From: Eileen Liska eliska01@comcast.net

INTRODUCTION:

Since 1992, HEAL PAC has filled the gap in political work for animals caused by federal and state laws that prohibit

non-profit animal protection charities from working for, endorsing, and commenting upon candidates and incumbents running for local, state, and federal offices.  NOTE HOWEVER:  Non-profits are NOT prevented from lobbying

(i.e., trying to influence) their elected officials (whether "directly" on their own as an organization, or "indirectly" by asking their members and donors to express their views). Many humane societies and others incorrectly believe this when, in fact, up to 10% of a non-profit's annual budget may be expended on direct and indirect lobbying combined.  For example, this means that a humane society could print an article in its newsletter in support of a pro-animal protection bill under consideration in the Michigan Legislature, and ask its members to express their support to their own elected officials.  What they could not legally do, however, is go further and actually advise others about how to vote, whom to vote for, or make donations to candidates.  That is where a Political Action Committee steps in, and can do those political tasks and, thereby, strengthen our political power and voices for animals. HEAL PAC cannot legally accept any donations or support from The Michigan Humane Society (MHS); despite the fact that since 1984 they have legally utilized the services of HEAL PAC's Founder and Treasurer (Eileen Liska) in her capacity as a lobbyist.  Many people incorrectly assume that the MHS monetarily supports HEAL PAC, but it cannot legally do this and, therefore, HEAL PAC is totally dependent upon dedicated animal protection advocates to realize the importance of a PAC for animals and support it monetarily with donations.  Thus, I want to take this opportunity to give all of you who have supported HEAL PAC with donations since 1992, a heartfelt THANK YOU!

None of us have to like the political system we are stuck with, to realize that until laws change, we need to work within the existing system to bring about positive changes in the legal protection and status of animals.  In fact, in an ideal world, our nation would embark upon massive campaign finance law changes that would:  abolish PACs and other special interest political groups; prohibit wealthy individuals from funding their own campaigns; require public financing for campaigns; limit the amount of money that could be spent to campaign for each office; shorten the length of time for campaigning; and require all print, radio, and TV news media to provide all candidates with free space/time in equal, limited measure. These reforms would return our democracy back to us, the People, and take it away from the wealthy individuals, multinational corporations and their PACs, and other special interests who have bought and paid for far too many of our state and federal elected officeholders.  Having worked in two different state legislatures (Wisconsin and Michigan), and having been directly involved in politics since my family brought me into it at the tender age of 5 (which means for 53 years now), I must tell you that I have known countless decent and honest elected officials who hate this system as much as anyone.  They are sick and tired of having to spend so much time running around raising money from anywhere they can find it.  But unless and until the citizens of our once great country stand up and say, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" (the famous phrase from the film, "Network"), we will continue to see our democracy continually eroded by the power of big money.

REFERENDUMS:

There are five referendums at the end of this year's General Election ballot; the one to overturn the dove hunting law passed by the legislature in 2004 being of MAJOR IMPORTANCE to animal and environmental protection advocates.  The language contained in this one referendum is provided to you here, and HEAL PAC urges you, and everyone whom you can educate about this, to VOTE NO.

 PROPOSAL 06-3 (Dove Hunting)

Public Act 160 of 2004 would:

* Authorize the Natural Resources Commission to establish a hunting season for mourning doves.

* Require a mourning dove hunter to have a small game license and a $2.00 mourning dove stamp.

* Stipulate that revenue from the stamp must be split evenly between the Game and Fish Protection Fund and the

   Fish and Wildlife Trust Fund.

*Require the Department of Natural Resources to address responsible mourning dove hunting; management    

   practices for the propagation of mourning doves; and participation in mourning dove hunting by youth, the elderly   

   and the disabled in the Department's annual hunting guide.

