More Detroit Humor at Voters' Expense

Ah, Detroit. Perhaps we should call you the laugh a minute city. except that the issues involved are so very serious. Now there is a question of whether 20,000 (that's twenty thousand) ballots were incorrectly tallied from the city's primary election two weeks ago, the one won by Mike Duggan as the result of a write in campaign. Second place finisher Benny Napoleon insists they be recounted, and that's okay. A recount could give him a primary victory, and that might be important in the coming weeks with as momentum switches to the November general election.

What is not okay is another punch in the gut to Detroit. This is potentially another display of incompetence which can be laid squarely on the backs of the city and the people who live in it, run it (the Emergency manager notwithstanding), defend it, vote in it, demand democracy for it, and even run its elections. Is there any reason now to doubt the necessity of the EM?

It appears to come down to a question of whether poll workers incorrectly marked the 20,000 or so votes in question. Yes, the Wayne County Board of Canvassers could have acted more quickly, by ordering a recount earlier. You'll find more detail here: http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/region/detroit/more-than-20000-votes-cast-for-mike-duggan-in-detroit-primary-election-may-be-in-jeopardy Instead, they punted it to the state at the last minute (they were supposed to have certified the election yesterday, August 20). So this is partly on the County too, and not Detroit alone.

Still, it reeks of the raw stupidity which Detroiters across the board have been accused of for a very long time now. Are we a banana republic, or a proud city on a hill in the United States of America?

We're not sure of the answer either.

A Write-in Candidate Wins in Detroit

Say whatever you want about the real value of elections. Say what you will about how one vote doesn't count. Sneer, even, at the entire election process. Because no matter what you say, think, or do, what happened yesterday in the Detroit mayoral primary is impressive and significant. A write in candidate not only won a spot on the general election ballot this November, he also came in first.

Mike Duggan was the top vote getter in yesterday's primary, and not by a small margin. He won almost half the ballots, and as a write in candidate. He was forced to do so after a court had rejected his spot on the ballot. This is more than a historical footnote. It's almost unthinkable.

True, Duggan had name recognition. True, too, that he had the support of both major Detroit newspapers, the Free Press and the News. True as well that he may have been helped by having been unceremoniously ordered off the ballot. The fact is that voters are a rather lazy lot. Yet over 44,000 of then in the city of Detroit took the time to write someone's name on their ballot.

It may well mean than the November election is a foregone conclusion. Benny Napoleon was supposedly the front runner yet was beaten by 16 percentage points. He already, arguably, has about half the electorate against him. Duggan needed barely four percent more voters for a majority yesterday; how can he not gain that much two months from now?

Okay, it's not over til it's over. Officially. But this one's over, folks. Mike Duggan will be the next Mayor of Detroit. We'll talk to you again about it on November 6.

Should Detroiters Bother to Vote Tomorrow?

There is a primary election in Detroit tomorrow, and it may be either the most or least important one in the city's history.

Seeing as Detroit is under the power of Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr and the people running for mayor and city council will be virtually powerless for at least the first year or so of their terms, any election right now seems unimportant. Even when they get real power, the bankruptcy which Detroit is facing may well determine what they can and cannot do for a few years after that. About the only really interesting aspect of the vote is Mike Duggan's write in candidacy for mayor. It would be an interesting side note to our history should he pull that off successfully.

Too, for the first time Detroiters will get to vote for council members by district, with two others elected at large. It is hope that, in the long run, this will give more power to the city's neighborhoods. That does make sense, but only time will tell.

ll that said, we can't shake the feeling that tomorrow's primary is a pointless endeavor. Why not wait until the EM is gone and save Detroit that much cash in salaries and benefits? But we may be missing something important with that question and will not insist upon it.

So, go ahead and vote. We suppose it must be worth something or they wouldn't be holding and election, right?

Law cannot be Fluid

Mike Duggan can't run for mayor of Detroit...for now. Yesterday's ruling by a Michigan Appeals Court has declared as much, and until the State Supreme Court is called look into the matter that is where it sits. For now, the most interesting discussion of the issue may not be over Duggan's candidacy itself but of the legal questions behind the ruling.

Stephen Henderson of the the Detroit Free Press says that he respects the court's literal ruling yet feels it violates the 'inclusive intent' of Michigan election law. Not being lawyers, we're not certain what he means by that, but we have our suspicions. We suspect that Mr. Henderson, as do so many of the liberal bent, believe that the law should be fluid or 'alive', as is our Constitution according to their view.

But what's the point of fluid law, of laws in motion? The only realistic approach to such a scheme of order can only be chaos, can't it? If the law is allowed to flow according to the will of those immediately involved with it, in this situation Mr. Duggan, how can we have fairness and justice? The Appeals Court has said that the Detroit Charter is unambiguous on the point; isn't that what we want in the law, proclamations which are so well enunciated as to be beyond interpretation? Isn't that the only real way to have every citizen equal before the law?

If the law is bad, there are mechanisms in place to change it. But it shouldn't be changed while the game is in play; that would be like changing baseball rules to have runners must circle the bases clockwise while one is caught between second and third. The game could not be played seriously without respect for the rules as they are whilst it is being played. You may well, for its own good, alter the rules between matches so that everyone who plays later can understand it and play it as best they can. To do so during a match would mock the very sportsmanship and fairness which sports are supposed to promote.

In the same way fluid law mocks the whole process of fairness and justice. If the Charter needs altering, it must come later, not while an issue is in play, and not by courts and their clients seeking whatever they may want simply because they want it.

If that isn't fair to Duggan, and arguably it may not be, the best which can be done is to fix things for the future. Yet as even Duggan and his supporters ought to have been able to predict that the courts might well see things as they have, it hardly seems credible that the whole thing treats him wrongly.

We need unambiguous law. Only our freedom will suffer without it. Our need for the greatest possible and rational freedom is far more important than any potential injustice towards Detroit mayoral candidates in 2013.