Home  |  Out & About  |  Dining  |  Events  |  Singles  |  Classifieds  |  Archive  |  Advertising

JENNIFER GRANHOLM: LADY OF JUSTICE

By Robert E. Martin

George Bernard Shaw once wrote that power does not corrupt men; but

fools, if they get into a position of power, corrupt power.

Since taking office in 1999, Granholm has served as the only top ranking

Democrat in the Executive Branch of our state government. She has been a

vigilant protector of consumers & families, and fought to make protection

of utility ratepayers a priority. Apart from bringing over $8 billion

dollars to the State of Michigan from the lawsuit against the big tobacco

companies, she has taken criminal action against numerous nursing homes and

physicians for either the neglect or abuse of their patients or their

attempts to defraud the Michigan Medicaid system.

Granholm has sued pharmaceutical companies for conspiring to keep generic,

lower-cost, alternative drugs off the market; and in March 2002, she

released the results of a statewide survey that showed variations of as

much as 400% in the prices of prescription drugs across the state.

An honors graduate of both the University of California at Berkeley and

Harvard Law School, Granholm was appointed Wayne County Corporation Counsel

in 1994. While there, she reduced taxpayer-funded lawsuit payouts by 87

percent. Before joining the Wayne County staff, she was a federal

prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's office where she maintained a 98 percent

conviction rate.

We began our in-depth interview with Jennifer Granholm by asking her about

the source of that inspiration that would prompt a person to aspire to

become Michigan's next Governor.

Review: You've made a strong reputation for yourself and are one of the few

state political figures to make national news in a positive life with your

aggressive stance on scanner overcharges and many consumer oriented issues.

Can you give us a bit of background concerning your interest in government?

Was there any 'defining' moment that solidified your desire to get into

politics?

Granholm:  That's a great question.  Part of it stems from when I was in

High School.  I lived in a school in a white neighborhood, but kids were

bussed in. There were racial tensions in our high school and I had some

great friends in the African American community who expressed such

resentment about having to be bussed into the white community.

Similarly, people in the White community were at odds. So they picked a few

us of to go on a retreat about justice & racial reconciliation issues,

because we had riots at our schools. That was a defining moment for me. The

feeling like there is an opportunity to change the world if you bring

people together.

Out of High School, along the way, experiences reinforced this notion

inside me that you are here to do something more than merely make money.

That's certainly a notion my parents reinforced into my head.  I come from

a family of immigrants and they really believe that we are here to give

something back.

What I'd like to promote as Governor is the idea that young people

shouldn't be concerned about only making a buck.

It is such a counter-cultural phenomenon nowadays - to talk about

selflessness instead of selfishness, but I think it is so imperative that

we do that. My brother is a minister and I think this notion has a biblical

underpinning, too.

Review: It's no doubt been frustrating being a ranking Democrat in the

Republican dominated Lansing Capitol.

Granhom:  (smiling) That's an understatement.

Review: What are three of the things you are most proud of during your

tenure as Attorney General?

Granholm:  First on my list is the Mentoring Program  - an effort to stem

the flow of kids into the juvenile justice system.  The goal originally was

to recruit 2000 kids who were chronic truants that needed a stable adult in

their life and we had over 4000 people sign-up for the Mentor Michigan

Program.

Jennifer Granholm 

I've done it myself and have mentored a little girl for 2 years.  It's been

an amazing experience and an eye-opener for me, and I'm very proud of that.

I want to recruit 10,000 people to mentor kids, because that is a way of

stepping outside ourselves, again.

Secondly, I'm very proud of our High Tech Crime Unit.  We were one of the

first states in the nation to set one up and have conducted cutting-edge

prosecutions in that arena. Now, a number of law enforcement agencies have

started them, which is good, because before many people believed if it

happened online it wasn't a crime.

We were the first state to get a criminal conviction for the sale of GHB

(the date rape drug) online, the first state to prosecute the sale of

alcohol or tobacco to minors online, and the first state to shut down

websites that sold prescription drugs online without a prescription.

We are also the first state to get a conviction for the Internet

solicitation of a murder online and we've obtained many convictions for

child pornography websites online, so we've been on the cutting edge of

this and I'm very proud of that.

Third, I am really proud that we beat down the effort of Governor Engler

and the Legislature to take away the powers of the office of Attorney

General.  Two years ago they introduced legislation and went to the courts

and tried to do it through the Governor's office in an appropriations bill,

and we have beaten them down.

This is a proud office that has stood for 160 years to protect the people

and it will continue to do so under a Granholm Administration.

Review:  Governor Engler has done much damage to our environment over the

years by politicizing the DEQ and stopping citizen input.

Here in Saginaw County the big story is the Lone Tree Council unveiling

documents going back 2 years that show dioxin levels 80 times higher than

that of EPA recommendations, yet DEQ Director Russell Harding is trying to

raise the standard and claims the publicizing of these dangerous and

alarming levels is only a political attack.

What do you feel should be done about this and should your office get

involved?  Also, my understanding is that years ago covenants were drawn up

stating that perpetrators would not be responsible for clean up.

Granholm:   It sickens me how long that information was withheld by the

Director. But to answer your question, we need to do three things.