SHOULD THIS LAW BE APPROVED?     YES ____     NO ____

 Contrary to the lies being deliberately used to confuse voters, this is not the first step in a plot to stop all hunting in Michigan .  This is about one goal and one goal only:  RESTORING MICHIGAN's 100 YEAR TRADITION OF PROTECTING MOURNING DOVES.  These are small songbirds, not gamebirds---even if other states incorrectly regard them as such.  There is no dove overpopulation problem. In fact, U.S.Fish & Wildlife Service studies for many years consistently show a decline in the dove population in those states where they are hunted. Michigan is the doves' northern breeding ground so if they are decreased here it will affect the entire U.S. population.  Because they have an extremely "gamey" taste, most hunters do not eat doves and simply want to hunt them because they are difficult to shoot while in flight---which hunters regard as good target practice. Injured and dead doves are left on the ground with no regard for the fact that living creatures have been used for target practice. And last but not least, it takes so many shots to bring down a dove that these lead shots then cause serious LEAD POLLUTION of the fields and groundwater, as well as poison wildlife who eat the doves off the ground.  After defeating bills to legalize dove hunting in Michigan for over twenty years, passage was only achieved in 2004 because of the effect of term limits and big donations from pro-dove hunting PACs. It is time for all Michiganians who care about responsible wildlife management and lead pollution prevention to VOTE NO and send a strong and clear message to the powerful, monied special interests who bought votes, that it is WE THE PEOPLE who will control our government on this issue, not them!

PROPOSAL 06-1  (Conservation & Recreation Funds)

Some of you may be wondering about Proposal 06-1, a constitutional amendment to require that money held in

conservation and recreation funds can only be used for their intended purposes.  HEAL PAC has decided to remain neutral on this proposal as there are legitimate arguments on both sides. On the surface, it may seem reasonable for anyone who is pro-environment to support Proposal 06-1; however, in times of state fiscal crises our elected officials may have no choice but to "borrow from Peter to pay Paul".  Instead of further cutting essential services, our state government may have to temporarily use money from one place to plug holes in another area of the state budget.  Faced with a $4 billion dollar deficit upon assuming office from former Governor John Engler, this was just the sort of problem Governor Granholm faced, and together with the Republican Legislature, all sorts of temporary measures had to be utilized to get our state through the last few years of fiscal crisis.  (Just FYI, as it is not a concern of HEAL PAC's, this same argument applies to PROPOSAL 06-5 regarding earmarking untouchable funds for public education. This too would hinder the Governor's and Legislature's flexibility to responsibly work through the state budgetary process.  These are tough calls because on the one hand, most of us are fed up with government and have a hard time trusting any elected official to do the right thing. Seen from that light, these two proposals would prevent elected officials from tampering with funds for conservation & recreation, and public education.  However, the issues in these two referendums are very complex with no quick fixes.  

 ENDORSEMENTS:

To recap past explanations, HEAL PAC looks at a candidate's overall views and an incumbent's overall voting record and views in formulating who will, or will not, be endorsed.  For example, if an incumbent voted for dove hunting but also supported all other animal protection bills, they will probably be endorsed (unless there are some other problems involved). Even though HEAL PAC is essentially focused on the goals of animal and environmental protection, it is NOT going to encourage or contribute to single-issue fanaticism (a growing problem that is destroying democracy).  We look at the big picture in making political endorsement decisions. Being effective in the political and legislative arena is not about being a sore loser, or making a personal disappointment into a public vendetta. It is about achieving victories over the YEARS by taking reasonable and responsible positions. We must not stoop to the level of so many of our opponents who cannot disagree without being disagreeable at best, and who have no respect for the legitimate views of others in a democracy. That said, here are HEAL PAC's endorsements.  THE ENDORSED CANDIDATE WILL APPEAR IN CAPITAL LETTERS.

FEDERAL CANDIDATES:

United States Senator (6-year term): INCUMBENT SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D) vs. Michael Bouchard (R)

Debbie Stabenow has a long history of strong support for animal and environmental protection (as a County

Commissioner, State Representative, State Senator, U.S.Congressperson, and now U.S.Senator).   Current Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard was supportive of animal protection bills while in the Michigan Legislature.  But a recent campaign rally held at the State Capitol in which the notorious Ted Nugent was a guest speaker/supporter, and wherein support for dove hunting was strongly promoted, tipped the scales against him for an endorsement. It's one thing to take a pro-dove hunting position, and quite another to have the poor judgement to stand next to a man like Nugent, whose own hunting practices are abhorrent to all ethical hunters. Another mark against him is his use of a

campaign adviser who used to work for Karl Rove and who uses Rove's same despicable tactics of personally and

negatively attacking Stabenow and outright lying about her fine record of service to all people of our state. This is a

huge disappointment and Bouchard should know better.

