There was a time when the term “states’ rights” was simply code for racial discrimination. In the early 1960s, Governors Ross Barnett of Mississippi and George Wallace of Alabama adhered to the policy of “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever.” They felt that as governors each state had the right to set policies regarding segregation and integration.

States’ rights are still an essential tenet of the Republican Party. Many Democrats who are scared of the so-called conservative movement in the country also embrace the rhetoric and policies of states’ rights.

There are a few courageous politicians who acknowledge the reality of “we’re all in this together” and the federal government is the entity that addresses the challenges that face all of us. One who supports strong federal involvement in domestic policies is former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm. Her views come from conviction and experience. She was governor of Michigan as its economy began to tank in the early 2000s, well before the rest of the country fell into a recession. The early 2000s was a terrible time for American auto manufacturers and Michigan bore the brunt of the distress more than any other state in the nation.

In her book, A Governor’s Story: The Fight for Jobs and America’s Economic Future, Granholm states:

After three decades of conservative ascendancy, global competition is confronting us with the hard fact that pure laissez-faire, free-market theory no longer works. Recent experience shows that tax cuts, deregulation, and a hands-off approach to government don’t amount to a magical formula for jobs, profits, and prosperity.

Throughout the book, she explains the limitations of what Michigan, as a single state, could do to address the serious economic problems that it faced. She was as energetic and creative as any governor could have been, but Michigan was caught between the vice of corporate greed and federal indifference during the George W. Bush years until the waning months of his term.

Finally, with the stimulus package fashioned by the Obama Administration with a Democratic Congress, necessary aid came. Granholm describes the good news that came in the form of a phone call from an aide to Vice-President Joe Biden. Here’s part of what Michigan was getting from the stimulus package:

“KD Advanced Battery Group—$161 million, factory to be built in Midland, Michigan. Johnson Controls—$299.2 million, factory to be built in Holland, Michigan. A123 Systems to get $249.1 million—factories to be built in Romulus and Brownstown. Compact Power, also known as LG Chem—$151.4 million for battery cells for the GM Volt, facilities to be built in Holland, Pontiac, and St. Clair. General Motors and Ford—two awards each for four different projects. Chrysler’s getting one. Magna E-Car Systems of America is getting $40 million for a plant in Holly. Eaton in partnership with the Coast Air Quality Management District is getting $45.4 million for a plant in Galesburg.

In order to appreciate the full significance of the Obama Administration’s commitment to the stimulus package as well as Governor Granholm’s clear understanding of its need, it is helpful to reflect on the vital engagement of the federal government in domestic issues in the 1960s and then see how Republicans have continuously tried to undermine it.

During the 1960s the federal government passed a series of civil rights laws based on the premise that human rights enforced by the federal government trumped states’ rights. Had the Civil Rights bills of 1964, 1965, and 1968 not been passed, it’s quite possible that in the South and other isolated locales, African-Americans could not eat at the same restaurants as whites. They could not stay in the same hotels. They could not live in communities where whites did not want them to be their neighbors. They would not have equal access to employment opportunities. There would be no enforcement procedures to ensure that African-Americans had equal rights to vote.

At the same time that the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations were advancing human rights, they were also addressing the economic needs of the poor and some in the middle class. These programs, known as the Great Society, included Medicare, Medicaid, the War on Poverty, increased federal aid to education, and increased federal assistance for mass transit. Additionally, consumer protection laws were enacted to provide protection for citizens against deceptive practices by some corporations.

The human rights and economic advances of the 1960s were of enormous benefit to the disenfranchised. But that’s not the entirety of the equation. In some ways, the advances for the “have nots” was a loss for the “haves.” Business owners could not refuse to serve African-Americans if they chose not to do so. Few African-Americans could vote in the South which ensured that candidates would continue to try to “out-segregate” one another. Politicians did not need to concern themselves about appealing to at least a modicum of moderate and progressive voters.

States’ rights has become the mantra for virtually all the Republicans running for president as well as a number of other candidates running for offices at the federal and state levels. In many ways the reason is residue from the advances of the 1960s. As Dr. Martin Luther King said, “laws cannot change the hearts of others, but they can change their habits.” The progressive laws of the 1960s have provided vital new opportunities for minorities and others who are disenfranchised. However, the laws appear to have not done much with regard to changing the hearts of others.

In many ways, the support of states’ rights by the Republican party is the residue of or a reincarnation of the Southern bigotry that has existed through most of the country’s history. The planks of their platform are largely based on trying to undo the civil and economic rights that became the law of the land of the 1960s.