First, we need to recombine the DNR and the DEQ. Secondly, we need to

reinstate some of those boards & commissions so citizens can have input

once again into policies that affect their land & water. Third, we need to

ban drilling and diversion of Great Lakes Water and implement smart land

use policies that would give people incentives to develop in areas with an

infrastructure already in place, rather than gobbling up green space,

farmland, and open space.

We are literally defined by our natural resources and area natural resource

state. If we do not have policies that reflect that we are missing the boat.

People come to Michigan based upon our conservation heritage, yet this

Administration has completely fallen down on the job in that respect. I

have promoted a 10-point pan for clean water in Michigan, including

addressing the ballast water problem and toxins in our water, whether it be

dioxin or mercury.

And we have not promoted eco-conservation, either. It's important for

people to understand that we do not inherit the earth from our parents, we

borrow it from our children.

It's a public trust for us and a constitutional requirement and the next

Governor has to follow that constitutional obligation.

If somebody pollutes, they should be responsible. If you can trace it

directly to that party they need to take away whatever they put into the

land & water. That's a philosophy.

Currently you have a government that is involved with compliance assistance

rather than forcing people to clean up their mess. That's why the number of

referrals from the DEQ to the Attorney General's office has dropped so

hugely. We need to enforce the laws and exercise the tools that assure our

environment is clean, in addition to seeking federal funds.

We want to make sure that business thrives and there is no question about

that, but it is not inconsistent to have a business ethos that is a

conservation ethos because that's why they come to Michigan in the first

place - to enjoy these great natural resources. So it is not a win/lose

situation. You can have a win/win situation when you have business &

environmental interests that co-exist.

Review: Do you think much of the projected $1.4 billion budget shortfall

that the State faces can be traced to the phasing out of the single

business tax and the increase in the state sales tax from 4 to 6 cents?  It

would seem that when the economy is down this would directly affect revenue.

Granholm:  They've done a number of things that have cut revenue but not

cut spending, so if you're going to cut revenue then you must cut spending

to compensate, which is something they haven't done.

What they have done is create this structural deficit and I believe the

latest figure is around $800 million because the projected growth in the

economic base will increase revenue.  But what they've done is fill that

almost billion dollar hole by implementing several 'one-time fixes' like

acceleration of income tax collection by moving it from December to July,

or borrowing from the Rainy Day Fund, which is another one-time fix.  Then

they took the tobacco settlement dollars to fix the General Fund, which is

another one-time fix.

So the next Governor has an enormous budget deficit that they're going to

be saddled with. In fact, that John Engler has done this is to me the

biggest indication that he doesn't think his candidate has a chance of

winning, because he is really saddling the next Governor with a tremendous

hole.

So what do you do?

First, we need a policy of growing the economy so revenue is enhanced. The

ways to do that include incubating and attracting business into Michigan

that dovetail on the great legacy we have in this state which is the

automotive industry.

We are not a rust belt. We are manufacturing the most technologically

advanced mass produced product in the world right here in Michigan, which

is the 21st Century automobile.

We ought to be targeting businesses that dovetail into that product,

because the car isn't going anywhere.  We need to get business here that

enhances the great industry that we already have.

The reason Silicone Valley imploded is because they didn't have a business

that all these industries were hooked into. Here in Michigan we do. And if

we're smart about targeting that and building on the synergy of that legacy

than we can really grow our economy and increase the revenues.

Secondly, we have to be reasonable about what we're doing with respect to

unemployment. We've got an unemployment bill that is stuck in the

legislature that is outrageous.

We're the lowest state in the Midwest in terms of what we pay for

unemployment compensation.  If you want to stimulate the economy, which is

what we have all these great expansionist policies for at the Federal

level, you need to put money back into peoples' pockets who need it the

most and will be most likely to spend and put it back into the economy,

which are the unemployed workers.

So we've got this huge unemployment fund at record levels yet are not

increasing the weekly benefit. We're at 74% of the poverty level and it is

unbelievable how much money is in the trust fund.

So we've got this huge unemployment fund at record levels yet not

increasing the weelky benefit - we're at 74% of the poverty level and it is

unbelievable how much money is in the trust fund.

Its illogical from an economic point of view to not increase that benefit,

at least indexing it to the cost of inflation, which is what we ought to

do.

Review:  Another big problem is with the rising costs of health and auto

insurance, which are two things that truly fuel inflation.  How do we

approach this whole issue of skyrocketing insurance on all levels?

Granholm:  I don't want to be cynical, but the reality is that it's

difficult not to be. There's a sort of lore in Lansing that if it's going

to benefit the insurance industry it's going through, period.

The reality is there's a lot of good insurance companies and people working

hard in that industry, but they've gotten a very good deal over the past 12

years.

The average citizen is paying through the nose, regardless of what kind of

insurance it is. We have seen these costs disproportionately impact the

average citizen and that imbalance has to be corrected.

The way we control the costs is by achieving balance in the Governor's

office and the State Legislature. We need people that care about citizens.

Caring about corporations is important because they are job providers, but

this is a balanced state, and if you don't have people who care about

average people that have very little voice in Lansing except at the ballot

box, then we are in trouble.

