DOCSLIB.ORG

United States District Court Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States District Court Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10542 Page 1 of 276 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ) OF MICHIGAN, et al., ) Case No. 2:17-cv-14148 ) Plaintiffs, ) Hon. Eric L. Clay ) Hon. Denise Page Hood ) Hon. Gordon J. Quist v. ) ) PLAINTIFFS’ SUBMISSION OF ) PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT JOCELYN BENSON, in her official ) AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Capacity as Michigan ) Secretary of State, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) Joseph H. Yeager, Jr. (IN 2083-49) Mark Brewer (P35661) Kevin M. Toner (IN 11343-49) GOODMAN ACKER P.C. Harmony A. Mappes (IN 27237-49) 17000 West Ten Mile, Second Floor Jeffrey P. Justman (MN 390413) Southfield, MI 48075 Daniel R. Kelley (IN 30706-49) Telephone: 248-483-5000 Matthew R. Kinsman (IN 32032-71) [email protected] FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 300 North Meridian Street, Suite 2700 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: 317-237-0300 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiffs US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10543 Page 2 of 276 PLAINTIFFS’ SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Pursuant to the Court’s “Order re: Parties’ Partial Stipulations and Report” (ECF No. 234) and the Court’s instructions at the conclusion of the trial, plaintiffs respectfully submit the attached proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Plaintiffs include their proposed findings based on the evidence and inferences therefrom and their objection (below) to consideration of one exhibit pursuant to the Stipulation, as reserved in the parties’ prior submission of exhibit lists. The Conclusions of Law comply with the Court’s 50-page limit, Trial Ex., ECF 250, PageID# 9350:4-19. Although the Court did not impose a page limit on Findings of Fact, Plaintiffs acknowledge that the Findings attached are voluminous. Plaintiffs tender these Findings and Conclusions in computer searchable format and with a detailed table of contents, as a detailed reference for the Court’s use in preparing its entry. The Findings are unusually lengthy in part because of the large volume of important evidence submitted in this action by stipulations rather than in an open court. The plaintiffs’ counsel stand ready to provide different or additional material as the Court may advise. Objection: Trial Exhibits D-50 and D-52 are hearsay declarations of Dr. Yan Liu and Jeffrey Timmer, respectively, in support of Defendant Secretary of State Ruth US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10544 Page 3 of 276 Johnson’s Motion in Limine to Exclude the Expert Report of Dr. Jowei Chen (ECF No. 147) (collectively, Liu and Timmer “MIL Declarations”). Plaintiffs reserved the hearsay objection to each exhibit within the Secretary’s designation of exhibits (ECF No. 172-2, at 10 (reserving hearsay objection under F.R.E. 802)). Plaintiffs object to admission of these exhibits, on the basis of hearsay. However, should the Court determine the Liu and Timmer MIL Declarations should be admitted, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court also consider the responsive declaration (ECF No. 160-3) of Professor Chen. Professor Chen’s responsive motion in limine declaration was not included in Plaintiffs’ Exhibit Lists largely because of its hearsay rebuttal of the issues raised in the previous two declarations. US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10545 Page 4 of 276 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FINDINGS OF FACT .......................................................................................................... 1 I. Parties and Claims ......................................................................................................... 1 II. The Legislature’s Intent ................................................................................................ 4 A. Republicans started the 2011 redistricting process with an advantage. ............................................................................................................ 4 B. The map drawing process was secretive and excluded any meaningful Democratic input. ......................................................................... 8 The Republicans’ Map Strategy ....................................................................... 8 MRRI’s Role ..................................................................................................... 10 The Secretive Process ..................................................................................... 12 Exclusion of Democrats ................................................................................. 14 C. The Republican-controlled legislature’s objective was to entrench Republican representation and subordinate Democratic voters. ............. 18 Drawing the Congressional Maps ................................................................. 18 Drawing the Senate Maps ............................................................................... 22 Drawing the House Maps ............................................................................... 24 The Republican Chairman and Republican Donors .................................. 25 Extensive Use of Partisan Data ..................................................................... 27 Rushed Legislation Timeline .......................................................................... 31 D. Politics trumped statutory guidelines. ........................................................... 34 III. The Effects of the Redistricting Scheme ................................................................. 38 A. The district level evidence shows vote dilution and/or associated harm at a district level generally, and in each Challenged District. .......... 39 Congressional District 1 ................................................................................. 41 Congressional District 4 ................................................................................. 47 Congressional District 5 ................................................................................. 51 Congressional District 7 ................................................................................. 58 Congressional District 8 ................................................................................. 61 Congressional District 9 ................................................................................. 65 Congressional District 10 ............................................................................... 69 Congressional District 11 ............................................................................... 