1. Republican views opposed to human rights:

a. Anti-choice

b. Anti-contraception

c. Anti-gay rights

d. Anti-euthanasia

e. Anti-immigration

2. Republican view opposed to economic rights for the poor and middle class

a. Opposing ending Bush tax cuts for the wealthy

b. Initial opposition to payroll tax cuts (only applying to lower and middle class)

c. Opposing additional stimulus to provide more jobs for the unemployed

d. Opposing retaining maximum length of unemployment insurance at 99 weeks (or increasing that number if necessary)

e. Opposing the Affordable Health Care Act which extends health care coverage to an additional 35 – 40 million citizens

f. Opposing federal aid to education

g. Favoring reducing spending on virtually all domestic programs.

h. Anti-environmental protection

i. De-regulation which increases corporate profits at the expense of consumer and worker interests.

While Barack Obama has been criticized by some progressives for not pushing a sufficiently strong liberal agenda, over the past year he has been fashioning more policy around the strength of the federal government. He has the strongest bully pulpit of any public figure. With help from other Democrats who can sense the absurdity of many Republican positions, President Obama can help us restore the perspectives of the 1960s when it was clear that major answers to public issues rested with the federal government. The Republicans have given Democrats a wonderful opportunity to bring common sense back to governance. Jennifer Granholm clearly understands the importance of a strong federal government. Barack Obama is moving more in that direction. Now we need other Democrats to seize the moment.

The post A governor says: “State solutions need an active federal government.” appeared first on Occasional Planet.

If you want to see how convoluted Mitt Romney’s record is regarding what to do to help the American auto industry, simply compare his cornucopia of positions vs. those of former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm. Romney has repeatedly demonstrated a practice of flip-flopping on a variety of issues. But you would think that addressing the needs of the auto industry would be something in which he would be both emotionally invested as well as knowledgeable.

He grew up in Michigan. His father, George, worked as an auto executive and from 1954-1962 served as chairman and president of American Motors Corporation (which was later acquired by Chrysler). George Romney had an interest in politics, with a wide variety of passions. In an era when there was a strong moderate wing of the Republican Party, he was one of its leaders. Because of his success with American Motors, he was a viable candidate for governor of Michigan. He ran and won in 1962, serving six years. He was a strong advocate of civil rights, working closely with Dr. Martin Luther King. Romney had the unenviable task of being governor of Michigan when four days of violent rioting occurred in Detroit. He worked to address the core problems of poverty and discrimination in Michigan. He worked to ,strengthen the automobile industry, which was the linchpin of Michigan’s economy. Job discrimination was now banned by federal law, so helping the auto industry was helping minorities.

George Romney’s son, Willard Mitt, has been anything but definitive about what to do address the needs of America’s auto industry and the hundreds of thousands of workers who labor for “the big three” as well as their primary suppliers. As reported by Julie Hirschfeld Davis of Bloomberg News on Feb. 16, 2012:

In 2008, Mitt Romney campaigned for president in Michigan decrying Washington’s disregard for lost automobile industry jobs.

Ten months later, after he had left the race, the Detroit native advocated that the government let General Motors and Chrysler go bankrupt rather than extend a federal bailout — a course that a bipartisan chorus of elected officials, including Michigan’s Republican Governor Rick Snyder, say would have been fatal for the automotive industry, leading to massive job losses.

Today, Romney takes credit for recommending a version of the restructuring that turned around the now-thriving U.S. car companies.

Mitt Romney now calls Massachusetts home, but his commitment to addressing the needs of the state where he grew up are clearly confused and do not provide any confidence for the residents of Michigan.

Some thirty years after George Romney served as governor of Michigan; an energetic and impassioned attorney-general of the state ran for and became governor of Michigan. In a year (2000) when Republicans were steamrolling the Democrats, Jennifer Granholm was the only Democrat to win state-wide office in Michigan. She took office nine months prior to 911, when the boom of the 1990s was already beginning to wane. Following 911, the U.S. economy began a prolonged recession, in part due to the shock of the events and in part because of the policies of President George W. Bush, which misdirected federal money from domestic needs to needless wars. He also rammed through Congress tax breaks that included families making more than $250,000 a year, clearly people who didn’t need a break.

Granholm had to face two vexing economic problems. There were companies such as General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler that were losing market share, and their very financial viability came into question. There were other Michigan-based companies, such as Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, that were making more money than ever. However, that in large part was due to the outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries, where wages were considerably lower.

