Pollsters Ask: Get Rid of Michigan’s EM Law? Voters With College Degrees Say “Keep It.”

by P.D. Lesko

Jesse Jackson, Rachel Maddow, Michigan blogger Chris Savage and a host of left-leaning pundits have been punditing and writing themselves blue in the face over the past 10 months since Public Act 4 was passed by the Michigan Legislature and signed into law by Governor Rick Snyder. The law played a significant role in the launch of a recall movement against Governor Snyder, a move that did not succeed, but was recently reinvigorated and is moving forward. The so-called Emergency Manager law also launched a ballot drive effort to have voters decided whether to appeal it. Then, there’s the lawsuit filed by a nun and 26 other Michigan residents that alleges the state’s EM law is unconstitutional.

In short, Public Act 4 is the face of Republican politics in Michigan that launched a 1,000 protests and an exponentially larger number of blog entries.

Influential progressive organizations such as Think Progress, Michigan Forward and Progress Michigan have been vocal in their support of these protests, and efforts to repeal Public Act 4. Michigan Forward, with the support of unions, has been collecting signatures to get the measure on the ballot. It would take 161,305 signatures to do so, and Michigan Forward head Brandon Jessup has said the group has already collected more than that number of signatures.

Michigan’s establishment political pundits and mainstream media however, have been dismissive of what they’ve painted as shrill and inaccurate criticisms of Public Act 4.

Crain’s Business Detroit ran a piece on April 2011 titled “Why Rachel Maddow (and Jesse Jackson) got it wrong.” The piece paints both Chris Savage and Rachel Maddow as conspiracy theorists, identifies and criticizes misconceptions on Maddow’s part concerning Public Act 4:

Most recently, Maddow has done some work (prompted, apparently, by a local blogger) connecting the state takeover of Benton Harbor to a proposed waterfront development. The luxury condominium development, Maddow says, would imperil Jean Klock Park, Benton Harbor’s — wait for it — one and only “jewel.” More on that later.

It sounds great. Unfortunately, there are a few problems with Maddow’s scenario.

“It is not about the budget,” Maddow has warned of the EFM law. “It’s about something way worse than that.”

This is where Maddow starts to go off the rails. The changes to the EFM law are about something big, all right, but that something is called “bond ratings.”

In a segment with MLive’s newest political columnist Tim Skubick after Governor Snyder’s 2012 State of the State speech, Bill Ballenger, who is the go-to-guy for quotes by MLive reporters covering state politics, and the editor of a newsletter which focuses on state politics, called the idea that Public Act 4 was targeting the state’s black communities and black voters “silly.” Ballenger’s response was certainly a swipe at Chris Savage, who claimed in a piece he posted that if Detroit were to be placed under the control of an Emergency Manager, 49 percent of the state’s black residents would be without their own local elected officials.

Republicans in the Michigan Legislature say Public Act 4 is a necessary tool to help struggling communities get back on the path to financial solvency. Democrats in the Legislature, who seem to be in a state of continual outrage, have repeatedly spoken out against Public Act 4.

Of course, the state’s voters may soon be asked to either repeal or support Public Act 4, should the current ballot initiative succeed. As it turns out, even after all of the backing and forthing between mainstream media, bloggers, national political pundits and even Congressman John Conyers, Michigan’s voters are just not sure whom to believe. Is Public Act 4 disenfranchising blacks throughout the state, and political poison, or is Snyder’s Public Act 4 the best tool to use with financially troubled cities such as Benton Harbor and Detroit, and school districts, such as Highland Park’s?

600 Michigan voters polled between January 21-25 2012 told EPIC-MRA staffers: “We can’t decide.” Asked if they would vote to keep Public Act 4 on the books, 45 percent of Michigan voters surveyed said no and 42 percent said yes. The results are within the 4-percent margin of error. The poll was conducted by EPIC-MRA  for the Detroit Free Press and WXYZ-TV.

As one might expect, the poll reveals that Republicans support the EM law, and Democrats hate the new EM law in almost equal measures. The majority of Black voters polled want to get rid of Public Act 4, but white voters just can’t seem to decide, and are almost evenly split in their opinions. One of the most interesting results of the EPIC-MRA survey is the clear presence of an “education gap” in the response of voters. Those who have college degrees (educated voters) would vote 48 percent to 41 percent to keep Public Act 4, while those with a high school diploma or less would vote 57 percent to 29 percent against it.

If the signatures collected by Brandon Jessup’s group are verified, the state’s voters will, in a few months, decide what Michigan should do with Public Act 4. It will not only be a referendum on a law, but also on the ability of the state’s progressive political activists, writers, and organizations to inform and shape public opinion.