Michigan Supporters of Straight-Ticket Device Want to Subpoena Some Michigan Legislators

Last month, supporters of the Michigan straight-ticket device asked a U.S. District Court to force certain state legislators to testify about their motives, when the passed the bill repealing the straight-ticket device late in 2015.  The legislators are fighting the request.  A federal magistrate will decide whether the subpoenas should be honored or quashed.  Thanks to Thomas Jones for this news.


Michigan Supporters of Straight-Ticket Device Want to Subpoena Some Michigan Legislators — 5 Comments

  1. Nonstop motives for ALL laws ALL the time ??? Duh.

    Intentional / unintentional = more / less drastic remedies in civil cases.

    Mich. happens to be one of the very few somewhat close 2 party statewide regimes — see 2016 results.

  2. If they were smart they just say how it was unfair that not every party had a straight ticket device, or how it disadvantaged independent candidates.

  3. Yes, I wish some Michigan third party would intervene in the case to make that point.

  4. The case is one more Donkey plot to make it a bit easier for DUMB Donkeys to vote for ALL Donkey candidates on the ballots — esp. lower offices — state senators, state reps, etc.

    Which plot will cause Civil WAR II to start ???

  5. Well, every party on the ballot did get a straight-ticket device . . . and if voters wanted to vote in races where their preferred party didn’t have a candidate, they could still do so by casting what was called a “split” ticket. (A “mixed” ticket was a ballot with no straight-ticket device selected; the voter had to make each vote in each race separately. Presuming the straight ticket is not just merely *mostly* dead, all ballots in the future will be voted in “mixed” style, even if someone chooses only each individual candidate of one party.)

    So no party was entirely without a straight-ticket option . . . but alternative parties might have been injured to some extent by the option not being perceived as quite as useful for their voters as for those of the Titanic Two.

    Of course, independent (No Party Affiliation = NPA) candidates and/or voters would still have grounds to complain.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *