men and women are morally adrift, ignorant of norms, and intent chiefly upon gratification of appetites, will be a bad society—no matter how many people vote and no matter how liberal its formal constitution may be.

Second, the conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity. It is old custom that enables people to live together peaceably; the destroyers of custom demolish more than they know or desire. It is through convention—a word much abused in our time—that we contrive to avoid perpetual disputes about rights and duties: law at base is a body of conventions. Continuity is the means of linking generation to generation; it matters as much for society as it does for the individual; without it, life is meaningless. When successful revolutionaries have effaced old customs, derided old conventions, and broken the continuity of social institutions—why, presently they discover the necessity of establishing fresh customs, conventions, and continuity; but that process is painful and slow; and the new social order that eventually emerges may be much inferior to the old order that radicals overthrew in their zeal for the Earthly Paradise.

Conservatives are champions of custom, convention, and continuity because they prefer the devil they know to the devil they don’t know. Order and justice and freedom, they believe, are the artificial products of a long social experience, the result of centuries of trial and reflection and sacrifice. Thus the body social is a kind of spiritual corporation, comparable to the church; it may even be called a community of souls. Human society is no machine, to be treated mechanically. The continuity, the life-blood, of a society must not be interrupted. Burke’s reminder of the necessity for prudent change is in the mind of the conservative. But necessary change, conservatives argue, ought to be gradual and discriminatory, never unfixing old interests at once.

Third, conservatives believe in what may be called the principle of prescription. Conservatives sense that modern people are dwarfs on the shoulders of giants, able to see farther than their ancestors only because of the great stature of those who have preceded us in time. Therefore conservatives very often emphasize the importance of prescription—that is, of things established by immemorial usage, so that the mind of man runneth not to the contrary. There exist rights of which the chief sanction is their antiquity—including rights to property, often. Similarly, our morals are prescriptive in great part. Conservatives argue that we are unlikely, we moderns, to make any brave new discoveries in morals or politics or taste. It is perilous to weigh every passing issue on the basis of private judgment and private rationality. The individual is foolish, but the species is wise, Burke declared. In politics we do well to abide by precedent and precept and even prejudice, for the great mysterious incorporation of the human race has acquired a prescriptive wisdom far greater than any man’s petty private rationality.

Fourth, conservatives are guided by their principle of prudence. Burke agrees with Plato that in the statesman, prudence is chief among virtues. Any public measure ought to be judged by its probable long-run consequences, not merely by temporary advantage or popularity. Liberals and radicals, the conservative says, are imprudent: for they dash at their objectives without giving much heed to the risk of new abuses worse than the evils they hope to sweep away. As John Randolph of Roanoke put it, Providence moves slowly, but the devil always hurries. Human society being complex, remedies cannot be simple if they are to be efficacious. The conservative declares that he acts only after sufficient reflection, having weighed the consequences. Sudden and slashing reforms are as perilous as sudden and slashing surgery.

Fifth, conservatives pay attention to the principle of variety. They feel affection for the proliferating intricacy of long-established social institutions and modes of life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity and deadening egalitarianism of radical systems. For the preservation of a healthy diversity in any civilization, there must survive orders and classes, differences in material condition, and many sorts of inequality. The only true forms of equality are equality at the Last Judgment and equality before a just court of law; all other attempts at levelling must lead, at best, to social stagnation. Society requires honest and able leadership; and if natural and institutional differences are destroyed, presently some tyrant or host of squalid oligarchs will create new forms of inequality.

Sixth, conservatives are chastened by their principle of imperfectability. Human nature suffers irremediably from certain grave faults, the conservatives know. Man being imperfect, no perfect social order ever can be created. Because of human restlessness, mankind would grow rebellious under any utopian domination, and would break out once more in violent discontent—or else expire of boredom. To seek for utopia is to end in disaster, the conservative says: we are not made for perfect things. All that we reasonably can expect is a tolerably ordered, just, and free society, in which some evils, maladjustments, and suffering will continue to lurk. By proper attention to prudent reform, we may preserve and improve this tolerable order. But if the old institutional and moral safeguards of a nation are neglected, then the anarchic impulse in humankind breaks loose: “the ceremony of innocence is drowned.” The ideologues who promise the perfection of man and society have converted a great part of the twentieth-century world into a terrestrial hell.

Seventh, conservatives are persuaded that freedom and property are closely linked. Separate property from private possession, and Leviathan becomes master of all. Upon the foundation of private property, great civilizations are built. The more widespread is the possession of private property, the more stable and productive is a commonwealth. Economic levelling, conservatives maintain, is not economic progress. Getting and spending are not the chief aims of human existence; but a sound economic basis for the person, the family, and the commonwealth is much to be desired.

Sir Henry Maine, in his Village Communities, puts strongly the case for private property, as distinguished from communal property: “Nobody is at liberty to attack several property and to say at the same time that he values civilization. The history of the two cannot be disentangled.” For the institution of several property—that is, private property—has been a powerful instrument for teaching men and women responsibility, for providing motives to integrity, for supporting general culture, for raising mankind above the level of mere drudgery, for affording leisure to think and freedom to act. To be able to retain the fruits of one’s labor; to be able to see one’s work made permanent; to be able to bequeath one’s property to one’s posterity; to be able to rise from the natural condition of grinding poverty to the security of enduring accomplishment; to have something that is really one’s own—these are advantages difficult to deny. The conservative acknowledges that the possession of property fixes certain duties upon the possessor; he accepts those moral and legal obligations cheerfully.

Eighth, conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism. Although Americans have been attached strongly to privacy and private rights, they also have been a people conspicuous for a successful spirit of community. In a genuine community, the decisions most directly affecting the lives of citizens are made locally and voluntarily. Some of these functions are carried out by local political bodies, others by private associations: so long as they are kept local, and are marked by the general agreement of those affected, they constitute healthy community. But when these functions pass by default or usurpation to centralized authority, then community is in serious danger. Whatever is beneficent and prudent in modern democracy is made possible through cooperative volition. If, then, in the name of an abstract Democracy, the functions of community are transferred to distant political direction—why, real government by the consent of the governed gives way to a standardizing process hostile to freedom and human dignity.

For a nation is no stronger than the numerous little communities of which it is composed. A central administration, or a corps of select managers and civil servants, however well intentioned and well trained, cannot confer justice and prosperity and tranquility upon a mass of men and women deprived of their old responsibilities. That experiment has been made before; and it has been disastrous. It is the performance of our duties in community that teaches us prudence and efficiency and charity.

Ninth, the conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power and upon human passions. Politically speaking, power is the ability to do as one likes, regardless of the wills of one’s fellows. A state in which an individual or a small group are able to dominate the wills of their fellows without check is a despotism, whether it is called monarchical or aristocratic or democratic. When every person claims to be a power unto himself, then society falls into anarchy. Anarchy never lasts long, being intolerable for everyone, and contrary to the ineluctable fact that some persons are more strong and more clever than their neighbors. To anarchy there succeeds tyranny or oligarchy, in which power is monopolized by a very few.

The conservative endeavors to so limit and balance political power that anarchy or tyranny may not arise. In every age, nevertheless, men and women are tempted to overthrow the limitations upon power, for the sake of some fancied temporary advantage. It is characteristic of the radical that he thinks of power as a force for good—so long as the power falls into his hands. In the name of liberty, the French and Russian revolutionaries abolished the old restraints upon power; but power cannot be abolished; it always finds its way into someone’s hands. That power which the revolutionaries had thought oppressive in the hands of the old regime became many times as tyrannical in the hands of the radical new masters of the state.

Knowing human nature for a mixture of good and evil, the conservative does not put his trust in mere benevolence. Constitutional restrictions, political checks and balances, adequate enforcement of the laws, the old intricate web of restraints upon will and appetite—these the conservative approves as instruments of freedom and order. A just government maintains a healthy tension between the claims of authority and the claims of liberty.

Tenth, the thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society. The conservative is not opposed to social improvement, although he doubts whether there is any such force as a mystical Progress, with a Roman P, at work in the world. When a society is progressing in some respects, usually it is declining in other respects. The conservative knows that any healthy society is influenced by two forces, which Samuel Taylor Coleridge called its Permanence and its Progression. The Permanence of a society is formed by those enduring interests and convictions that gives us stability and continuity; without that Permanence, the fountains of the great deep are broken up, society slipping into anarchy. The Progression in a society is that spirit and that body of talents which urge us on to prudent reform and improvement; without that Progression, a people stagnate.

Therefore the intelligent conservative endeavors to reconcile the claims of Permanence and the claims of Progression. He thinks that the liberal and the radical, blind to the just claims of Permanence, would endanger the heritage bequeathed to us, in an endeavor to hurry us into some dubious Terrestrial Paradise. The conservative, in short, favors reasoned and temperate progress; he is opposed to the cult of Progress, whose votaries believe that everything new necessarily is superior to everything old.

Change is essential to the body social, the conservative reasons, just as it is essential to the human body. A body that has ceased to renew itself has begun to die. But if that body is to be vigorous, the change must occur in a regular manner, harmonizing with the form and nature of that body; otherwise change produces a monstrous growth, a cancer, which devours its host. The conservative takes care that nothing in a society should ever be wholly old, and that nothing should ever be wholly new. This is the means of the conservation of a nation, quite as it is the means of conservation of a living organism. Just how much change a society requires, and what sort of change, depend upon the circumstances of an age and a nation.

Such, then, are ten principles that have loomed large during the two centuries of modern conservative thought. Other principles of equal importance might have been discussed here: the conservative understanding of justice, for one, or the conservative view of education. But such subjects, time running on, I must leave to your private investigation.

The great line of demarcation in modern politics, Eric Voegelin used to point out, is not a division between liberals on one side and totalitarians on the other. No, on one side of that line are all those men and women who fancy that the temporal order is the only order, and that material needs are their only needs, and that they may do as they like with the human patrimony. On the other side of that line are all those people who recognize an enduring moral order in the universe, a constant human nature, and high duties toward the order spiritual and the order temporal.

— Dennis Lennox

Breaking: Investigation concludes; county asked to fire administrator

2011-04-18T13:32:00.001-04:00

The administrator of Cheboygan County government could be terminated after a two-week internal investigation determined he abused access to public records to engage in unethical and potentially illegal conduct.

A formal complaint submitted over the weekend to the county’s Board of Commissioners called for the "immediate termination" of Administrator Michael Overton.

The complaint came after I determined that Overton improperly accessed my office's records and made a harassing telephone call to a person who regularly interacts with my office.

On April 4 at approximately 3 p.m., Overton called the person, whose name is being withheld to protect the person’s privacy rights. This person has had no interactions with county government other than my office and Overton could have only gained access to the telephone number by accessing the my office's records.

Those who interact with elected officials have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The idea that an apparatchik is going through an elected official's records and then harassing those who interacted with that official is simply unimaginable and best belongs in a George Orwell novel.

My investigation utilized records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act to make its determination.

In my complaint to Board of Commissioners Chairman Linda Socha, I wrote:

Mr. Overton cannot be allowed to continue his unprofessional, unethical, improper and illegal conduct and behavior. He must be held accountable. Nothing short of Mr. Overton's immediate termination as administrator will resolve these matters.

— Dennis Lennox

Michigan or France?

2011-03-25T19:06:00.000-04:00

If it wasn't for the Français des noms géographiques, one may think this article from The Guardian was describing the historical anachronisms that make up local government here in Michigan:

The mayor is at the heart of civic life, but above that are several layers of local and regional government, each with its own responsibilities, tax powers, independence and back office.

Tatham takes me down to the bridge across the river that bisects his village in an attempt to explain how France in governed. On one side is the département of Sarthe, on the other is the départment of Orne. Cross the bridge and he loses all power. Two other authorities have responsibility for the road crossing the bridge and a tiny metal button nestled in the brickwork marks the boundary.

"No doubt about it, the French state is too complicated; nobody understands it. When things are that complicated it makes civil servants very powerful because only they understand how it works," he says.

A huge reorganisation of regional government is under way, with plans to merge the councillors of 96 départements, created by Napoleon and designed for a man on a horse to cross in a day, with 22 regional councils.