72 Congressional District 12 ............................................................................... 77 Senate District 8 ............................................................................................... 82 i US.121864383.12 Case 2:17-cv-14148-ELC-DPH-GJQ ECF No. 257 filed 02/22/19 PageID.10546 Page 5 of 276 Senate District 10 ............................................................................................. 84 Senate District 11 ............................................................................................. 86 Senate District 12 ............................................................................................. 87 Senate District 14 ............................................................................................. 88 Senate District 18 ............................................................................................. 90 Senate District 22 ............................................................................................. 93 Senate District 27 ............................................................................................. 95 Senate District 32 ............................................................................................. 97 Senate District 36 ............................................................................................. 98 House District 24 ........................................................................................... 101 House District 32 ........................................................................................... 102 House District 51 ........................................................................................... 104 House District 52 ........................................................................................... 106 House District 53 ........................................................................................... 107 House District 55 ........................................................................................... 107 House District 60 ........................................................................................... 109 House District 61 ........................................................................................... 111 House District 62 ........................................................................................... 111 House District 63 ........................................................................................... 112 House District 75 ........................................................................................... 114 House District 76 ........................................................................................... 117 House District
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2004 Inside Front Cover of Book Is Blank MICHIGAN HISTORICAL CENTER 2004 Annual Report
    2004 Inside Front cover of book is blank MICHIGAN HISTORICAL CENTER 2004 Annual Report © 2005 Michigan Historical Center This annual report was produced by the staff of Michigan History magazine, a part of the Michigan Historical Center, Michigan Department of History, Arts and Libraries. www.michiganhistory.org This page is blank. Table of Contents Administration ....................................................................5 Michigan History.................................................................9 Archaeology.....................................................................13 Records Management .......................................................17 Michigan Historical Museum .............................................21 State Archives...................................................................27 State Historic Preservation Office .......................................31 Commissions....................................................................43 Donors ............................................................................47 2004 ANNUAL REPORT | 5 ADMINISTRATION n 1873 a joint legislative resolution directed the state librarian to collect “books, pamphlets, or papers pertaining to the Ihistory of Michigan,” as well as “Indian relics, and curiosities of any kind,” and to make the “cabinet so collected . open for the inspection of all persons.” Two years later, the state made its first appropriation for preserving its history—one thousand dollars to sup- port the Pioneer Society of Michigan in its
    [Show full text]
  • Appropriations Committee
    1 APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency Presented by Joseph L. LaFleur, Director Pennsylvania Lottery Presented by Secretary Rhodes Secretary of Revenue Eileen McNulty Stenographic transcript of meeting held the Finance Building and Hearing Room 140, the Main Capitol, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Wednesday March 10, 1993 At 10:10 o'clock a.m. EMBERS OF THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: DWIGHT EVANS, Chairman GORDON LINTON, Vice Chairman RICHARD KASUNIC, Subc. Chairman of Capitol Budget JOSEPH BATTISTO, Subc. Chairman on Education BABETTE JOSEPHS, Subc. Chairman on Health/Welfare LEO TRICH, Secretary JOSEPH PITTS, Minority Chairman ALVIN C. BUSH, Min. Subc. Chairman, Capitol Budget PATRICK FLEAGLE, Min. Subc. Chairman on Education DAVID G. ARGALL, Min. Subc. Chairman, Health/Welfare HOLBERT ASSOCIATES DEBRA ROSE-KEENAN 2611 Doehne Road Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 HOLBERT ASSOCIATES \ r (717) 540-9669 \ 2 LAJORITY MEMBERS REPRESENTATIVE ANDREW CARN REPRESENTATIVE ANTHONY DELUCA REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL GRUITZA REPRESENTATIVE EDWARD HALUSKA REPRESENTATIVE STANLEY JAROLIN REPRESENTATIVE FRANK LAGROTTA REPRESENTATIVE KEITH MCCALL REPRESENTATIVE KEITH MCCALL REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD OLASZ REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPH PRESTON REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAM ROBINSON REPRESENTATIVE EDWARD STABACK REPRESENTATIVE STEPHEN STETLER REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS TANGRETTI REPRESENTATIVE JOHN WOZNIAK MINORITY MEMBERS REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAM ADOLPH, JR. REPRESENTATIVE THERESA E. BROWN REPRESENTATIVE RAYMOND BUNT, JR. REPRESENTATIVE ELAINE FARMER REPRESENTATIVE ROBERT J. FLICK REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE T. KENNEY, JR. REPRESENTATIVE JERE W. SCHULER REPRESENTATIVE PAUL SEMMEL HOLBERT ASSOCIATES (717) 540-9669 3 CONTENTS iUEST SPEAKER PRESENTATION Foseph L. LaFleur 4 iecretary Rhodes 52 iecretary McNulty 52 HOLBERT ASSOCIATES (717) 540-9669 4 CHAIRMAN EVANS: What I would like to do is reconvene the House Appropriations Committee meeting from ;he tour that was excellent this morning, in a sense.
    [Show full text]
  • The Truth About Voter Fraud 7 Clerical Or Typographical Errors 7 Bad “Matching” 8 Jumping to Conclusions 9 Voter Mistakes 11 VI
    Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law is a non-partisan public policy and law institute that focuses on fundamental issues of democracy and justice. Our work ranges from voting rights to redistricting reform, from access to the courts to presidential power in the fight against terrorism. A sin- gular institution—part think tank, part public interest law firm, part advocacy group—the Brennan Center combines scholarship, legislative and legal advocacy, and communications to win meaningful, measurable change in the public sector. ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER’S VOTING RIGHTS AND ELECTIONS PROJECT The Voting Rights and Elections Project works to expand the franchise, to make it as simple as possible for every eligible American to vote, and to ensure that every vote cast is accurately recorded and counted. The Center’s staff provides top-flight legal and policy assistance on a broad range of election administration issues, including voter registration systems, voting technology, voter identification, statewide voter registration list maintenance, and provisional ballots. © 2007. This paper is covered by the Creative Commons “Attribution-No Derivs-NonCommercial” license (see http://creativecommons.org). It may be reproduced in its entirety as long as the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law is credited, a link to the Center’s web page is provided, and no charge is imposed. The paper may not be reproduced in part or in altered form, or if a fee is charged, without the Center’s permission.
    [Show full text]
  • District Name of Committee Benefiting Party 1Th Quarter Raised Amount Spent Cash on Hand House 5 Durhal for Michigan Rep
    District Name of Committee Benefiting Party 1th Quarter Raised Amount Spent Cash On Hand House 5 Durhal For Michigan Rep. Fred Durhal Democratic House 6 Stephanie's Changemaker Fund Rep. Stephanie Chang Democratic $264 $425 $435 House 8 Sherry Gay-Dagnogo Strong Women LeadRep. PAC Sherry Gay-Dagnogo Democratic $40,355 $15,589 $33,478 House 9 Santana For Michigan Rep. Sylvia Santana Democratic $0 $0 $1,340 House 12 Geiss Leadership Fund Rep. Erika Geiss Democratic $0 $0 $2,270 House 13 Liberati For Michigan Rep. Frank Liberati Democratic $500 $200 $959 House 15 Hammoud For Michigan Rep. Abdullah Hammound Democratic $1,819 $1,773 $1,499 House 16 Kosowski For Michigan's Future Rep. Bob Kosowski Democratic $0 $215 $133 House 18 Hertel For Michigan Rep. Kevin Hertel Democratic $800 $966 $780 House 19 Shamrock PAC Rep. Laura Cox Republican $11,000 $10,700 $23,555 House 21 Progressive Womens Caucus PAC Rep. Kristy Pagan Democratic $13,885 $1,856 $15,001 House 21 Kristy Pagan Leadership Fund Rep. Kristy Pagan Democratic $0 $1,455 $276 House 23 Camilleri for Michigan Rep. Darrin Camilleri Democratic $10,000 $482 $9,517 House 23 MI Futuro Fund Rep. Darrin Camilleri Democratic $1,000 $1,250 $85 House 24 Marino Victory Fund Rep. Steve Marino Republican $0 $0 $0 House 25 Henry Yanez For Michigan Rep. Henry Yanez Democratic $0 $36 $1,310 House 29 Greimel For Michigan Rep. Tim Greimel Democratic $0 $1,650 $6,044 House 30 Farrington Leadership Fund Rep. Diana Farrington Republican $8,300 $2,376 $7,082 House 32 Hornberger Majority Fund Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Government Directory
    HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SENATE PO Box 30014, Lansing MI 48909 PO Box 30036, Lansing, MI 48909 Website: www.house.mi.gov District/Party/Name/Hometown Office # Ph. 373- Website: www.senate.mi.gov 59 Republicans, 49 Democrats, 1 Independent , 1 Vacancy 91 D *Lamonte, Collene, Montague 1195 HOB 3436 26 Republicans, 12 Democrats Michigan Gary Randall, Clerk 31 D **Lane, Marilyn, Fraser 795 HOB 0159 Lt. Gov. Brian Calley (R), President GONGWER The Capitol Record Since 1906 373-0135 81 R *Lauwers, Daniel, Brockway 1185 HOB 1790 Carol Viventi, Secretary 17 D *LaVoy, Bill, Monroe 696 HOB 1530 373-2400 District/Party/Name/Hometown Office # Ph. 373- 93 R *Leonard, Tom III, DeWitt 1197 HOB 1778 71 D *Abed, Theresa, Grand Ledge 1090 HOB 0853 27 D ***Lipton, Ellen Cogen, Huntington Woods 791 HOB 0478 District/Party/Name/Hometown Office # Ph. 373- Legislative/State Government Information Since 1906 1 D *Banks, Brian, Harper Woods 585 HOB 0154 59 R ***Lori, Matt, Constantine 993 HOB 0832 124 W. Allegan, Suite 1200 (517) 482-3500 27 D Ananich, Jim, Flint 315 FB 0142 37 D ***Barnett, Vicki, Farmington Hills 886 HOB 1793 36 R ***Lund, Pete, Shelby Twp. 141 CB 0843 Lansing MI 48933 FAX: (517) 482-4367 63 R ***Bolger, Jase, Marshall 164 CB 1787 6 D **Anderson, Glenn, Westland 610 FB 1707 86 R **Lyons, Lisa Posthumus, Alto 1190 HOB 0846 E-mail: [email protected] 76 D *Brinks, Winnie, Grand Rapids 1095 HOB 0822 9 D *Bieda, Steve, Warren 310 FB 8360 73 R **MacGregor, Peter, Cannon Twp. 1092 HOB 0218 Website: www.gongwer.com 84 D ***Brown, Terry, Pigeon 1188 HOB 0476 105 R **MacMaster, Greg, Kewadin 1389 HOB 0829 35 R *Booher, Darwin, Evart 520 FB 1725 96 D **Brunner, Charles, Bay City 1285 HOB 0158 108 R **McBroom, Ed, Vulcan 1487 HOB 0156 11 R *Brandenburg, Jack, Harrison Twp.