The weaker the manufacturing base in Michigan became, the less tax money there was for the state to address the increasingly dire needs of its citizens who had lost jobs or could no longer afford school. Governor Granholm had to deal with cascading bad news. As she relates in her book, A Governor’s Story: The Fight for Jobs and America’s Economic Future, the state took one severe hit after another. One of the largest corporations in the state was Delphi Automatic, which manufactured a host of hi-tech and electrical components for cars, primarily General Motors.

On the evening of October 7, I got a call at home from Lynda Rossi. “It’s done, Governor. Delphi is going to file for Chapter 11 protection tomorrow.” “Oh, God. Put on your seat belt,” I said. “This is gonna be a rough ride.” It was the largest industrial bankruptcy in U.S. history. Business Week summarized the strategy: Miller filed for Chapter 11 protection only for his U.S. operations, which employ 32,000 UAW and other union workers. He was careful to exclude Delphi’s 115,000-worker foreign factories, many of which operate in low-wage countries such as Mexico and China. If Miller gets his way, court filings show, Delphi will end up with a U.S. workforce of perhaps 7,000, leaving the bulk of its production abroad. “The company will only keep U.S. operations that have technological value,” says Brian Johnson, an auto analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. Miller declined comment.

Governor Granholm was angry, but determined to confront Delphi CEO Robert Miller to awaken whatever social conscience he might have about the people of Michigan. She also offered additional tax breaks for Delphi even if it meant less revenue for cash-starved Michigan. Miller stuck with his basic decision, but Governor Granholm was able to shame him into canceling or reducing all bonuses and golden parachutes for top executives. Miller personally took a 10% pay cut. Imagine Mitt Romney using government power to try to tame a runaway private corporation.

Consider the following problem that Governor Granholm faced with Pfizer Pharmaceuticals:

There was an awkward pause that lasted just long enough to give me a bad feeling about Kindler’s call. “Well, that’s why I’m calling,” he said. “We’re going through a massive downsizing, too. Lots of generics coming online that bump out our main drugs. We have to rationalize our global footprint.” Kindler paused again, and I thought I heard him swallowing. “It means that we’re gonna have to close our Ann Arbor facility,” he continued. “And close some of our operations in Kalamazoo. I’m sorry to be the bearer of bad news.” My mind was racing, trying to assess the body count. How big were those facilities? “Wow, isn’t that about 3,000 jobs in Ann Arbor alone?” I said. “That can’t be right, can it?” “Actually, between Ann Arbor and Kalamazoo, it’s about 5,000. But we’re not going to give out the numbers publicly because we don’t want people to panic. I’m so sorry. I know that it’s the last thing you need to hear. Michigan has been a great partner for us. But it’s beyond your control and beyond my control, frankly.” “Jeff,” I heard myself almost panting, “is there anything we can do to keep you here? More tax breaks? Anything?” I was grasping for a lifeline. “This goes well beyond taxes,” he said. “It’s about generic drugs coming online. We have to reduce our global footprint. It has nothing to do with Michigan. We’re closing facilities around the world. I’m so sorry,” Kindler said again.

The governor was willing to reduce burdens and increase incentives for Pfizer. But as CEO Jeff Kindler said to the governor, “It’s beyond your control and beyond my control, frankly.”

Governor Granholm was able to slightly soften the blow. With an approach essentially opposite that of Mitt Romney, she recognized that there was very little that the state of Michigan, or any state, could do without extensive involvement by the federal government. As time went on, she was able to do the nearly impossible, convince President George W. Bush to provide aid for the automobile companies. When Barack Obama took office, Governor Granholm worked closely with the administration to stop the hemorrhaging of corporations and jobs from Michigan. She convinced the president, Vice-President Biden, and others in the administration to take advantage of the skilled work force in Michigan and provide start-up money for a number of hi-tech enterprises.

As hard as it is to believe, but with all its problems, Governor Granholm reports, “The Detroit Metropolitan area is the 7th fastest-growing regional economy in the country, after having been 147th out of 150 before the recession.” Governor Granholm had a clear vision and was willing to take political risks to accomplish goals for the benefit of her state and the nation.

Whether one compares Mitt Romney to his father, George, or to recently retired Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, Mitt clearly is lacking vision, principles, and a backbone. On Feb. 28, 2012, he may be rewarded by the people of Michigan with an embarrassing loss in the Michigan Republican Primary. If so, it will be well-deserved.

The post Romney turns his back on his home state appeared first on Occasional Planet.