— Dennis Lennox

Governor Snyder delivers special message on local government reform; endorses metropolitan government

2011-03-21T10:39:00.000-04:00

Announcing that Michiganders must “look beyond our own immediate township, city and county boundaries in order to build a stronger” state, Governor Rick Snyder delivered a special message to the Legislature on Monday that urged specific reforms of local government.

The heavily anticipated announcement was made at City Hall in Grand Rapids, which could soon find itself part of amalgamated city-county metropolitan government — a proposal the governor endorsed.

Many of Governor Snyder’s reforms were anticipated. He called for overhauling revenue sharing between state coffers and local governments, changing labor laws to ease service collaboration amongst neighboring communities and stopping state legislation from imposing unfunded mandates on local governments.

He also called for amalgamation — albeit voluntarily.

“We should permit open minds across the state to not only enter into collaborations, but to consolidate governmental units and activities as appropriate in their respective communities,” said Governor Snyder. “The final decision regarding such consolidation should be left at the local level, but the consideration of such consolidation must not be prevented or discouraged by state government.”

Governor Snyder’s support for amalgamation is one of the most prominent calls for radical reform heard in a long time. He went about as far as he could in calling for a reduction in the number of counties, townships, cities and villages without declaring a revolution against the Neanderthal-controlled Ancien Régime.

While there are existing mechanisms for two townships to voluntarily merge, reforms along those lines are unlikely without significant state action. As for Michigan’s 83 counties, changes to these archaic boundaries can only occur through acts of the Legislature — a process that last occurred in 1891.

The governor’s special message was a much-needed departure from the status quo that has plagued state government for too long.

Governor Snyder is thinking outside the box and putting forth innovative solutions that if enacted will help right the ship of state.

— Dennis Lennox

Michigan deserves her say in the G.O.P. presidential nomination

2011-03-15T15:45:00.005-04:00

While some states are canceling presidential primary elections or holding them in conjunction with regularly scheduled local and state elections, there is a growing call within Michigan Republican circles to ensure the state is a player in next year’s nomination process.

As it stands now, Michigan will most likely hold a primary on Tuesday, February 21, 2012. Though this date is earlier than other states it may be too late in the process.

Barring a prolonged tussle similar to what Democrats went through in 2008, a nominee will likely emerge by mid-February, as several states are jockeying to compete for national and even international attention with Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

As you recall last time, Michigan was a major player with her primary on January 15, 2008. There was even a nationally televised debate for Republican hopefuls in metropolitan Detroit.

With the economy set to be a major issue in the 2012 campaign, there’s no better state for Republican hopefuls to highlight their alternatives to the failed policies of President Obama’s administration.

"Michigan will do what it has to do to remain relevant in the primary season," state Republican Party chairman Robert Schostak told Lansing-based MIRS News. "What does that mean for a primary date? We'll need to see more of the lay of the land."

It’s good to hear encouraging words from Mr. Schostak, who wants to see Michigan remain a national player.

But words aren’t good enough. Now is the time for action.

With would-be presidential candidates preparing candidacy announcements for this spring and early summer, it’s important to finalize the process ahead of time and get any necessary legislation through both houses of the Legislature and to the governor’s desk.

Taking action now will also allow for a proper discussion on what method state Republicans should use this time around.

In recent decades, Michigan has had a relatively open primary election in which any registered elector could decide the party’s eventual nominee.

To prevent meddling by Democrats, party leaders had a semi-closed primary in 2008 that required electors to specifically choose between a Republican and Democratic ballot. Electors weren’t required to register their partisan affiliation, as some states mandate, but a record was kept of which ballot was requested and that data was later released — thereby allowing the parties and others to make more than an educated guess on a person’s political leanings.

I’m not a big fan of open primaries, which are the equivalent of allowing an atheist to show up, join the College of Cardinals and vote in a papal conclave.

I also believe only party members should be allowed to select party leaders and nominees.

That’s why I would encourage Mr. Schostak and other G.O.P. leaders to embrace either Iowa-style caucuses or a state nominating convention to determine which candidate wins Michigan.

My preference is a caucus, as that would force the party to invest in the grassroots and ensure there are functioning Republican organizations in each and every precinct. Too many areas of Michigan outside of Oakland and Kent counties have been ignored — it’s to the point where neither major political party has a dues-paying member in many areas.

The caucuses would grow the party in a crucial year, where general election turnout will increase by some 1 million compared to 2010.

Additionally, caucuses would be party-run affairs and not funded by taxpayers. This would produce significant savings at a time when Michigan is literally broke.

Though a convention would be simpler and less costly than caucuses, participation would be limited to about 3,000 Republicans in a state of 9.8 million people. That would make it too easy for one faction to unfairly control the process and win the convention through a relatively small number of supporters.

Regardless of the method that is used, a decision must be made sooner than later.

Further delays will sideline Michigan at a time when the presidential campaign is ready to be in full swing.

— Dennis Lennox

ICYMI: Real reform begins with local government

2011-03-11T09:40:00.000-05:00

In case you missed it, here is my op-ed from today's edition of The Muskegon Chronicle:

Real reform begins with local government

In the budget he presented on Feb. 17, Gov. Rick Snyder alluded to reforms that he’ll encourage lawmakers to embrace when he delivers a special address the week of March 21 to both houses of the Legislature.

Some of Snyder’s plans — namely a reduction in revenue sharing to the state’s 83 counties and 1,775 townships, villages and cities — are a step in the right direction. They’re initiating a long overdue discussion on the size and scope of government in the 21st century.

A careful read of Snyder’s unprecedented 25-page “Citizen’s Guide to Michigan’s Financial Health” reveals that local government is more of a burden on the cash-strapped wallets of taxpayers than state government.

While Lansing is often the subject of blame, much of the problem rests in the unwieldy system of local government. I reckon that even entrenched politicos cannot explain the complex structural innerworkings that have resulted in one politician for every 600 people in this state.

So, while Snyder will largely focus on a handful of state level reforms and use what’s left of revenue sharing to provide financial incentives to local governments who share police departments or pool libraries together, I’d encourage leaders to come together and totally reinvent the system from scratch.

Do we need townships? If so, should there be a minimum population requirement to avoid the plague of small townships with large coffers and little to no services other than tax collection and election administration?

Should there be counties or should we abolish county government and move toward regional governments? If there are going to be counties, how do we redraw the lines to reflect the realities of 2011 and not 1891, when the 83 counties were last reorganized?

Are cities given independence from counties? If this was done, city taxpayers could see a savings of at least 15 to 20 percent as they would no longer fund a county government that provides them with little to no services.

Should villages continue to exist? What about road commissions? Do we continue electing school boards or do we move toward countywide school districts or municipal control?

Does it make sense to have 15 separate public universities? Should we create a state university system to streamline administrative operations and reduce costs?

Some of these are radical proposals. Some are fairly commonplace in other states. Sadly, none of these are sexy issues that will generate real interest among the voters.

Many of these ideas are also ones that even the boldest of Lansing reformers won’t touch because it would kick off a multiple front war with vested special interests, many of whom are directly funded by tax dollars from local governments — the same entities that would be reformed under these proposals.

The time is now to “reinvent Michigan,” as the governor says. No longer can we accept the status quo from our politicians be they at the local or state levels.

While we can focus on making the tax structure competitive with other states, an outdated, complicated structure of overlapping governments wrapped in bureaucratic red tape will still make it difficult for innovators and job creators to come to main street and get Michigan working once again.

Dennis Lennox is the Cheboygan County drain commissioner, a position he once tried to eliminate. A Republican, he resides in Topinabee.

Wisconsin group trying to ban prayer in Cheboygan County

2011-03-08T09:12:00.004-05:00

After first setting their targets on banning the celebration of Christmas in county government, the Freedom from Religion Foundation is trying to ban prayers from being said in Cheboygan County senior citizen centers.

The Wisconsin-based group sent a letter on February 23 to Cheboygan County Council on Aging director Mike Bur complaining about the reciting of the Lord’s prayer before meals. At both the Wolverine and Inverness Township centers, it’s not uncommon to find seniors performing the pledge of allegiance, praying or singing patriotic or Christian songs before, during and after meals.

As with the Freedom from Religion Foundation’s complaint over celebrating Christmas, the letter objecting to prayer did not cite the “concerned area citizen.”

It’s time for the people of Cheboygan County to come together and stand strong against this Wisconsin group who is trying to impose their radical agenda on us. We cannot allow them to bully our local officials and governments into not celebrating Christmas or allowing the citizenry to pray.

— Dennis Lennox

Changing the way road commissioners are elected won't help roads

2011-03-07T12:05:00.002-05:00

Legislation significantly changing the governance of local roads was introduced in the Michigan House of Representatives earlier this year.

The three bills (4029, 4030 and 4031), introduced by Representatives Wayne Schmidt, Greg MacMaster and Jon Bumstead, would have county road commissioners elected or in some counties appointed from single-member constituencies rather than the present at-large method of election or appointment. (I refuse to call the three bills reform, as reform, by definition, requires positive change.)

This legislation comes only a couple years after the Legislature allowed counties to increase the size of the board of road commissioners from three to five members.

At the time, proponents of increasing the number of road commissioners — mostly rural townships — claimed it would bring increased oversight while making those overseeing local roads more accountable.

Many counties followed suit and quickly increased the number of road commissioners.

But in many of the counties that adopted the change, no noticeable improvements have occurred. One could even call it a failed experiment in public policy.

In my county, three of the five road commissioners reside in the same heavily populated locale leading many of the outlying townships to complain that they are neglected. The same cries have been heard elsewhere, and it is these interests that are now pushing to elect road commissioners by constituency.

The three bills are bad public policy that will inject factional politics into the governance of county roads.

The board of road commissioners will also become more partisan, as the county apportionment commission, consisting of the Democratic and Republican chairmen and the elected county clerk, treasurer and prosecuting attorney, will draw the map for the road commissioner seats.

If these bills are passed, the focus of road commissioners will change from maintaining a county-wide system of infrastructure to ensuring their individual constituency has the best roads often to the detriment of others. In essence, you’ll see localized versions of the earmarks and pork-barrel spending that occur in the upper echelons of government.

Most importantly, it will have the reverse effect as road commissioners will become even more unaccountable.

Because members of the board of road commissioners are presently elected county-wide, an elector can hold all three or five members accountable at the ballot box.

Under a constituency system, that wouldn’t be the case and the interests of individual township governments — and not necessarily those of the people — would gain significant influence.

And in rural counties, it would also allow a disgruntled township government to essentially control the outcome of an election by marshalling the votes of township office-holders and employees as well as those of their friends and family members.

A constituency system would also likely increase malapportionment, as boundaries for seats on the board of road commissioners would be drawn based upon the principle of one-person, one-vote without much concern for land area.

While cities are typically autonomous of county road governance, the electors residing in a city may still vote for road commissioners as well as other county office-holders. Thus cities or even larger, more populated townships would continue having unequal representation despite the introduction of single-member constituencies.

In some counties this may not be a concern, but in others you could see a city being divided into two or three road commissioner constituencies with the remaining seats allocated to the surrounding townships. That isn’t a scenario that supporters of the legislation talk about much if at all, but it’s one that could happen more often than not.

Instead, I would propose amalgamating the county board of road commissioners, drain commissioner — the office I hold — and board of public works into the office of a single public works commissioner, who would be elected county-wide.

Alternatively, the Legislature could abolish the board of public works and the drain commissioner and transfer the duties and responsibilities to a public works commissioner — a reform that three of the 83 counties have adopted. Roads would be kept separate, but the board would also be abolished and a single road commissioner would be elected county-wide.

It’s clear the current patchwork of government doesn’t work. It’s time to bring together the experts and statesmen from across the spectrum to rework government for the twenty-first century.

Unlike other reforms that I have long advocated, this would be statutory in nature and wouldn’t require the ordeal of a constitutional amendment.

If legislators truly want to take up good-government reform, they’ll abolish the historical anachronisms that have created a dysfunctional and heavily fragmented government.

— Dennis Lennox

Ignore the Neanderthals and reform government in Michigan

2011-03-01T14:08:00.001-05:00

Governor Rick Snyder is expected to announce a series of incentives over the coming weeks for consolidation, which mostly revolve around rewarding communities who functionally collaborate with extra statutory revenue-sharing dollars.