U.S.CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES:

Michigan has 15 U.S. Congressional Districts and Representatives in Washington, D.C.  Only those candidates or incumbents whom HEAL PAC is endorsing are noted below.  The absence of an endorsement means neither candidate is endorsed, or that insufficient information was available for us to make a choice. 

District 5:  INCUMBENT U.S.REPRESENTATIVE DALE KILDEE (D-Flint)*

* A long-time champion of environmental and animal protection.

District 7:  CANDIDATE SHARON RENIER (D) vs. Candidate Tim Walberg (R)*

* The current U.S.Rep. from District 7 is Joe Schwarz, an old-school moderate Republican, physician, former 

Mayor of Battle Creek, former State Senator (who opposed dove hunting among other pro-animal positions), 

a military and CIA veteran, and fiscal conservative.  He was unseated in the Republican Primary this past August by Walberg who won because of the strong support he got from religious right extremists, and the anti-abortion and gun lobbys. This was a classic example of why HEAL PAC's Report & Endorsements in that Primary Election emphasized how crucial these elections are; especially when they are won and lost by the slimest of margins.  It is also a classic example of the growing strength of single-issue fanaticism at the expense of what is best for the majority. For these reasons, our endorsement goes to RENIER.

District 9: CANDIDATE NANCY SKINNER (D) vs. Incumbent Joe Knollenberg (R)*

* Current U.S.Rep. Joe Knollenberg has an absolutely awful record on animal and environmental protection. Skinner,

on the other hand, is supportive of these concerns.

DISTRICT 11: INCUMBENT U.S.REP. THADDEUS McCOTTER (R)*

* McCotter is a highly intelligent, hard-working public servant who was very supportive of animal protection bills when he served in the Michigan State Senate (except for when he voted for dove hunting, but later had the character to

admit it was a mistake he would never repeat).

DISTRICT 12: INCUMBENT U.S.REP. SANDER LEVIN (D)*

* A long-time champion for environmental and animal protection.

DISTRICT 13: INCUMBENT U.S.REP. CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (D)*

* Another long-time advocate for environmental and animal protection.

DISTRICT 14: INCUMBENT U.S.REP. JOHN CONYERS, Jr. (D)*

* Another long-time advocate for environmental and animal protection.

DISTRICT 15: INCUMBENT U.S.REP. JOHN DINGELL (D)*

* Although a supporter of the pro-hunting and gun lobbys, he has supported many federal animal protection bills, and

has a record of very strong  support for environmental legislation.

GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATES:

Governor of the State of Michigan (4-year term): INCUMBENT GOVERNOR JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM (D)                                                                                   vs. Dick DeVos (R)

Many of you will either not understand this endorsement or may even be upset by it.  But again, HEAL PAC looks at

the big picture and works for positive change over the years. There is no doubt that we were all upset and angry that

Governor Granholm didn't keep her 2002 Campaign promise to veto a dove hunting bill should it finally be passed by

the legislature. But as one of the key people involved in this matter, let me share some insights with you about what happened.  First of all, if anyone has a right to be really angry it is me. It was to me, in a meeting that included MHS

Exec.Dir.Cal Morgan and former Republican State Rep. Gerry Law, that the Governor made her verbal promise. And

it was in response to a candidate questionnaire sent to her by HEAL PAC, that she made the promise in writing. Finally, I was one of the people who met with her in her office prior to her decision, and believe me, I and the others present gave her strong and compelling arguments to keep her word and veto the bill. I even brought a 4th generation Michigan Bow & Arrow deer hunter into the meeting so she could see just one representation of all the ethical hunters in our state who are disgusted by the idea of using doves for nothing more than target practice and causing lead pollution in the process.  But instead of taking  this personally and being angry and vindictive, I do not want HEAL PAC to be like other single interest PACs who conduct themselves as extremists. The Michigan United Conservation Clubs (MUCC), for example, opposed Senate Bills 951-952, just because they were introduced on behalf of The Michigan Humane Society which is one of the leaders against dove hunting, and not because of anything in the bills which have no impact upon them. It was pure emotional vindictiveness and we never want to behave like that.  So, what did cause Granholm to not veto the dove hunting bill?  First of all, her staff was divided into two camps; one strongly opposed to dove hunting; the other strongly in favor of it.   Some of these staffers served at the highest levels of her Administration and their opinions were all carefully considered by Granholm.  Second, three key people

were very influential in persuading her to not veto the bill:  Lt.Governor John Cherry (a longtime advocate for dove hunting); Granholm's staff advisor for natural resources and agricultural affairs (who came to the position right after having worked at the MUCC which has always been a state leader in the push for dove hunting); and David Dempsey (a former Michigan Environmental Council staffer, and a long-time and highly respected environmental protection advocate. [One caveat: other than hunting issues, when he served in the legislature, Springer Spaniel fancier and Lt.Governor, John Cherry, was a very consistent and supportive advocate for animal protection laws. ]

 Working together and in concert with others, especially the MUCC, these three people used their knowledge of Granholm's nature to persuade her to "compromise" and go along with a proposal by the MUCC's Director, Sam Washington.  That compromise proposal was to sign the bill into law and then allow the unelected state Natural Resources Commission (NRC) to only establish a dove hunting season in the 6 southern-most counties of our state, along the border with Ohio and Indiana where dove hunting has been legal.  Of course, we all know that this compromise was a farce since once doves were placed on the state "Game List" via the passage of the law, the NRC has total power to decide all of the terms of each and every dove hunting season. We all knew that after that first year, the NRC would undoubtedly expand the hunt to cover the whole state, or most of it at best (there are very few doves to hunt in northern MI and the UP).  So, had we not been able to get Proposal 06-3 on the ballot (which legally halted further hunts until the people could resolve this by a referendum vote), the NRC would have expanded dove hunting. Let me now explain my earlier comment about using Granholm's "nature" to sell this so-called compromise.  I know Granholm personally and have had various opportunities to talk to her and observe her.  She and her family have adopted a cat, and more recently a dog, from the Michigan Humane Society.  She has a very humane-minded

approach to life and work, and absolutely comprehends that a society should never treat animals with callous disregard.  As an idealist, she has always worked in accord with the idea that in a democracy where all views must be regarded, consensus and compromise is a legitimate way to achieve one's goals in both the short and long term.  She brought this sensibility to her job as Attorney General (where her staff helped protect and ensure enforcement of certain animal laws), and then to her job as Governor.  It was this essence of her nature that led her to seek some sort of compromise on the dove hunting issue when her staff, and Michiganians, were so divided about it.  Like many of us she has now learned the hard way that not everyone sees collegiality and consensus as a strength---that can be applied in all cases.  Many people in the legislature put obstructing her plans to help our state over their own duties to our state.  In the last two years she has become a much tougher negotiator for her positions which were contrary to what the her opponents wanted. Yet at the time that she was deciding whether to veto the dove hunting bill she was still trying to find middle ground with others on this and other issues. Sadly, this was not an issue that lends itself to a middle ground.  And those within her own Administration who worked hard to persuade her that the "compromise" was reasonable, and that she might be able to pick up votes in 2006 from hunters and the hunting lobby, put their own agenda above the Governor's best interests.  Hunters and their lobbying groups and PACs did not vote for her in any significant numbers in 2002, and despite what she did for them, they will not be voting for her this November 7th.  Yes, she should have listened to those who told her this would happen.  But she didn't, and that is that.  All we can do now is look to the future and decide whether Granholm or DeVos will best advance our agenda to promote respect for all life and the natural environment.  It is TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE to base the important decision of who will be the Governor of Michigan in these times of major economic re-structuring, and a health insurance crisis, on any one issue----no matter how personally upset you or I might be about her mistake on dove hunting. These are very serious times for our state (and nation). Each and every one of you, as citizens, has an obligation to find out how both candidates stand on ALL the issues that matter to you, as well as their SPECIFIC plans for addressing those issues and problems.  Granholm has a track record of already bringing new industries to our state, and has offered very specific information about what more needs to be done.  DeVos has not offered such specificity.