    [Show full text]
  • Administration of Barack Obama, 2014 Remarks at Michigan State
    Administration of Barack Obama, 2014 Remarks at Michigan State University in East Lansing, Michigan February 7, 2014 The President. Hello, Spartans! Go Green! Audience members. Go White! The President. [Laughter] Oh, thank you so much. Everybody, have a seat here. The—it's good to be at Michigan State. Thank you, Ben, for that wonderful introduction. Give Ben a big round of applause. He's got his beautiful family right here. How did Dad do? Was he pretty good? Where—yes, there he is. He did good? I thought he did great. It is good to be in East Lansing. It's good to be with all of you here today. I'm here because I've heard about all the great things that you're doing. And I want to thank Mayor Triplett and President Simon for hosting us. I am also here to do some scouting on my brackets. [Laughter] I just talked to Coach Izzo; Spartans are looking pretty good. I know things were a little wild for a while, had some injuries. But the truth is that Coach Izzo, he always paces so that you peak right at the tournament. [Applause] That's a fact. Then I got a chance to meet Mark Dantonio. All right. So you've already got a Rose Bowl victory. You guys are—you're greedy. [Laughter] You want to win everything. But it's wonderful to be here. I love coming to Michigan. Mainly, I love coming to Michigan because of the people. But I also love coming here because there are few places in the country that better symbolize what we've been through together over these last 4, 5 years.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. a Concurrent Resolution Granting Authority for Adjournment for More Than 2 Days
    3185 PART VII HISTORY OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS IN THE HOUSE (References are to page numbers of the Journal.) 1. A concurrent resolution granting authority for adjournment for more than 2 days. Offered by Senator Alan Cropsey Jan. 14, received in House ................................................................................................................................ 27 Jan. 14, adopted and returned ........................................................................................................................... 27 Senator(s) Nancy Cassis, John Gleason, Gilda Jacobs, Roger Kahn, John Pappageorge named co-sponsor(s) 3. A concurrent resolution for the adoption of the Joint Rules of the Senate and House of Representatives. Offered by Senator Alan Cropsey Feb. 18, received in House ............................................................................................................................... 164 Feb. 18, adopted and returned .......................................................................................................................... 164 Senator(s) Patricia Birkholz, Hansen Clarke, John Pappageorge, Michael Switalski named co-sponsor(s) 4. A concurrent resolution to affirm Michigan’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government. Offered by Senator Bruce Patterson Sep. 22, received in House ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Capability, Bargaining Power, and Conflict by Thomas M. Lafleur
    Nuclear capability, bargaining power, and conflict by Thomas M. LaFleur B.A., University of Washington, 1992 M.A., University of Washington, 2003 M.M.A.S., United States Army Command and General Staff College, 2004 M.M.A.S., United States Army Command and General Staff College, 2005 AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Security Studies KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 2019 Abstract Traditionally, nuclear weapons status enjoyed by nuclear powers was assumed to provide a clear advantage during crisis. However, state-level nuclear capability has previously only included nuclear weapons, limiting this application to a handful of states. Current scholarship lacks a detailed examination of state-level nuclear capability to determine if greater nuclear capabilities lead to conflict success. Ignoring other nuclear capabilities that a state may possess, capabilities that could lead to nuclear weapons development, fails to account for the potential to develop nuclear weapons in the event of bargaining failure and war. In other words, I argue that nuclear capability is more than the possession of nuclear weapons, and that other nuclear technologies such as research and development and nuclear power production must be incorporated in empirical measures of state-level nuclear capabilities. I hypothesize that states with greater nuclear capability hold additional bargaining power in international crises and argue that empirical tests of the effectiveness of nuclear power on crisis bargaining must account for all state-level nuclear capabilities. This study introduces the Nuclear Capabilities Index (NCI), a six-component scale that denotes nuclear capability at the state level.
    [Show full text]
  • 20 20 D Ir E C T O Ry
    “Helping communities achieve Northeastsuccess Michigan through Council intergovernmental of Governments cooperation and coordination” 2020 DIRECTORY 80 Livingston Blvd, Suite U-108 P.O. Box 457, Gaylord, MI 49734 989.705.3730 Phone 20 989.705.3729 Fax www.discovernortheastmichigan.org 20 Serving the counties of: Alcona, Alpena, Cheboygan, Crawford, Montmorency, Oscoda, Otsego, and Presque Isle Helping communities achieve success through intergovernmental cooperation & coordination” NEMCOG 2020 DIRECTORY Table of Contents NEMCOG Region Map ....................................................................................................... i State Planning and Development Regions ..................................................................... ii Michigan Associations of Regions, Directory of Regions .............................................. iii About MAR ..................................................................................................................... iv About State-Designated Planning & Development Region ........................................... v NEMCOG Board of Directors .......................................................................................... vi NEMCOG Staff Directory ............................................................................................ vii-ix County Road Commissions ......................................................................................... x-xii Alcona County ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Employment Discrimination and the Lost Potential of Choice by Mary Ziegler, Assistant Professor, Florida State U