Consolidation has traditionally been in the form of special purpose authorities — regional parks, library districts, firefighting boards — with appointed boards or commissions that govern with a high degree of political independence. Experts have found this does not “promote cooperation or accountability.” Instead it creates yet another layer of government and self-perpetuating bureaucracy.

It is unclear if the governor’s proposal will take the logical next step and call for full consolidation. After all, if two governmental entities come together to share policing the logical next step is for those jurisdictions to merge overall governance.

When it comes to consolidation, experts generally agree that consolidation has several benefits namely a uniform providing of services within a region as well as a significant reduction of the burden of government on taxpayers. Police, firefighting, public works and tax assessment and collection generally have the most to gain.

However, public opinion of these consolidations can often be divided for years. This often results from the fact that central governments in state or provincial capitals forced through consolidations.

This is not surprising, as the opponents of consolidation will use emotional attachment whether it is to a rural community or a high school sports team — namely football — to fight amalgamation. Moreover, in the rural areas there have been complaints of a loss of democratic representation when outlying areas formed regional governments with more urbanized communities.

Some studies even indicate the cost of government significantly rises in cities with over a million residents. In those cases, downsizing — as some have suggested for Detroit — may actually make sense.

Setting aside what appears to be a never-ending debate on the success or failure of so-called mega-cities — Indianapolis and Toronto come to mind — clearly an argument can be made for smart consolidation that reduces the burden of government and produces leaner, more efficient services.

Perhaps the best exhibit for smart consolidation is the much-maligned township — a relic of pre-statehood days when Michigan was, in the words of Alexis De Tocqueville, “hardly more than a wilderness.”

In those halcyon days of yore, which were perhaps best described by then-Adrian Superintendent of Schools W.J. Crocker in his 1880 book entitled “The Civil Government of Michigan,” townships were the provider of frontline services with each township having a superintendent of schools, school inspector, highway commissioner, overseer of highways, fence viewer, drain commissioner, justice of the peace, constable and pound master in addition to the supervisor, clerk and treasurer that continue to exist to this day.

The thought of township government was attractive to the likes of De Tocqueville and Thomas Jefferson. They had a romantic attachment to the township and saw it as the most natural form of government, in which the everyday citizenry partaked in the machinery of government.

The shear number of officeholders that were once found in all townships across the state is rather astonishing when one considers that today many of these townships have uncontested elections. It is not uncommon in the smallest of townships to have a concerted effort to find someone — anyone — to fill a vacancy because nobody sought election.

Many of the duties and responsibilities that were once the sole function of townships when Michigan’s system of government was originally construed were gradually transferred to county government.

While the duties have changed, a historical patchwork of counties, townships, cities and villages has been left behind to the detriment of the state.

As early as the 1930s, many astute observers noted that townships provided virtually no services that could not otherwise be performed by another governmental entity.

It was Dr. Arthur Bromage of the University of Michigan, author of a series of papers on reform in the 1930s, who called for the abolishment of what he saw as an “unnecessary and hence costly and wasteful unit of government.”

Even today many of the 1,242 townships do little more than assess and collect taxes, oversee polling locations for elections, pay for the construction and maintenance of local roads and employ a sexton to care for cemeteries. Larger townships will have dedicated police or firefighting services while smaller townships rely on the county or a neighboring jurisdiction.

There is most certainly a need for the lowest level of local governance, but it is time for the most ardent of supporters of township government — the Michigan Township Association, which is largely funded through taxpayer-funded membership dues — to accept that real reform is a necessity if the Ancien Régime is to continue its grip on power.

Unfortunately, the MTA, along with a plethora of other public sector interest groups, use taxpayer money to lobby and fight reform efforts.

Imagine being a member of the Legislature from a rural constituency home to about 40 townships. After voting to significantly reform or even abolish townships, you could expect 200 township officeholders plus their spouses, family members and friends voting against you. Assuming they were all married, had two children and had three friends they heavily influence, your opponent would already have 1,200 votes on day one of your re-election campaign.

I am reminded of a township in my own county, where a member of the township board told me she would do everything she could to defeat any proposal I put forth to reform county government because “ultimately I want to abolish townships.” Setting aside the fact that this is not true, it demonstrates that too many government functionaries would rather keep their bailiwick than do what is best for the people they serve.

When I campaigned unsuccessfully for the Michigan House of Representatives in last year’s election, I spoke at the monthly meetings of 53 of the 56 township governments across the constituency. Across those four counties, there are 58 townships, two of which are in a separate House constituency, for a grand total of 290 elected officeholders. This equates to one politician for every 341 people — a truly eye-catching ratio of democratic representation. On top of the 58 townships, there are nine villages — an entity perhaps more archaic than townships — and five cities. (I also spoke at meetings of the councils in each of these municipalities as well.)

Without writing a treatise on the role and history of villages — one could be written — it must be noted that villages are municipal governments in the same way as cities are, however, villages are serfs to the feudal lords of the township. Thus residents of a village are also residents of a township and sometimes, but not always, the other way around. That means a taxpayer in a village pays not only for village government, but also for township and county government. This anachronism results in a substantial duplication of services as well as countless political duels between rival governments.

I recall speaking with the elected president of a village. His village — arguably better called a hamlet — is not unlike many communities in rural Michigan. It is a remnant of a bygone era, when towns came and went. Settlements would sprout up alongside a new logging camp or mining development and would fade away in the ash heap of history as economic prosperity moved elsewhere — well, at least sometimes.

Even today the political map of this state is littered with dead and half-dead townships, villages and even counties, the latter of which were carved out of nineteenth century wilderness when a ride to and from the county courthouse wasn’t suppose to take more than a day by horse.

In many cases, nothing remains of these settlements. In my county, Duncan City, Ingelside, Weadock, Riggsville and others are examples of former towns that only appear on old maps. In other cases, half-dead towns remain and even the village president cannot even explain why their entity still exists.

“We have always had the village and we wouldn’t know life without it,” the village president told me, as if the village were a sacrilegious institution.

It is this notion that government is somehow divinely inspired and thus not subject to reform that is the root cause of Michigan’s woes.

Lansing can debate changing the letterhead of a state government agency or altering the tax structure, but that will not do a single thing in the immediate short term to reverse the Great Diaspora that has carried away Michigan’s future over much of the last decade.

There is a desperate need for substantive reform at the state level, but a major culprit is unaffordable, unwieldy local government with multiple layers that only exist because “we have always had” this highly fragmented system.

As I said earlier, consolidation must be smart. It cannot be consolidation for the sake of consolidation.

In some cases townships serve a purpose while in many cases they could be altogether replaced. The same is true for counties and municipalities because quite simply the state government is unable — practically or politically — to do everything. There must be a local government of some construction.

One could make the case that Michigan should keep townships at least in some form and abolish county government, as some New England states have done.

Any governmental services intermediate of the municipality or township and the state government could then be devolved to regional authorities.

The functionaries of these regional authorities would maintain their democratic accountability through an elected assembly that would replace the former county board of commissioners. Regional police commissioners could replace sheriffs. There could be directly elected regional mayors to serve as a check and balance to the assembly, which is currently missing in 79 of the 83 counties where the board of commissioners has both legislative and executive powers.

The regional route has been tried in Ontario, where the Canadian province of approximately 13 million people has only 444 municipalities — a figure that is 40 percent lower than 15 years ago. The downsizing was achieved through, in some cases, forced amalgamations by the then-conservative provincial government.

Ontario’s consolidation was and remains controversial in part because it resulted in the creation of the mega-cities that are now Ottawa and Toronto.

An alternative and politically more palatable approach than what was done in Ontario would be largely preserving the existing structure albeit with significant reforms.

Most notably there would no longer be two types of municipal governance. Villages and cities would become one or they would return to township status. Townships would be required to have a minimum population — perhaps 2,000 residents — and counties would be reorganized for the first time since 1891.

The artificial lines that separate the political jurisdictions of this state have created a map in which it isn’t uncommon for a person to live in one county, work in another and regularly shop in a third county. It may have taken a day to ride a horse to and from the county courthouse in 1891, but now one can drive a car across three counties in an hour or less.

The changing reality due in large part to modern transport was recognized as early as 1932, when the governor’s Commission of Inquiry into County, Township and School District Government reported an “extreme need for county consolidation in the northern part of the lower Peninsula.”

As counties are administrative arms of the state, the Legislature has the sole power to reorganize counties. And while counties or townships could be abolished through a variety of actions, the key to successful reform is smart consolidation.

By implementing a minimum population requirement for local government, the state could then require each newly constituted county to reorganize its townships in a set time or face state intervention and reorganization of townships without local input.

The counties could do this in much the same way as the county apportionment commission, which consists of the clerk, treasurer, prosecutor and the chairmen of the Democratic and Republican parties and meets every 10 years to redraw constituencies for the county board of commissioners.

With its present system, government in Michigan is full of contradictions and contains a structure that is both too rigid and too fragmented. One commentator was right when he called it “Jeffersonian tradition on steroids.”

Unfortunately, most of the change will require constitutional amendments, which mean real reforms are unlikely unless these ideas are adopted by a grassroots statewide organization capable of collecting enough signatures to force questions onto the ballot — something that is very unlikely to occur.

Short of that, a well-off donor paying signature collectors between $2 and $4 a signature would be necessary as Governor Snyder and members of the Legislature won’t risk their political career on a prolonged war with the Neanderthal interests that control too many votes on both sides of the aisle.

— Dennis Lennox

American Family Association of Michigan statement on Christmas in Cheboygan County

2011-02-25T15:27:00.001-05:00

Video of Santa Claus testifying before the Cheboygan County Board of Commissioners on Friday, February 25.

American Family Association of Michigan President Gary Glenn released the following statement:

“We applaud Commissioner Lennox’s resolute witness of the birth of Jesus Christ and his refusal to submit to some atheist group's demand that he recant that witness just because he's elected to public office. We urge county officials to support Dennis in his stand for constitutionally-guaranteed religious liberty.”

State urged to improve report on regional watershed

2011-02-23T21:29:00.006-05:00

Earlier tonight I attended a public hearing that was convened by the state Department of Natural resources at the Tuscarora Townhall in Indian River.

The public hearing was held to discuss a draft report on the Cheboygan River watershed. The nearly 1,500-square mile watershed includes the Cheboygan, Pigeon and Sturgeon rivers and Black, Burt, Crooked, Douglas, Mullett and Pickerel lakes. (This area encompasses parts of Charlevoix, Cheboygan, Emmet, Montmorency, Otsego and Presque Isle counties.)

During the public comment portion of the hearing, I pointed out significant inconsistencies in the 603-page report.

Besides some technical errors dealing with local governance of water resources — namely the Office of Drain Commissioner, which is charged by state statute with overseeing water resources in Cheboygan County — I focused on water quality.

On Roman numeral page 13 of the executive summary, the report states that “overall water quality in the Cheboygan River watershed is good.” However, there was no definition of “good” and no indication of where “good” falls on the measure of water quality.

Then on page 34 of the report it was stated that water quality across the watershed is “generally good.”

Though it is unclear what, if any, difference there is between “good” and “generally good,” I believe there is a substantive difference especially when three sentences later the report states that “several lakes within the Cheboygan River drainage do not meet water quality standards.”

This lack of clarity continued to where the report stated that the watershed has “generally high quality waters.”

These contradictions are significant, and the rationale for using “high quality” verses “good” or “generally good” is unknown.

This is concerning and left my office, as well as constituents of mine, with an incomplete assessment of the watershed.

Setting aside the errors and omissions, I believe that with corrections this report will be valuable to the community and the state as a whole.

It’s essential this report is accurate and beyond question, which is why I appreciated assurances from the Department of Natural Resources that officials would work to revise the report to reflect my concerns as well as those expressed by others in the audience.

The final report will be issued later this year.

— Dennis Lennox

7&4 News story on effort to ban Christmas; Poll shows 87% support Christmas display

2011-02-23T11:32:00.002-05:00

7&4 News ran a story on Tuesday's newscast on my office's Christmas display, which the Freedom from Religion Foundation claims is "illegal and inappropriate." You can watch the story above or visit the 7&4 News website, which includes a poll asking if "Christmas display should be allowed in government buildings."

— Dennis Lennox

The latest developments

2011-02-22T13:27:00.002-05:00

Find out the latest in the Freedom from Religion Foundation's effort to ban Christmas in county government right here in Cheboygan County by listening to my radio interviews with WJR's "Frank Beckmann Show", WBLW's "Rise and Shine" and Andrew Lawton's "Strictly Right" podcast.

— Dennis Lennox

Persecution in store for the prosecutor who won't defend Christmas?

2011-02-22T09:29:00.002-05:00

Here I am with the tabletop nativity scene in my office in the Courthouse.

In case you missed it, the American Family News Network ran a story today updating listeners and readers of its OneNewsNow.com website on the latest developments in the Freedom from Religion Foundation's effort to ban Christmas in Cheboygan County.

Here's a copy of the story:

Persecution in store for the prosecutor?

Christmas could be banned in a Michigan courthouse as an out-of-state legal advocacy organization has threatened to sue the county over a Christmas display set up in the drain commissioner's office. (See earlier story)

"The county prosecutor, who has a legal obligation to represent the county and its elected officials, has refused to defend Christmas from the Freedom From Religion Foundation," laments Drain Commissioner Dennis Lennox (R). "If they get their way, Christmas in Cheboygan County -- at least in the county courthouse -- will be banned."

He points out that the county prosecutor is a Democrat, and he suspects party affiliation has something to do with the lack of action.

"Unfortunately, this prosecutor, Daryl Vizina, is refusing to put aside his liberal political beliefs to stand up for the religious liberties of his constituents," the commissioner decides.

A couple of Christian legal organizations have offered to represent Lennox in the case, but he thinks "it would be nice if the county prosecutor would do his job, put aside his liberal political beliefs and stand up for the people of Cheboygan County."

— Dennis Lennox

My letter to the Freedom from Religion Foundation

2011-02-21T11:47:00.000-05:00

As many of you know, the Freedom from Religion Foundation called a Christmas display that I had in my drain commissioner's office "illegal and inappropriate" in a formal complaint sent last month.

I responded to the Madison, Wisconsin-based organization on Friday with the following letter:

Miss Rebecca S. Markert
Freedom from Religion Foundation
Post Office Box 750
Madison, Wisconsin 53701

Dear Miss Markert:
      I am in receipt of your letter of January 31, 2011, in which the Freedom from Religion Foundation raised objections to a display that was located in my office throughout the Christmas holiday season.
      Upon receiving your letter, I took the display out of storage and put it back up in my office. I work for the people of the County of Cheboygan and not the Freedom from Religion Foundation.
      I remind you of article 1, sections 4 and 5 of the Michigan Constitution, which protect the rights of all Michiganders to “worship God according to [their] own conscience” and “freely speak, write, express and publish . . . views on all subjects.”
      I will not be bullied or intimidated by your organization’s threatening letters.

Very truly yours,

(Signed)

Dennis Lennox
DRAIN COMMISSIONER

P.S. Merry Christmas.

cc: The Honorable Linda Socha

— Dennis Lennox

Democrat prosecutor refuses to defend Christmas

2011-02-18T13:25:00.001-05:00

Cheboygan County’s prosecutor is refusing to defend Christmas from an out-of-state legal advocacy organization that wants to ban the holiday from the county’s Courthouse.

Prosecuting Attorney Daryl Vizina, a Democrat, won't help me against claims by the Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation that displaying a Christian cross, nativity scene and sign proclaiming “Merry Christmas” in the drain commissioner's office is “illegal and inappropriate.”

It's time for Prosecuting Attorney Vizina to put aside his liberal political beliefs and stand up for the religious liberties of our mutual constituents. His refusal to defend our community means that Christmas could soon be banned from the public square.

The display was in my office through Orthodox Christmas on Jan. 7. After receiving a formal four-page complaint earlier this month, I put the display back up and I've vowed to keep it up year-round.

I anticipate the Freedom from Religion Foundation will file a lawsuit against the county and my office, which is why I requested Prosecuting Attorney Vizina's assistance.

While several Christian legal organizations have offered their assistance, I believe the prosecutor has a duty to defend Christmas.

This is about putting the people first. I don't work for the Freedom from Religion Foundation. I work for the people and I will continue to defend our Judeo-Christian heritage.

— Dennis Lennox

Reducing county revenue sharing must accompany real reforms

2011-02-17T12:36:00.002-05:00

I applaud Governor Rick Snyder’s budget recommendation Thursday to significantly reduce revenue sharing amongst the state’s 83 counties. I also hope this will be the first step in a comprehensive restructuring of local government.

Under Governor Snyder’s budget, the state would save $51.8 million through a 34 percent reduction in county revenue sharing. While many big-government advocates claim this will result in the elimination of vital frontline services, this will force a serious discussion on the structure of local government in the twenty-first century.

The governor was right. This discussion is long overdue. It’s time to rethink the way Michigan structures local government. The burden of government in Michigan is simply unaffordable for too many families and main street businesses.

Governor Snyder will deliver a special address to the Legislature in March on government reforms. He’s expected to announce additional revenue sharing formulas that reward local governments with extra money if they consolidate services amongst neighboring jurisdictions.

This is a good step forward, but it’s not enough.

Michigan hasn’t reorganized its 83 counties since 1891. This has resulted in a mass expansion of county government services to the point where many counties are duplicating the services of municipal governments, at the expense of taxpayers.

Something as simple as making cities politically independent from counties would reduce the tax burden in cities by at least 15 to 20 percent. Our unwieldy system of 83 counties and 1,775 cities, townships and villages — let alone the hundreds of school districts and special authorities — simply doesn’t make sense. In fact, I would wager that the vast majority of Michiganders, including politicos in Lansing, would have a difficult time explaining our complex structure of government that produces approximately 1 politician for every 600 people.

Other reforms that must be considered by Governor Snyder and members of the Legislature:

Extending home-rule to all counties, which would allow local communities to determine what type of government best serves the needs of local residents.
Establishing minimum population requirements for townships, cities and villages.
Mandating the creation of a blue-ribbon commission in each county to review all facets of county government and recommend cost savings.
Consolidating county department of public works, board of road commissioners and county drain commissioners into a single agency headed by an elected public works commissioners.

— Dennis Lennox

Michigan needs a Christie-style approach

2011-02-16T13:56:00.000-05:00

Like many other conservatives, I’m a member of the Chris Christie Fan Club.

The governor of New Jersey has become a Republican superhero of sorts. His straight-talk approach is refreshing for many who want bold leadership at a time when the federal government and the governments of most of the 50 states face significant challenges that very well may determine the future of the American republic.

Too many politicians from both political parties have avoided making the difficult decisions for far too long.

At the state level here in Michigan, necessary reforms have been stalled by special interest groups, who bankroll the campaigns of legislators and would-be legislators in this age of term limits.

While these groups and both parties will feud about taxes or social issues, they generally agree when it comes to preserving the status-quo. Case in point: Proposal 1 on last year’s general election ballot, which would have convened a state constitutional convention. That sort of radical change would have upset too many interests — even those who would have greatly benefited from it — and thus an unholy alliance of virtually ever lobbyist and special interest group, along with leaders of both political parties, came together to silence the reformers.

As Christie told the American Enterprise Institute on Wednesday: “My children’s future and your children’s future is more important than some political strategy. We need to say these things, and we need to say them out loud.”

Christie’s counterpart in Michigan, Governor Rick Snyder, has shown great promise with his verbal commitments to think outside the box and consider ideas that actually work.

While it’s too early to know what Snyder will propose in terms of reforms here in Michigan, one can only hope that the Christie mindset will spread throughout the halls of government in Lansing.

— Dennis Lennox

Recent media coverage

2011-02-16T13:00:00.003-05:00

For those of you who missed it, I was interviewed by Dick Bott of the Bott Radio Network last week about the legal threats I received from a leftist organization involving a Christmas display in my Courthouse office.

The interview can be heard by clicking here.

The American Family News Network is also running a story by Charlie Butts both on the radio and on its OneNewsNow.com website.

These stories come on top of recent interviews I did with Greg Marshall of WMKT AM-1270 and Norm Jones of WTCM AM-580 here in Northern Michigan.

— Dennis Lennox

Constitutional reform needed at Michigan universities

2011-02-08T06:46:00.002-05:00

The most frequent question I receive every election from family, friends and neighbors is about the campaign for the three university boards.

For those of you who don’t complete both sides of you ballot, it may come as a surprise that three of the 15 state universities — Michigan State University, Wayne State University and the University of Michigan; the Elite Three if you will — have elected boards while the others are segregated to second-class status with board members appointed by the governor.

This structure of university governance has always been questionable, especially to those who have an interest in the universities with appointed boards. (For full disclosure, I went to Central Michigan University and have received contributions from the school’s political action committee in past elections.)

The voices for reform get louder when reports surface that appointed members hardly show up for board meetings. And it’s never been ascertained if these absent members take advantage of free tickets to college football games and other marquee events while not showing up to vote on university matters.

The easiest solution would be electing all members of the 15 boards, but practically that’s not possible for a variety of reasons.

That leaves us with three other avenues for good-government reform.

Proposal one would consolidate all 15 boards into a single board with the membership elected on a statewide ballot in much the same manner as is done now with the Elite Three boards. This would also be similar to how other states structure systems of higher education.

While this would make all universities accountable to the electorate, the Elite Three institutions would likely object to be lumped in with what some of the Ivory Tower inhabitants view as the unwashed masses.

Alternatively, you could protect the uniqueness of the University of Michigan’s Board of Regents, the Board of Trustees at Michigan State University and the Wayne State University Board of Governors by keeping those entities intact while amalgamating the other 12 boards into a single elected entity. This would be more palatable to the Elite Three, though the compromise would preserve the fundamental unfairness enshrined in the Michigan Constitution.

That leaves us with perhaps the most radical reform: abolishing the boards altogether and giving the oversight duties and responsibilities to the state Board of Education, which is already responsible for the K-12 and community college levels.

This would also take away any correlation between patronage of universities and sitting on the boards, as anyone who is familiar with the 15 boards know that members are typically major fund-raisers, which raises all sorts of conflict of interest questions.

Regardless of the solution, it has become clear that more accountability is needed. For too long, the 15 universities have operated outside the awareness of even the most astute political observers.

In fact, some of the more egregious incidents — affirmative action, social engineering and outright indoctrination of students — has come at the Elite Three with their directly-elected boards. Despite the election of those members, few off-campus news outlets cover their decisions and those ballot contests are too obscure for any significant hustings or candidate vetting.

The lack of oversight has become so bad that some university boards have even claimed legislation such as the Open Meetings Act doesn’t apply unless ordained by the respective boards.

The idea that these boards are subject to no stately authority is akin to the doctrine that the king can do no wrong.

Fortunately that doctrine was abandoned in post-Glorious Revolution political theory, at least everywhere except Michigan’s university campuses.

Because all 15 universities, but especially the Elite Three, carry so much clout in the Capitol, there is little discussion amongst the status-quo majority in the Legislature of constitutional reform.

Without a two-thirds vote in each chamber on a specific reform or a couple million dollars to collect petition signatures to get something on the ballot, it’s unlikely that the structure will ever change.

And that’s the real travesty.

The change Michigan so desperately needs is substantive structural reform. It isn’t renaming state departments every other year or changing the interworkings of Cabinet.

— Dennis Lennox

Outside group claims my office's Christmas display is 'illegal'

2011-02-04T10:46:00.003-05:00

“Every person shall be at liberty to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.”— Article I § 4 of the Michigan Constitution

“Every person may freely speak, write, express and publish his views on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of such right; and no law shall be enacted to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.”
— Article I § 5 of the Michigan Constitution

Earlier today, I received a threatening letter from the Freedom from Religion Foundation, a secular progressive legal advocacy group from Wisconsin.

This out-of-state organization was complaining because I displayed a Christian cross, nativity scene and “Merry Christmas” sign in my drain commissioner’s office during the Christmas season.

The four-page letter ignored the fact that Christmas is an official holiday of the local, state and federal governments.

I had taken the display down following Orthodox Christmas on January 7, but today I put the nativity scene and Cross back up in my office, where the display will remain.

I won’t sit back and let an outside organization come into Cheboygan County and bully me or my constituents around with their radical agenda. If the Freedom from Religion Foundation wants to push their agenda in Madison, that's fine. But don’t come here and tell us what to do.

The idea that a simple Christmas display is “illegal and inappropriate,” as the Freedom from Religion Foundation organization claimed, is absurd.

Other than this radical group, I have received no complaints whatsoever from my constituents – the people of Cheboygan County. In fact, several of my constituents have complimented my office as well as other county government offices for celebrating Christmas at a time when many in government are afraid to do so.

— Dennis Lennox

Don’t forget about county reapportionment and redistricting

2011-02-01T11:16:00.005-05:00

With some of the U.S. Census data released, the process of reapportionment has begun.

Though much of the attention focuses on the reapportionment of the lower house of Congress and the redistricting of the 148 constituencies in the Michigan Legislature, it’s important to remember that reapportionment will also occur in each of the state’s 83 counties.

At the local level, an apportionment commission consisting of the elected clerk, treasurer and prosecuting attorney and the chairmen of the county Republican and Democratic parties will assemble to determine constituencies for the legislative branch of county government — the board of commissioners.

But unlike their counterparts on the redistricting committees in the Legislature, the county apportionment commissions will have the power to increase or decrease the number of commissioners in each county. (The number of legislative seats is fixed by the Constitution.)

This local process is incredibly important for two reasons.

First, since the Supreme Court struck down the Ancien Régime’s system of having township supervisors assemble into county government’s legislative branch — the board of supervisors — as unconstitutional and against the democratic principle of one man, one vote in the 1966, Michigan has been left with mini-legislatures whose powers have substantially grown to include quasi-executive authority due to the lack of an executive in all but four counties.

Second, the age of term limits for members of the Legislature — three, two-year terms in the House and two, four-year terms in the Senate — has made the board of commissioners a stepping stone for higher office. And in some cases, the reverse has been the case with term-limited legislators running for commissioner in counties who treat the position as a full-time job.

While state law does limit the number of commissioners a county may have based on population, the apportionment commission’s power is virtually unchecked provided they adhere to a handful of basic principles. This means that some counties may keep the current number of commissioners and simply redraw constituency boundaries to reflect a changing population. Others could greatly downsize the board of commissioners by several members and thereby change the local political landscape.

Due to the general apathy in local government, only the most astute political observers follow the county reapportionment process.

But considering the significance of this process, there should be more attention paid to the county apportionment commissions. This is especially true for Michigan Republican Party leaders, whose objective throughout all this must be growing the G.O.P. majority at the federal, state and local levels.

In the wake of November’s election, there are 58 Republican-controlled boards, 23 boards with Democratic majorities and two counties (Benzie and Keweenaw) where no party has a majority, according to Inside Michigan Politics. This has resulted in 446 Republicans, 232 Democrats and eight independents.

In this age of term limits, a commissioner in Keweenaw County — the state’s smallest county — could be a member of the Legislature in only a couple of years. Just look at 33-year-old Lieutenant Governor Brian Calley, who just eight years ago was first elected to the Ionia County Board of Commissioners.

This is something the Democrats have realized for years and it’s not unusual to find the Michigan Democratic Party funding a county candidate’s literature and other campaign activities.

Unfortunately, the lack of strong — and in some cases functioning — parties in several of the state’s rural counties will make it more difficult for partisan control of the process. In some cases there may not even be a local Democratic or Republican chairman.

Sure politics will be involved, but it’s more likely to be a prosecuting attorney wanting to eliminate the seat of a commissioner who cut the office’s budget or a treasurer who is upset over meddling and undue interference by the Board of Commissioners.

When there is partisanship, it’s likely to be in larger swing counties where Republicans made inroads in November.

A prime example is Saginaw County, where Democrats control all of the countywide offices and could use their 4-1 majority on the apportionment commission to oust the six Republicans on the 15-member Board of Commissioners.

Another worry for Republicans is perennial battleground Oakland County, where the Obama tidal wave of 2008 swept Democrats into the offices of treasurer and prosecuting attorney. This means Democrats have a 3-2 apportionment commission majority, which threatens the Republican majority on the Board of Commissioners.

There’s already talk of legislative action aimed at reforming the process and giving counties with an elected executive — such as Oakland County’s L. Brooks Patterson — a say in the process.

Some have said Patterson should replace the treasurer, who happens to be a Democrat, while others have proposed abolishing the county apportionment commissions and allowing each board of commissioners to handle the process in the same manner as the Legislature. Critics of the latter proposal argue that would make it very unlikely for commissioners to downsize the number of constituencies, which happened in Macomb County during the drafting of a home-rule charter in 2009.

The real question will be whether this reform can work its way through both houses and make it to the governor’s desk in time, which will be a challenge considering the expedited budget enactment time line.

Regardless, it’s refreshing to see the Michigan Republican Party taking steps to ensure all county Republican chairman are prepared for this monumental task.

Workshops have been held in recent weeks and assurances were given that G.O.P. operatives are available to assist chairmen in drawing fair maps for their respective counties.

The party’s new chairman, Robert Schostak, has also indicated he will concentrate on growing the grassroots, including the 83 county parties — something that has been overlooked for too long.

Once the local Census data is released in March, you can expect some serious redistricting and reapportionment fights on both sides of the aisle in both the counties and the Legislature.

The results will be the lay of the land for the next 10 years.

— Dennis Lennox

Trading term limits for a 'part-time' Legislature?

2011-01-27T15:48:00.004-05:00

The effort to radically reform the limitations on the number of terms a legislator may serve, which were overwhelmingly approved in 1992 by Michigan voters, has begun with a pair of constitutional amendments recently introduced in the House of Representatives.

The discussion itself isn’t new. It’s been proposed by reformers and special interest groups several times in the last decade. But the subject has been considered toxic, and past attempts have failed soon after amendments were introduced.

That is until now, when a large group of mostly freshman legislators introduced constitutional amendments that if passed by a two-thirds vote in each house would appear on the ballot in 2012.

One amendment, introduced as House Joint Resolution C by 14 legislators, would allow members of either house of the Legislature to serve a maximum of 14 years. This would allow someone to serve seven, two-year terms in the House or three, four-year terms in the Senate — or some mixture of both.

The other amendment, House Joint Resolution H, goes further and extends the time allowed to 16 years. To convince voters that an extension nearly tripling the time a member of the House can serve is needed, the 12 sponsors downplay the amendment as making the Legislature part-time — a concept popular in many conservative circles — by limiting the number of sessions to a maximum of 150 consecutive days or five months per year.

This is precisely the argument that many Lansing insiders have long said would be the only way to get skeptical Michiganders to repeal term limits and restore the Ancien Régime.

Supporters will claim neither of these proposals is an outright repeal, but if passed Michigan would go from having the strictest term limits in the country to having the most generous.

Of the 15 states with term limits, only Oklahoma, Louisiana and Nevada come close to what sponsors of these amendments advocate. In those states, members of both houses of the Legislature are limited to 12 years.

These two amendments also run counter to the 12-year limit the Michigan Chamber of Commerce has supported, which would actually cut two years from the maximum number of a years a legislator could serve. (Currently, one could serve 14 years — eight in the Senate and six in the House.)

Additionally, the proposal doesn’t exempt sitting legislators from the term limits extension — a provision that would help convince me and others that sponsors of the proposal aren’t doing it out of their own self-interest.

Neither proposal addresses other much-needed reform, including ethics and conflict of interest legislation. This would become even more of an issue if the Legislature became part-time and members took full-time employment in fields with significant public policy interests, as is the case in many states where legislators serve on corporate boards, hold trade union leadership posts and work as federal or local government lobbyists.

While I have long opposed a constitutional limitation on the number of days the Legislature may sit on the grounds that it greatly empowers the governor and weakens the people’s voice, House Joint Resolution H is by no means what many advocates of a part-time Legislature have envisioned. One could even call it a maneuver to trick the electorate into voting to “throw the bums out” — as the popular adage goes — which wouldn’t come close to happening under any reading of the proposal.

The proposal may specify a maximum of 150 days of session, but no sitting of either house has exceeded that number since 1959 when the Legislature met for 175 days.

Before then, the Legislature exceeded the proposed limit only 10 times — 1879 (151 days), 1881 (158 days), 1883 (158 days), 1885 (165 days), 1887 (176 days), 1889 (183 days), 1891 (178 days), 1895 (150 days), 1899 (172 days) and 1901 (156 days). And in those days, legislative sessions were generally held every other year, which explains the high number of sittings.

Since 1993 — the first legislative session of the term limits age, the Senate has sat for an average of 92 days per year while the House has been in session for an average of 95 days. Both houses only came close to 150 days once — in 2007, when a budget stalemate that ultimately resulted in a government shutdown pushed the House to 134 days and the Senate to 132 days.

Some states limit legislative sessions through a constitutional or statutory cap on the number of actual days in session, while others simply mandate an adjournment date. In all, 39 states have some form of limitation, though not all can be considered part-time.

When comparing states with specific session day limitations, the 150-day maximum specified in House Joint Resolution H is actually on the high end and could result in the Legislature sitting for more days than it does now, as legislators could claim the Constitution requires sessions of 150 days.

By comparison, a statute in Alabama prohibits more than 30 session days in a period of 150 calendar days, while a constitutional provision limits the Colorado General Assembly to 120 sessions days per year. Sessions of the Massachusetts General Court adjourn in November of odd years and July of even years, while a constitutional provision dating to 1876 restricts the Texas Legislature to a two-year session of no more than 140 calendar days.

But unlike Michigan, governors in many of these states routinely call the legislatures into special sessions, thereby extending the time of the sittings. (Michigan hasn’t had a special session since the 1960s, when the Legislature started its practice of not adjourning until the end of the year, thus preventing the governor from calling legislators in special session, where they can only take up what the governor wants them to discuss.)

In Texas, which is often cited by part-time proponents, Governor Rick Perry has called eight special sessions over his 10 years. And outside of the special sessions, legislators in these nominally part-time legislatures will typically hold committee hearings outside of session days while receiving per diem payments for each day they work on top of artificially low salaries.

So while Texas legislators receive a paltry $7,200 a year, they also receive a per diem of $168 a day. In Alabama, legislators may receive the country’s lowest salary of $10 a year, but they also receive per diems of $3,958 per month and $50 for each session day.

In the end, not only would these proposals repeal the voter-approved term limits, the so-called part-time provisions used to masquerade the term limit changes will result in no measurable cost savings.

Alternatively, sponsors of these proposals should consider a reform that I have longer advocated.

It would accomplish the aims of a part-time mandate by requiring both houses of the Legislature to pass a balanced budget before taking up other business.

As passing a budget is the primary constitutional duty of the Legislature, it should be its first priority.

Unfortunately, as is again the case this year, many legislators aren’t waiting for a budget to be passed and signed by the governor before taking up pet projects and other non-urgent business.

Repealing term limits or limiting the Legislature to an arbitrary number of session days won’t put a single Michigander back to work nor will it begin the difficult task of reforming government and righting the ship of state.

Perhaps one of these days legislators will actually study an issue before introducing such a radical change.

— Dennis Lennox

Happy Statehood Day

2011-01-26T17:16:00.002-05:00

Today is one of those days that often goes unnoticed. It's Statehood Day. On this day in 1837, Michigan was admitted to the Union as the twenty-sixth state.

Here is a video about our great state, courtesy of the official Archives of Michigan:

Look About You from Seeking Michigan on Vimeo.

— Dennis Lennox

Examining Weaver’s proposals to reform the Supreme Court

2011-01-22T12:38:00.003-05:00

Since resigning as a justice of the Supreme Court in August of last year, Elizabeth Weaver has been aggressively pushing her reform proposals in after-dinner speeches and newspaper op-eds across the state.

Some of Weaver’s ideas aren’t new. During her some 16 years on the bench of the state’s high court, she became known for questioning the status-quo.

While I consider Weaver a friend and have always respected her for speaking out regardless of the political consequences, I don’t necessarily agree with everything she has done both on the bench and now as a activist. (She was especially good to Republicans here in cottage country, who have traditionally been ignored by downstate G.O.P. powerbrokers.)

Most notably, I disagreed with the way she resigned from the Supreme Court, which allowed then-Governor Jennifer Granholm to make a partisan political appointment in the middle of a highly charged campaign. I also thought she could have done more to remain about the fray and not lower the judiciary by engaging in endless public disputes with other sitting and former justices. With that said, others were to blame as well — and the integrity of Supreme Court has been damaged in the minds of many everyday Michiganders.