Voting is such an important tool, but this Administration has worked hard

attempting to cut that voice out. They've eliminated straight ticket

voting, disenfranchised college students, and done all of this in an effort

to shore up their perceived 'strength areas', which are corporations and

insurance companies.

I don't want to be so Populist about it to say that corporations are bad

and the little guy should always win, because it should always be a

balance.

But the reality is that now there is such a tilt against the average

citizen in this state, which is epitomized by those that occupy our courts

that have been appointed by this Administration, that people need to

realize the importance of going out and voting to restore some balance in

this state.

Review:  Should the state freeze the tax cuts for 2002? The impact on

income tax is about $187 million and the full year impact for the SBT would

be about $112 million, which would equal $297 million in savings for a full

year.

Granholm:  I'm not in favor of freezing the cut yet and I like the idea of

having a government that is lean but not mean.

What I want to propose is a cabinet level position that is a 'Bureaucracy

Buster'. In reality, government does have a lot of bureaucracy and many

excess layers of stuff. Perhaps bureaucracies were set in place long ago

and made perfect sense at the time they were implemented, but we need to

take another look at it.

I want to see government streamlined before tossing out the tax cuts. Until

I'm convinced government has done all it can to leverage technology to

service, it's important for me to prioritize where we're spending our

dollars as well. To me government is there to serve and be a safety net in

a very efficient way.

Currently we have spending that has occurred in some dubious areas. The

state spent $82 million on a prison in Ionia that sits empty and is

spending money in areas that need to be looked at before we decide to put a

pause on giving the people their money back.

Review:  What about the anti-terrorism legislation that passed at the State

level?  Many civil libertarians feel they've gone too far and critics claim

you've been supportive of the expanded wiretap provisions.

Granholm: This is the way I feel about that. First, the anti-terrorism

legislation in the state is much different than the federal level.  At the

federal level I think they did go too far. We are seeing a lot of

provisions coming through that aren't even in the legislation itself, but

have been accomplished administratively by the Department of Justice that

really go to the heart of many civil liberty issues.

As far as defining terrorism as a crime in Michigan, I think it has to be.

If you ask a state or local law enforcement division to assist in

preventing terrorism, then you need to have a crime in the state law to do

that. Prior to these laws, terrorism was not even a crime in Michigan, so

there are tweaks that have to occur within our legislative framework to

enable state and local law enforcement to protect citizens. I think that is

very important.

The state law is very narrowly crafted. The wiretap aspect is much narrower

than the federal level, or with other states that have enacted it.

	

Terrorism is conducted between closed organizations and the only

way to penetrate it is electronically. In Michigan this only occurs if

probable cause exists to believe a crime is being committed, such as in

acts of terrorism or high-level drug dealing or Internet related child

pornography.

Not all types of activity can be monitored. Plus you need a court order and

approval by the Attorney General, so you have two layers of approval, which

is actually much more narrowly crafted than the federal legislation.

The only way you prevent a terrorist act from occurring is to get

information that is credible. And the only way you can get that information

is by being able to penetrate a terrorist cell through electronic

comminations.

Review:  How would you contrast yourself against your opponents, David

Bonior and Jim Blanchard? When we interviewed Bonior he pointed out that

you barely won the AG race 51 to 49 percent against a second tier

Republican and that he's been running every two years for 29 years and won

every race, so he has more experience and a proven track record.

Additionally, he claimed that your only experience prior to AG was as

corporation counsel for Wayne County for 4 years.  How would you respond?

Granholm:  First, I'm the only one of any of these candidates who currently

serves in the Executive Branch of government, or has served in the

Executive Branch of government for the past 12 years.

I'm the only one of these candidates who's been elected statewide in the

past 16 years. And it is true, if you want somebody who has been in

government as a career politician and fought the old battles than I'm not

your choice. But if you want somebody who is going to bring a different

perspective to state government - the perspective of excellence - then I am

the candidate.

As the State Attorney General I serve in the Executive Branch of government

and run the largest law firm in the state. We represent the 200-plus

agencies, boards, and commissions of state government and handle 30,000

cases or matters on behalf of the state at any given time.

I know state government.

When was the last time David Bonior served in state government?  Wasn't it

30 years ago?

I'm interested in hearing people's perspectives and hope to construct a

diverse policy table. There exist a lot of good independents and Milliken

Republicans that have good ideas, and I would like to invite them over and

bring them into the picture. In fact, of all the candidates running, I

think I appeal to the broadest spectrum of Michigan.

If you're looking for somebody who has been a 'career politician' then I'm

not truly the candidate.  I can't compete with that, nor would I want to.

In fact, I think that's why people had term limits in mind - they want to

see a different perspective brought to government.  They don't want the

'same old, same old', and that is why I'm running.

I'm running because I bring a different perspective into play. I don't

want to fight the old battles. We're in the 21st Century and I think there

is a new way of looking at things and bringing people to the table that

have not been invited before.

home  |  out/about  |  events  |   personal  |  store  |  classified  |  real estate  |   forums  |  archives  |  contact
© 2009 Review Magazine.  All rights reserved.