Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Michigan GOP fails again to stop new redistricting panel

Michigan flag

Michigan has been the biggest redistricting battleground this decade.

RiverNorthPhotography/Getty Images

Another Republican attempt to block Michigan's independent redistricting commission was dismissed Monday by a federal judge.

The state Republican Party's lawsuit argued that restrictions on who may serve on the new panel violated the free speech and free association rights of potential GOP commissioners — the same argument a federal appeals court rebuffed just three months ago.

Battleground Michigan has been at the heart of the gerrymandering debate since the start of the decade, when Republicans took control of Lansing and drew some of the most assertively partisan legislative and congressional maps in the country. In response, 61 percent in a grassroots-driven 2018 referendum decided to turn the next decade's line-setting over to a panel outside the control of politicians.


Judge Janet Neff ruled in favor of Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson — signaling that the new lawsuit was ultimately no different, constitutionally speaking, from a remarkably similar lawsuit from the state party that was dismissed this spring by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"The parties have not identified any intervening change in facts or law, and the 6th Circuit's rulings are clearly stated and mirror this court's own assessment of the legal sufficiency of plaintiffs' claims," she wrote.

Michiganders who have in the last six years been a candidate, elected official, party officer, political consultant, lobbyist or legislative employee may not serve on the commission — nor may members of their immediate families.

Republicans argued these restrictions disqualify too many people from applying and that the commission's rules violate their freedom of association, as applicants for the commission are required to disclose which party they are affiliated with without needing consent from said party.

The 13-member commission will consist of four Democrats, four Republicans and five independents.

Nancy Wang, executive director of Voters Not Politicians, the group that advocated for the ballot measure, celebrated the win: "Michigan's Constitution begins with, 'All political power is inherent in the people.' The courts have vindicated the people's right to use our political power to take back our redistricting process and unrig our elections."


Read More

​Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth

Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth in April 2018 as part of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month.

Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kris R. Lindstrom/U.S. Navy

Military Sexual Trauma Survivors Can’t Sue the Government. A New Bill Could Change That.

When Mayra Diaz opened the door of her Army barracks room in 2022, she didn’t realize it was the beginning of the end of her military career.

She had never met the soldier standing in front of her, Sgt. Greville Clarke. She didn’t know he had sexually assaulted three other women on base over the past 15 months, including one he threatened at knifepoint.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG

Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG with a stylized DONKEY with 3 white stars on blue top of donkey and two red feet. Flag is laying on top of a red, white, and blue American Flag.

Getty Images

How to Define the Democratic Party - Left or Centrist?

Labels can be misleading and misused. The label "Centrist" is empowering because it signifies you are mainstream, not extreme, a place where all people can come together. To be labeled "Left" is to place you outside the mainstream, extreme; left connotes a kind of kookiness as well as—horror of horrors—Socialism.

But are the labels accurate? For most of the 20th century, the Democratic Party was, without question, the party that championed the working man, the average person—the people. But they were nevertheless firm capitalists—they were not Socialists.

Keep ReadingShow less
US $1 dollar bill in mid air melting, red gradated background

From $215B to $7.14T: how outbound investment, falling labor share, and rising corporate profits reveal trickle-down economics' core flaw.

PM Images/Getty Images

Trickle-Down-Economics was Doomed from Day-One; yet Defended to Present-Day

By 1972, U.S. direct investments abroad amounted to $94.0 billion. This was two years prior to the development of the Laffer Curve in 1974 by American economist Arthur Laffer, famously sketched on a restaurant napkin during a dinner meeting in Washington, D.C. Therefore, the writing was on the wall regarding the vulnerability of Trickle-down economics, years prior to Reagan’s Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA) of 1981.

Trickle-down economics fails primarily because outbound foreign direct investment (FDI) allows corporations and wealthy individuals to invest tax-cut windfall profits globally rather than domestically. The theory of Trickle-down economics predicted that lowering taxes on businesses and high earners will stimulate local capital accumulation, leading to domestic business expansion, job creation, and wage growth for everyone. However, in a highly globalized economy, capital is hyper-mobile. Instead of filtering downward into the domestic economy, these untaxed or low-tax profits frequently exit the country entirely.

Keep ReadingShow less