Weaver does have some interesting proposals that should be considered by the Legislature and the reform-minded administration of Governor Rick Snyder.

Top amongst the list is a proposal to elect justices by district.

This isn’t a new idea — it was proposed in the last session of the Legislature but, like so many other good-government reforms, never received adequate support from the vested special interests.

All seven justices are from the Detroit area. There isn’t a single high court jurist from Grand Rapids, which is Michigan’s second-largest city. The lack of geographical diversity also extends to the politically important Saginaw Valley as well as the central and northern regions.

Part of this rests in the way justices are elected.

Until the 2008 defeat of then-Chief Justice Clifford Taylor, a Republican, the judicial campaigns largely went unreported and unnoticed by the electorate.

That was until the Michigan Democratic Party ran a horrendous television advertisement — widely debunked as false — that portrayed Taylor as sleeping during Supreme Court sessions. The campaign also became unusually partisan after the presidential campaign of then-Senator Barack Obama used its resources to promote Taylor’s Democratic opponent.

Because districting would require the Supreme Court bench to truly reflect the state as a whole, I genuinely support it. (On a side note, districting would actually help Republicans as most of the likely non-Detroit justices would come from G.O.P. constituencies.)

Another one of Weaver’s reforms is eliminating the partisan nomination of candidates for the high court. While candidates don’t have a partisan designation next to their name on the ballot, they generally must be nominated by a party to make the ballot.

Frankly, I believe this idea is about as ludicrous as allowing the trial lawyers to appoint justices — a proposal that some advocate.

The electorate doesn’t largely follow judicial campaigns for a variety of reasons, but almost all polls have shown a clear majority wanting to continue electing not only justices but judges of lower courts as well.

The general apathy compounded by the fact that most judicial candidates are unwilling to share their ideology with voters even though the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down bar association rules that restrict prospective judges from sharing their views on matters of public policy as unconstitutional has resulted in campaigns where voters pick judges based solely on their sex or the nationality of their last name.

To reverse that prevailing trend, I would propose that all judicial candidates, including justices of the Supreme Court, be nominated by a political party and run with a ballot designation in the same way as candidates for other offices.

This is actually not a new concept.

With the adoption of the second constitution in 1850 — and the introduction of Jacksonian democracy, which held that everything should be elected — the judiciary was elected on a partisan basis until an amendment mandating non-partisan elections was approved in 1939.

Critics of the partisan election method, led by the American Bar Association, claim it subjects the Ivory Tower judiciary to the whims of the masses — such as the 1934 primary election for Circuit Court in Wayne County, in which 39 Republicans and 181 Democrats competed for 18 respective party nominations.

These elites would rather have uncontested elections with self-proclaimed consensus candidates or worse yet unaccountable judges selected by an appointment commission than have the unwashed masses subject judicial candidates to the same standard of scrutiny as any other candidate for public office.

For them the idea of a judicial campaign using “barelegged girls in stage dress” to distribute literature at hustings — yes, it actually happened in that ‘34 election — is appalling. It offends their sensibilities that in a republic the people are sovereign and have a direct say in the way they are governed and who governs them.

Weaver’s other notable proposals involve campaign finance reform and full transparency.

Under her plan, Supreme Court candidates could no longer accept outside contributions. Notwithstanding the constitutionality or lack thereof in prohibiting such funding, she proposes public financing of high court campaigns.

Currently, state government makes public funds available to gubernatorial candidates, but the funds are generally far from adequate, as Republican Pete Hoekstra found out in his primary campaign. These funds would, however, likely be sufficient for a Supreme Court campaign and in Weaver’s opinion eliminate potential conflicts of interest when a justice hears a case directly or indirectly involving a campaign contributor.

Michigan isn’t the fantasyland known as Utopia and one cannot take the politics out of an election.

Instead, it would be best to have judicial candidates run with partisan affiliation as that would bring their ideology and financial supporters into the sunlight.

The major problem is that the electorate simply doesn’t know anything about candidates for the judiciary. Part of this rests with their own apathy, but part of it is the process for which judges and justices are presently elected.

The current method allows for one to claim to be nonpartisan and above-the-fray while at the same time collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign dollars from special interests often with shadowy, front group-sounding names such as the Michigan Association for Justice.

Making judicial candidates contest a campaign under a party ticket would do more to eliminate the perception that special interests — be they labor, trail lawyers or big-business — control the courts.

While not perfect, it would at least give the electorate a basic understanding of who the candidates are, what they stand for and who is supporting them.

And that’s better than an unconstitutional limitation on free speech, which so many unfortunately advocate.

Of Weaver’s proposals, the districting of justices as well as full transparency in judicial campaigns would be smart reforms.

The governor along with the Republican majorities in both houses of the Legislature were given a mandate to implement real reform and right the ship of state.

They would be wise to consider these proposals along with the partisan nomination of judicial candidates.

— Dennis Lennox

Corporate excess bad, union robbery of kids just dandy

2011-01-21T18:18:00.002-05:00

In case you missed it, my recent op-ed article on the United Auto Workers-owned $33 million resort right here in Cheboygan County was published by The Washington Times.

You can read the article, entitled "Corporate excess bad, union robbery of kids just dandy," by clicking here.

— Dennis Lennox

UAW hypocritical in keeping $33 million resort

2011-01-19T15:02:00.004-05:00

Under the administration of President Barack Obama and the former Democratic majority in both houses of Congress, it was fashionable to engage in class warfare and attack anything viewed as corporate excess.

But those on the political left have once again proved their hypocrisy by ignoring the utter irony in the United Auto Workers owning a lavish $33 million resort in right here in Cheboygan County.

This resort, which includes a championship golf course, is situated on 1,000 acres at Black Lake in the heart of cottage country.

Yet despite a pristine location and first-class amenities, the UAW’s resort has lost over $23 million in recent years.

Instead of putting the resort up for sale or even opening it up to non-union members, union leaders have kept it for themselves while at the same time claiming that forced unionization of auto workers in other states is necessary to keep their club alive.

To offset the massive financial losses, the UAW has launched near annual appeals of the resort’s property tax assessments. This has forced local government to spend thousands of dollars it doesn’t have on defending tax assessments, which largely fund the education of local children.

The idea that the UAW on one day leads the chorus of raising taxes on families and businesses — disguised as forcing them to “pay their fair share” — and the next day maneuvers the system with the goal of undercutting the resort’s tax burden is the definition of hypocrisy.

My constituents, most of whom are families and retirees, don’t like paying taxes but the vast majority do without hiring a horde of attorneys aimed at crippling local government’s resources.

The UAW’s repeated tax appeals have cheated children out of a quality education, which for many of them — over 17 percent live in poverty — is their only chance at bettering themselves and ensuring a brighter future.

This isn’t a pro-union or anti-union issue.

My late grandfather was a local union president. I come from a traditional union state and I understand the sentiment behind UAW president Bob King’s comments that he is committed to “creating the UAW of the ‘40s and ‘50s and ‘60s.”

But those days are over.

The UAW is dwindling in membership and it clearly cannot justify owning a $33 million resort at a time when its own members are struggling to make end’s meet and overcome the challenges of a diverse 21st century economy.

If King and other UAW leaders won’t do the right thing then congressional leaders must hold the union accountable in the same way Democrats held the Big Three and other business executives to account over the past two years.

— Dennis Lennox

1912-2008 presidential election results by county

2011-01-18T10:57:00.001-05:00

Political junkies can now view how all 3,000-plus counties voted in every presidential election over the past hundred years (except 1952), thanks graphics courtesy of Wikipedia.

Here are individual links to the graphics:

Perhaps the biggest thing one will notice is the changing political landscape over time. It wasn’t that long ago that Republican presidential candidates won in counties — and by extension states — that are unthinkable today.

It’s also interesting to examine the voting trends of border counties and how often the community in the neighboring state has similar political leanings.

— Dennis Lennox

Stabenow: President Obama saved Michigan's economy. Really, Senator?

2011-01-13T10:24:00.001-05:00

In an article by Politico's David Catanese, U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow says she would campaign for re-election in 2012 against her Republican opponent — rumored to be former Congressman and 2010 Republican gubernatorial candidate Pete Hoekstra — with President Barack Obama.

This isn't a terribly surprising decision when you consider the president carried Michigan in 2008 and his poll numbers have remained considerably higher than Stabenow. Perhaps what is more surprising is the Democratic senator's reasoning for wanting Obama with her in the Wolverine State.

Politico quotes Stabenow saying: “I'd like him to be there as much as possible. He helped save our economy in Michigan.” (Emphasis added.)

That sounds great except Michigan's economy is far from recovered. One family has left Michigan every 12 minutes. Over 9,000 college graduates left the Detroit area alone between 2007 and 2009. Several counties have ranked in the top 15 of most economically stressed counties in the country (there are over 3,000 counties across the 50 states).

While the state's unemployment numbers fluctuate between last and second-to-last, the state has had the dubious distinction of being in a single-state recession — dare I say depression? — for most of the last 10 or so years.

Such a remark reaffirms the view that many have of Stabenow as out-of-touch and unconnected from working families and main street businesses.

She clearly hasn't spent much time in her beloved state, in communities such as her hometown of Clare, or she would know that things are far from well.

— Dennis Lennox

A return to a 'bygone era' of political discourse?

2011-01-10T14:58:00.003-05:00

In the wake of the horribly tragic incident of Saturday, many in the political chattering class are using this as yet another opportunity to push their agenda.

I won’t get into the baseless claims that some have made, but I do question one of the arguments that American politics need to return to a “bygone era” of political discourse.

While this is a noble sentiment, it shows a flawed understanding of American political history.

It is laudable to want genuine statesmanship. After all, who doesn’t.

But has this ever truly existed in our political history?

Even our republic’s earliest of elections — the 1800 presidential contest of Jefferson and Adams — featured bomb-throwing rhetoric worse than anything in contemporary times.

Don’t take my word.

Watch this short video (courtesy of Reason TV) featuring the accusations that were actually leveled by Messrs. Adams and Jefferson.

Perhaps the real problem rests with the lack of civic knowledge in the citizenry.

As an electorate, we tend to reward the candidates with the highest name recognition, the best television commercials and the catchiest of slogans. Nobody wants to hear about complicated public policy solutions — let alone foreign policy.

And perhaps that inability to have serious and substantive discussions on the pressing challenges is the true culprit of today’s discourse.

— Dennis Lennox

Leadership is key to Michigan's recovery

2011-01-04T06:52:00.001-05:00

Read my thoughts on the challenges facing Michigan's new leaders in today's edition of The Detroit News. My op-ed is a reprint of what I published last week here on DennisLennoxDiary.com.

— Dennis Lennox

Anuzis best pick for G.O.P. chairman

2011-01-03T09:18:00.001-05:00

A similar campaign playbook has emerged in the final days before today’s heavily anticipated husting of candidates for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee.

With most of the 168 members of the Republican Party’s governing panel wanting a new direction, the four challengers to incumbent Michael Steele, the former lieutenant governor of Maryland, are claiming they will be — in the words of hopeful Saul Anuzis — a “nuts and bolts chairman.”

With Democrats united in their resolve to re-elect President Barack Obama and retain majority in the upper house of Congress, the party’s chairman must be someone who gets the tough work done to assist the eventual presidential nominee and the congressional caucuses under Speaker-designate John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Now isn’t the time to write a book or ride the lucrative after-dinner speaking circuit. This is the time to capitalize on the G.O.P.’s recent electoral success, reach out to traditional and nontraditional donors and write a roadmap for victory on November 6, 2012.

When you look at what is ahead for the party, it is clear only one candidate can accomplish such a monumental task. And that candidate is Anuzis, the former chairman of the Michigan Republican Party and current Republican National Committee member.

For starters, Anuzis isn’t from Washington, D.C., which is important because the change the republic needs is going to come from the states.

But his biggest strength has been as a leader who can bring together the different factions of the party to achieve success at the ballot box. Anuzis doesn’t label himself one type of conservative over another — he’s simply a conservative.

He’s also dedicated to helping the team. That meant working with Steele despite running against him in the 2009 campaign for chairman. Anuzis didn’t pack his bags and quit the party for an outside organization. He did his part to help Republicans up and down the ticket, including the lowest of offices in the most rural parts of Michigan.