    Choice at Work: Employment Discrimination and the Lost Potential of Choice By Mary Ziegler, Assistant Professor, Florida State University College of Law This paper was presented as part of “A Revolutionary Moment: Women's Liberation in the late 1960s and early 1970s,” a conference organized by the Women’s, Gender, & Sexuality Studies Program at Boston University, March 27-29, 2014. *** The decision of Roe v. Wade1 seems to have saddled feminists with a limited and limiting rhetoric of reproductive choice.2 By focusing on privacy, the Court ignored the importance of a state-created safety net for poor and non-white women.3 Choice rhetoric justified class and race divisions in access to reproductive healthcare, reinforcing assumptions that some women could not responsibly exercise reproductive autonomy.4 By spotlighting an understudied debate about reproductive liberty at work, this paper explores the lost potential of arguments for reproductive choice. Immediately before and after the decision of Roe v. Wade, feminists developed a principle of meaningful reproductive choice. At a minimum, litigators demanded that state actors not place special burdens on women who made 1 410 U.S. 113 (1973). 2 For a sample of feminist criticism of Roe, see, e.g., Erin Daly, Reconsidering Abortion Law: Liberty, Equality, and the New Rhetoric of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 45 AM. U. L. REV. 77, 85-86 (1995) (“Under Roe, the physician [...] is constitutionally required to lead the decision-making process.”); Scott Moss, The Intriguing Federalist Future of Reproductive Rights, 88 B.U. L. REV. 175, 178 (2008) (describing Roe’s “doctor-focused”—rather than woman- focused—justification); Catharine A.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of the Senate 97Th Legislature REGULAR SESSION of 2014
    No. 84 STATE OF MICHIGAN Journal of the Senate 97th Legislature REGULAR SESSION OF 2014 Senate Chamber, Lansing, Thursday, December 18, 2014. 10:00 a.m. The Senate was called to order by the Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Goeffrey M. Hansen. The roll was called by the Secretary of the Senate, who announced that a quorum was present. Ananich—present Hood—present Pappageorge—present Anderson—present Hopgood—present Pavlov—present Bieda—present Hune—present Proos—present Booher—present Hunter—present Richardville—present Brandenburg—present Jansen—present Robertson—present Casperson—present Johnson—present Rocca—present Caswell—present Jones—present Schuitmaker—present Colbeck—present Kahn—present Smith—present Emmons—present Kowall—present Walker—present Green—present Marleau—present Warren—present Gregory—present Meekhof—present Whitmer—present Hansen—present Moolenaar—present Young—present Hildenbrand—present Nofs—present 2248 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [December 18, 2014] [No. 84 Senator Steven M. Bieda of the 9th District offered the following invocation: Dear God, we seek Your help with our legislative affairs today. Bless this session with Your divine intelligence, and help us to make the best use of our own. We are of diverse opinions here, yet we wish to mend our differences and reach agreements satisfactory to all. Please share a little of Your wisdom with us to help us do the right thing by all concerned. We also thank You for the abundance that we enjoy in this state. Thank You for our friends and our family and also a special prayer and special thanks to those who are leaving us after several years of service in the State Legislature.
    [Show full text]
  • High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing in Michigan INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 2015 About This Report
    High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing in Michigan INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 2015 About this Report his report is part of the Hydraulic Fracturing in Michigan Integrated public comments received throughout this process. However, the report Assessment (IA) which has been underway since 2012. The guiding does not necessarily reflect the views of the Advisory Committee or any T question of the IA is, “What are the best environmental, other group which has provided input. As with preparation of the technical economic, social, and technological approaches for managing reports, all decisions regarding content of project analyses and reports have hydraulic fracturing in the State of Michigan?” been determined by the IA Report and Integration Teams. The purpose of the IA is to present information that: While the IA has attempted to provide a comprehensive review of the current status and trends of high volume hydraulic fracturing (HVHF), specifically, in • expands and clarifies the scope of policy options, and Michigan (the technical reports) and an analysis of policy options (this report) • allows a wide range of decision makers to make choices based on their there are certain limitations which must be recognized: preferences and values. • The assessment does not and was not intended to provide a quantitative As a result, the IA does not advocate for recommended courses of action. assessment (human health or environmental) of the potential risks Rather, it presents information about the likely strengths, weaknesses, and associated with HVHF. Completing such assessments is currently a key outcomes of various options to support informed decision making. point of national discussion related to HVHF despite the challenges of The project’s first phase involved the preparation of technical reports on key uncertainty and limited available data–particularly baseline data.
    [Show full text]