That’s the type of hard-working chairman Anuzis will be should he prevail and win the chairmanship.

Anuzis’ sole focus will be winning in 2012.

And for that, he’s earned not only my support, but the support of thousands of everyday Republicans in all 50 states, who unfortunately don’t have a vote in the election.

— Dennis Lennox

My thoughts on yesterday's Inaugural

2011-01-02T20:17:00.003-05:00

With yesterday’s Inaugural in the history books, the era of reinventing Michigan is now a day old.

I congratulate Governor Snyder, Lieutenant Governor Calley, Secretary Johnson and Attorney-General Schuette on taking the oath of office and look forward to the radical change they will enact to right the ship of state. I also congratulate Justices Kelly and Young, the judges of the Court of Appeals and members of the statewide boards that took office yesterday.

Below is a short video that I produced earlier today with highlights from the Inaugural.

— Dennis

Michigan can lead the way

2010-12-29T21:28:00.002-05:00

As if adjusting to their new jobs won’t be hard enough, the largest class of freshmen politicians, from the governor and the other great offices of state down to members of the Legislature, in contemporary times will take office New Year’s Day and spend most of their first year addressing yet another massive budget deficit.

Outgoing legislators and officeholders should have addressed state government’s profound challenges, but they didn’t. They refused to make the tough decisions that should have been made years ago.

This failure has resulted in a projected deficit of $1.85 billion for the fiscal year that begins October 1, according to a Senate Fiscal Agency report that was released over Christmas.

I don’t envy the challenges facing Governor Rick Snyder and the incoming members of the Legislature.

The status-quo playbook — accounting gimmicks, threatening to layoff policemen and release felons if taxes aren’t raised, furloughs for state employees and all the other tactics that have been used in the last eight years — won’t get the job done anymore.

Only radical change can right the ship of state.

Not only is it time for an age of austerity, but now is the time to reform, consolidate and streamline Michigan’s system and structure of government.

With the Census declaring Michigan the only state in the union to have lost population, the ancien régime must go. Our great state simply doesn’t need one politician for every 600 people nor does she need 83 counties, 1,200 townships, 500 cities and villages and the hundreds of other governmental entities that make the burden of government unbearable for too many of her citizens.

Combined with job-killing taxes and regulations that chased away main street businesses, Michigan has been in a single state economic depression for much of the last decade in which recovery meant moving from No. 50 to No. 49.

With his commitment to reinvent Michigan, Snyder has the best opportunity since George Romney modernized state government at the last constitutional convention to truly change things.

While the next year will be fraught with painful, but necessary, decisions, brighter days are ahead because after all it was Michigan ingenuity, entrepreneurship and innovation that built America.

With the right leadership, Michigan can once again lead the way.

— Dennis Lennox

Relaunching my website

2010-12-29T18:34:00.002-05:00

After a long time without updates, I'm officially relaunching my website and hope to provide you with regular commentary on solutions to today's challenges as well updates on what I'm doing personally and as drain commissioner of Cheboygan County.

— Dennis Lennox

Post-partisan Obama a threat to Republicans

2010-12-16T18:49:00.001-05:00

The following article was written for Conservative Home USA.

The GOP must be careful not to play into the hands of the White House’s new strategy to cast President Barack Obama as a pragmatic voice opposing, as they call them, the extremes partisans of the Democratic and Republican parties.

The image of a post-partisan, centrist-driven president who is more concerned about sound public policy worked in 2008, when Obama was successful in capturing self-identified independents and enough moderate-to-liberal Republicans — headliners by the likes of former Governor William Weld and Susan Eisenhower. Many conservatives will say good riddance to what they call Republicans-in-name-only, but the fact remains that a party cannot realistically win nationally when it writes off upwards of 15 states.

It takes independents, who are drawn to support Lincoln Chafee — the liberal former Republican senator, who opposed both the Republican and Democratic parties to win the governorship of Rhode Island in November. These swing voters are the same demographic that propelled Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate after winning a by-election in Massachusetts last year. It’s also what helped Governor-elect Rick Snyder win in Michigan with 58% of the vote. By comparison, Obama won Michigan, a traditional swing state, with 57%.
In a recent poll, Obama would win Michigan in 2012 with only native son and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, whose father was a popular governor of Michigan, coming close to picking up the home of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler.

With Obama playing up his independence from party orthodoxy in the first skirmishes of his re-election campaign, his numbers are increasing, according to a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll released late Wednesday. As with the Michigan poll, only Romney comes close to defeating the president.

Obama’s new strategy is boosted by phony criticism from Democrats in Congress, who are gleefully playing along. The Democratic charade is then of course picked up by right-wing talking heads, who claim it’s an example of liberal frustration with the Obama administration.

This gives conservatives, and by extension Republicans, a false feeling of security.

For Republicans to win, they must also play the pragmatic card and not allow Obama to rebuild his winning coalition. It’s very much what propelled the victories of Prime Minister John Key’s National Party in New Zealand and the center-right coalition of Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt in Sweden.

If Republicans can’t focus on what matters to swing voters, Obama will coast to re-election with the help of middle-class suburban voters in swing constituencies, such as the one held by Democrat Congressman Gary Peters in metropolitan Detroit.

This is the demographic drawn to Obama’s reborn pragmatism. These are same voters who supported Republicans in the mold of Snyder, Weld, Brown and popular common sense Governors Bob McDonnell of Virginia and Chris Christie of New Jersey.

To defeat Obama, Republicans must take a page from the solutions-based electoral strategy of these sensible conservatives.

— Dennis Lennox

In case you missed this article

2010-12-10T14:54:00.016-05:00

The Saginaw Valley Journal ran an in-depth article on me that's worth reading. You can read it by clicking here.

Dennis Lennox, a senior consultant at Sterling, Hoffman & Co., a Michigan-based media company that counts among its publications The Saginaw Valley Journal, was acquitted by a jury on two separate charges of embezzlement and violating Michigan’s Campaign Finance Act, last Monday in Cheboygan County on the northern-tip of Michigan’s lower peninsula. Mr. Lennox is the county’s Drain Commissioner.

“I have known Dennis for over a decade now and I’m honored to call him my friend,” Sterling, Hoffman & Co. chairman and chief executive Michael Westendorf said in a statement released shortly after Mr. Lennox’s trial concluded, “He has never been afraid to stand up for what’s right regardless of the political consequences. This probably makes him a lousy politician, but it makes him an outstanding public servant.”
Mr. Westendorf would not elaborate on Mr. Lennox’s salary or role at the company, saying that Sterling, Hoffman & Co. is a private firm.

While most cases involving campaign finance allegations are handled civilly through the Secretary of State’s office in Lansing, Mr. Lennox, 26, was charged by Cheboygan County’s prosecuting attorney, he says, in connection with his candidacy in the 2010 Republican primary election for the 105th District seat in the Michigan House of Representatives.

The Campaign Finance Act case was allowed to proceed locally, as the Michigan Supreme Court has yet to hear arguments on an appeal from the Meijer Corporation on whether local prosecutors have the jurisdiction to enforce the Campaign Finance Act. Meijer was previously investigated by authorities in Grand Traverse County over allegations of impropriety.

Cheboygan County’s prosecutor, Democrat Daryl Vizina, alleged Mr. Lennox included campaign material in county-funded drain commissioner mailings, though no witnesses were ever produced who claimed they received a suspect card.

Mr. Lennox was accused by Mr. Vizina of writing the address of a political Web site connected to his House campaign as a post script on an official drain commissioner Christmas card he sent to a former state legislator-turned-lobbyist, whose assistance Mr. Lennox was hoping to enlist in moving reform legislation that would have allowed Cheboygan County to abolish the drain commissioner’s office. The card in question was never delivered due to an incorrect address and was later returned by the U.S. Postal Service.

Cheboygan County administrator Mike Overton had mailroom officials seize the card, as well as other pieces of mail, without Mr. Lennox‘s consent or knowledge. The mailings were then opened without a search warrant and later turned over to police.

While prosecutors tried focusing on unsent mail, claiming they were evidence of widespread campaign finance violations, the case focused on the single card — valued at 44 cents in postage.

Mr. Lennox contended from the beginning that it was a mistake.

“I made a mistake and I acknowledged it time after time,” he said, “I reimbursed the county and the prosecutor still went forward with a clearly political prosecution in the middle of an election campaign, which greatly damaged my candidacy and ultimately played a factor in my loss in the Republican primary election.”

The one-day trial, held in 89th District Court, lasted approximately eight hours on Dec. 6. The jury deliberated for just under an hour before vindicating Mr. Lennox.

While nobody knows the jury’s rationale, Mr. Lennox believes common sense prevailed.

“The jury realized I wasn’t a criminal and no violation of the law occurred. I made a mistake that anybody could have made,” said Mr. Lennox. “It’s just unfortunate it took nearly a year for my name to be cleared — this could have been resolved a long time ago.”

In the trial, Mr. Lennox’s attorney, Daniel Hartman, argued that Mr. Lennox didn’t intentionally violate the law and the prosecutor’s failure to produce a single person who received an official drain commissioner Christmas card with political content was further proof of Mr. Lennox’s innocence.

Mr. Overton originally claimed in testimony and statements to police that citizen complaints prompted a request for a police investigation into Mr. Lennox‘s actions.

However, when confronted by Mr. Hartman on the witness stand, Mr. Overton changed his testimony and said Commissioner Linda Socha, the board’s chairman, received a card and called him about it. Mr. Hartman then showed Mr. Overton evidence from the prosecutor proving Ms. Socha never received a card and thus couldn’t have complained about receiving one. Mr. Overton again changed his testimony and claimed Ms. Socha was contacted by constituents, but the administrator couldn’t name anyone specific.

This inconsistency, among others, likely played a factor in the jury’s decision.

Mr. Lennox says he’s glad his ‘long nightmare’ is over and he’ll take extra steps to ensure nothing similar happens in the future.

“I’m putting this behind me and focusing on serving the people of Cheboygan County as their elected drain commissioner and voice in county government,” he said, brushing off follow-up questions on his political future.

The Next Chapter

Mr. Lennox is widely seen to have higher ambitions despite his loss in a six-way Republican primary that was ranked by Lansing political observers as the most competitive House primary this past year. He raised nearly $50,000 and earned diverse endorsements from senior leaders in Republican and conservative circles, including former Michigan Republican Party chairman Saul Anuzis, former Governor Christine Todd Whitman‘s moderate Republican Leadership Council, prominent social conservative Jay Sekulow and others; but the campaign couldn’t overcome the whispers about his Christmas cards.

Despite the loss and Mr. Vizina’s prosecution, Mr. Lennox traveled across Michigan in the general election as campaign manager and co-chairman of Yes on Proposal 1, which advocated passage of a ballot question asking whether a state constitutional convention should be convened in 2011.

“I believe it’s time to reinvent Michigan,” he said. “We need twenty-first century solutions and not the same tired, old ideas of the past.”

He’s by far the youngest countywide elected official in Michigan, coming into that role after defeating a two-term Democratic incumbent in the 2008 general election — a year in which few Republican challengers overcame the Obama tidal wave.

He took office as drain commissioner after campaigning on the platform of abolishing the office. This garnered national media coverage, including appearances on the Fox News Channel.

While the Board of Commissioners passed Mr. Lennox’s resolution abolishing the office and legislation he wrote was introduced in both the Michigan House and Senate, the office has yet to be abolished.

“I can’t control what Lansing does or doesn’t do,” said Mr. Lennox, a self-described policy wonk, who launched FireDennis.com, a Web site to highlight his reform crusade. “I fulfilled my promise and did everything I could, including running for the House of Representatives on the platform of reforming government at all levels.”

But firing himself — or as he prefers, abolishing his office — wasn’t his first high-profile media experience.
As a student at Central Michigan University, he drew similar attention in 2007 as campaign manager of Students Against Gary Peters. Mr. Peters, a former state legislator and political appointee in Governor Granholm’s administration, was running for Congress against then-Republican incumbent Joe Knollenberg in a swing metro Detroit constituency.

Mr. Lennox objected, saying Peters couldn’t be a non-partisan political science professor and campaign two hours away in one of the most contested congressional races of the 2008 campaign. Mr. Lennox has claimed his criticism of Peters wasn’t rooted in partisanship, but others disagreed. Some have labeled him "too partisan."

“I plead guilty to being a Republican who supports Republicans,” he said, laughing, “Ninety percent of what I do — if not more — isn’t party political, but there is a difference between governing and my role in holding a party leadership post.”

‘Petersgate’, as Mr. Lennox calls it, heated up when a C.M.U. dean was caught on video smacking him after Mr. Lennox pulled out a camcorder to record her actions during a Freedom of Information Act request.

The exchange drew the attention of the Drudge Report, Fox News, and the Associated Press. It has been widely circulated with varying interpretations. Some say she should have been charged for assault and battery, others claim she just pushed the camera away. Regardless, Mr. Lennox’s trajectory was on the rise.

Rocking The Boat

With four new members of the Cheboygan County Board of Commissioners taking office on Jan. 1, Mr. Lennox hopes to focus on nuts-and-bolts work with the freshman majority — only three incumbents were re-elected — to pass meaningful reforms of county government.

“He has the experience to make a real difference,” said Steve Stockman, a former member of Congress, who met Mr. Lennox when he trained young conservatives at the suburban D.C.-based Leadership Institute and now calls him a friend. “I have worked with him on several occasions and have always been impressed.”

The outgoing majority blocked several of Mr. Lennox’s proposals over the past two years. Among them was a referendum asking electors whether they wanted to continue with an unelected county administrator or create an elected county executive. Currently, four counties — Bay, Macomb, Oakland and Wayne — have separated the executive functions of county government from the Board of Commissioners, though other counties have considered what many good-government advocates say is a necessary reform.

Mr. Lennox also wants the Board of Commissioners to establish an independent compensation commission, comprised of non-politicians, to establish the pay and benefits of county elected officials.

“It’s just wrong for politicians to vote themselves and their colleagues pay increases,” he said.

The often-controversial drain commissioner is also working with a civic organization to create a blue-ribbon panel of citizens to review all facets of Cheboygan County’s government and recommend cost savings.

The Board of Commissioners also rejected both of these proposals; though Mr. Lennox is hopeful the new members will get on board.

“There is a growing movement in Cheboygan County saying the status-quo clearly isn’t working when the county is ranked as the eleventh worst economically stressed county in the country,” said Mr. Lennox, noting the Associated Press ranking considered all 3,143 counties. “That was a wakeup call to many community leaders.”

Mr. Lennox chaired the Cheboygan County Republican Party’s campaign committee this past election, where he helped recruit new candidates. Some were successful, while other would-be local politicians lost by some 60 votes to long-time incumbents in the party primary.

A staunch Republican, who lost the party leadership contest after the 2008 election by one vote to a chairman who later quit, Mr. Lennox insists this is about keeping the party Republican.

“I believe in the Party, but incumbent officeholders can’t just use the Republican nomination to win an election,” he said. “If you won’t pay membership dues, attend meetings, get involved and most importantly support a conservative, Republican position on the most important issues facing your office, you don’t deserve re-nomination.”

All this has made Mr. Lennox a target by some who want to preserve their power bastions. Some of these people claim to be Republican, but Mr. Lennox points to many so-called local GOP leaders who publicly supported Democrat Gary McDowell over Republican Dan Benishek for Congress — the seat being vacated by retiring incumbent Bart Stupak.

Taking on these entrenched interests resulted in Mr. Vizina’s prosecution, according to Mr. Lennox.

“This was a political witch hunt from the beginning,” he said, “My opponents realized they had to beat me somehow and they couldn’t risk the chance of me winning the primary, so they decided to take advantage of their positions and abuse the system. It‘s unfortunate, but life and politics aren‘t always fair. Politics, unfortunately, is similar to making sausage — it’s a dirty process. At the end of the day though, the right thing normally happens no matter what the other side does.”

Mr. Vizina rejects the accusation that politics had anything to do with the prosecution.

Calling Mr. Lennox’s accusations of political bias “absolutely ridiculous,” Mr. Vizina told Lansing-based MIRS, “I know Mr. Lennox points at me (but) I don’t know if I’ve ever spoke with him.”

That’s a dubious statement, according to public records obtained from Mr. Lennox. He says Mr. Vizina has personally written him numerous times after the drain commissioner’s office requested legal opinions on official matters. Mr. Lennox says he could provide phone logs documenting telephone conversations, but doesn’t want to get into such a meaningless argument.

“I’ll let the jury’s verdict of not guilty on both counts end this chapter,” he said.

Conflict & Controversy

Crucified by local media, Mr. Lennox has had to use social-networking Web sites Facebook and Twitter to get his side of the story out, along with news media outside Cheboygan County.

The local newspaper of record, the Cheboygan Daily Tribune, has been soundly criticized by Mr. Lennox and his supporters for bias. A former editor was the campaign adviser for Greg MacMaster, who won the primary and general elections to become a member-elect of the Michigan House of Representatives. Several newspaper employees also publicly endorsed MacMaster and passed out his signs around town, Mr. Lennox claims.

“I don’t like looking back and pointing fingers, which is easy when you lose,” said Mr. Lennox. “But it’s clear there were very questionable stories and allegations printed over the last 18 months that bordered on fiction and in many cases the newspaper didn’t bother contacting me for my side.”

Gone unreported have been Mr. Lennox’s allegations that Mr. Vizina did not comply with the Campaign Finance Act. Mr. Lennox filed a complaint to state officials indicating that Mr. Vizina allegedly didn’t file a disclosure report since his election in 2008. If found in violation, Mr. Vizina would be subjected to a maximum fine of $500.

A Bright Future

“I suspect they will come after me again for something before 2012, when I’m eligible to seek re-election as drain commissioner,” said Mr. Lennox, “I didn’t get into public service to make friends. I did this because I want to serve. I want to make a difference. I want to improve my community and our great state of Michigan.”

With two years before the next election and six years before Mr. MacMaster is term-limited from the House of Representatives, one wonders if Mr. Lennox will remain in his current office.

“This regretful and unfortunate ordeal just ended, I haven’t given much thought to what I’ll do in 2012 — let alone for Christmas,” he said, denying as he did earlier that he has higher ambitions. “I took an oath to serve as drain commissioner and I’ll continue to fulfill that oath to the best of my ability.”

He wouldn’t get into specifics, but he emphasized that he supports Republicans.

“I run to win. I don’t run to lose, and I don‘t know who would,” he says rather bluntly.
Even his critics will admit that that you can’t count him out. Mr. Lennox has been criticized in the past and even written off, but he manages to pull off surprise wins, including his acquittal in a case that many claimed was a slam-dunk.

“I believe in public service,” said Mr. Lennox, who counts political leaders from former Governors George Romney and Bill Milliken to Presidents George W. Bush, who he interned for in 2004, and Ronald Reagan as political heroes. “That’s what great about the American republic: You can stand up, have your say and make a difference.”

A letter to the editor

2010-11-03T18:52:00.001-04:00

The following was published by the Cheboygan Daily Tribune:

To the editor:

On Tuesday, our fellow citizens overwhelmingly voted for a new direction. They said, “Enough is enough.”

Our local Republican candidates achieved electoral victory after hard-fought campaigns.

All three Democrats on the Board of Commissioners were defeated — giving our party a 7-0 majority for the first time in years. Replacing the three Democrats will be Tony Matelski (Aloha, Grant, Koehler and Waverly townships), Don Horrocks (City of Cheboygan) and Cal Gouine (Inverness and Mullett townships). Sue Allor (Ellis, Forest, Nunda, Walker and Wilmot townships) also won election after defeating a Democrat in an open seat contest. Together, the four commissioners-elect represent the new ideas and fresh approach that Cheboygan County so desperately needs.

Your Republican change-makers were also successful in the campaign for the Board of Road Commissioners. Incumbent David Brown and challenger James Johnson won six-year terms over strong challenges from two Democrat opponents.

Together, these new leaders are ready to roll up the sleeves and push an aggressive agenda aimed at improving our community and ensuring a better, brighter future for the next generation.
But this is only the first step in getting Cheboygan County working again.

The citizenry must stay involved and engaged. The tough questions must be asked — and answers demanded — because the status-quo isn’t working.

By working together we can achieve the conservative change Cheboygan County deserves.

Dennis Lennox
Drain Commissioner, Cheboygan County

— Dennis Lennox

ICYMI: Proposal 1 coverage

2010-10-20T18:24:00.010-04:00

The Roseville-Eastpointe Eastsider, West Bloomfield Beacon and other community newspapers across Oakland, Wayne and Macomb counties ran a story by C&G Newspapers reporter Eric Czarnik on Proposal 1, a state constitutional convention.

In the story, I was quoted as saying:

"Proposal 1 is the most important ballot question facing the people of Michigan in more than a half century," he said. "We would argue that Michigan is in worse condition economically than it was in 1961."

According to Lennox, a new constitution could save taxpayers more than $1 billion a year if it includes structural reforms, such as reforming public employees' health care and pensions. He said a new constitution could also address the perennial problem the state has with coming up with a balanced budget by Oct. 1 every year.

Lennox blamed an "unholy alliance" of big labor, big business and political elites for trying to stop the convention effort. He accused them of trying to keep the status quo.

"We've lost one family every 12 minutes, 1 million jobs in the past 10 years, and Lansing has failed us," Lennox said.

— Dennis Lennox

WBKB interviews me on Proposal 1

2010-10-15T18:28:00.001-04:00

I was interviewed by WBKB TV-11 for a story recapping Thursday's forum on Proposal 1 at Alpena Community College.

— Dennis Lennox

Campuses could soon be quiet

2010-09-08T17:11:00.003-04:00

Central Michigan University's Campus Conservatives may have been the first student organization to dissolve, but similar groups on campuses across the country will soon follow its path.

That's because the federal Supreme Court ruled over the summer, in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, that registered student organizations such as Campus Conservatives cannot limit membership to students with shared beliefs.

The ruling means groups focused toward racial minorities, such as the Organization for Black Unity, cannot refuse membership to KKK members, who could then overrun the organization and disband it.

The same is true for Christian organizations, which could be forced to dissolve unless religious doctrines are ignored by students.

And before anyone says that argument is absurd, it's happened right here at CMU.

In the spring of 2007, then-members of the Gay-Straight Alliance tried joining Campus Conservatives for the sole purpose of launching a coup d'état and dissolving what was then CMU's oldest, largest and most active political organization. (This incident was detailed in legal briefs filed before the Supreme Court, and justices even referred to it in their dissenting opinion.)

The inability of students to voluntarily associate with like-minded students will have a chilling effect on free speech and civic engagement on campuses such as CMU, which are already challenged by an apathetic student body that is largely ignorant of anything outside of "Jersey Shore" on MTV.

— Dennis Lennox

Lansing's budget debacle reaffirms need for constitutional convention

2010-09-08T15:51:00.003-04:00

The debacle over finalizing a state government budget underscores the reason why Proposal 1, a state constitutional convention, must be passed.

Our leaders in Lansing promised they would pass a budget by July 1. That deadline came and went, and it wasn’t until this week, some two months after the original deadline, that a budget agreement was reached by legislative leaders and the governor.

But a promise is a promise. And I doubt few Michiganders would receive a two-month extension from their boss after failing to meet a critical work deadline, as our legislators did.

This charade, which has been repeated year after year over the last decade, illustrates why Lansing is fundamentally incapable of fixing itself. The change our great state so desperately needs won’t come from within the halls of state government.

With a constitutional convention, good-government reforms could be enacted to prevent future budget debacles and state government shutdowns.

Notable outside-the-box examples include changing the commencement of the fiscal year from October 1 to July 1, requiring both houses of the Legislature to pass a balanced budget before taking up any other business and docking the pay of legislators for each day the budget is late.

Here’s another discussion-starter: The dissolution of the Legislature and immediate, parliamentary-style snap elections when a budget cannot be passed. This would give a much-needed popular mandate to one side of the budget debate, and force action.

It is clear that the status-quo isn’t working anymore.

The only practical mechanism to right the ship of state is a constitutional convention.

It would allow for the people to take back their government and circumvent the dysfunctional place in Lansing otherwise known as the Capitol.

— Dennis Lennox