DeVos and his family have made donations to humane societies, and he would probably be supportive of much, if not all, animal protection legislation (other than hunting). But again, it is wrong to base such an important decision on your interest in any one single issue.  And for those out there (Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike)  who are among the 70% of U.S. citizens who are unhappy with the Bush Presidency, it is vital to realize that Devos has given millions of dollars to Bush's election campaigns. as well as to extreme right wing officials and causes. It would be

irresponsible to not take this into consideration and hold him accountable for these actions.

Also, should the Republicans regain majority control of our State House and Senate, it would be imprudent to lose our state's only political opposition to that one party platform---Governor Granholm. Losing her sole voice flies in the face of our democratic system of checks and balances.  

Last, avoiding this decision by not voting for either candidate always helps one, or the other, win election, so such inaction still results in a specific action. Such an abrogation of your duties as a citizen is just one example of why  government at all levels is not responsive enough to the needs of regular citizens, instead of the special interests who always vote.  

Concluding by returning to our animal protection goals, for HEAL PAC the fact still remains that despite her mistake,

Granholm still shows herself to be very supportive of pro-animal legislation. Just last month, it was her support expressed through her legislative staff, that finally got the state Treasury Dept. to stop dragging their feet and finalize a plan for adding more state income tax donation checkoffs on the state tax form. Their delays have jeopardized not only State Senate Bills 951-952 to expand sterilization of pets and improve anti-cruetly law enforcement, but other

tax checkoff legislative proposals.  Hopefully, there will still be enough time left this year to pass the bills now that

the Governor's office broke the logjam at Treasury.  So, since doves are not the only species we need to fight for, we must take the long view and support those who are the most dedicated to our ENTIRE cause.  This isn't a perfect world with perfect people or elected officials, so we have to contemplate our voting decisions with great care.

STATE SENATE CANDIDATES:

District 1:  INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR HANSEN CLARKE (D)

District 2:  INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR MARTHA SCOTT (D)

District 3:  INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR IRMA CLARK-COLEMAN (D)

District 4:  INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR SAMUEL "BUZZ" THOMAS (D)

District 5:  CANDIDATE TUPAC HUNTER (D) (Currently a State Rep.)

District 6:  INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR LAURA TOY (R); and

                  CANDIDATE GLEN ANDERSON (D) (Currently a State Rep.)*

* Both of these individuals have been extremely supportive of animal and environmental protection legislation, have been good friends/supporters to humane societies, and are loving pet owners themselves. It would be impossible to

choose between them so this has to be a DUAL ENDORSEMENT. 

District 7: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR BRUCE PATTERSON (R)*

* Senator Patterson has been very supportive on many animal protection issues, and did his best to help us with the dove hunting bill despite his obligation to keep a previous commitment and ultimately vote for the bill. He will also soon (and in the next 2007-08 session) be sponsoring a bill to again update/strengthen one of our state anti-cruelty laws. He works hard, doesn't suffer fools easily, and "tells it like it is, and for that he has received unfair criticism.

District 8:  INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR RAY BASHAM (D)*

* Also voted for dove hunting (reluctantly) but very supportive of numerous pro-animal bills, and will be co-sponsor of anti-cruelty law update bill noted directly above.  

District 9:  INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR DENNIS OLSHOVE (D)*

* A true champion for animal protection, in both the Senate now and when he served in the House in the past.

District 10: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR MICHAEL SWITALSKI (D)*

* Another animal protection supporter, and one who voted against dove hunting.

District 11: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR ALAN SANBORN (R)*

* Pro reasonable animal protection despite vote for dove hunting.

District 12: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR MIKE BISHOP (R)*

* Pro animal protection despite vote for dove hunting.

District 13: CANDIDATE ANDY LEVIN (D) vs. Candidate John Pappageorge (R)*

* Both are animal protection advocates, and Pappageorge to his credit did not vote for dove hunting. The edge goes

to Levin because of the degree of his dedication to environmental & animal protection. As the son of U.S.Rep. Sander Levin he learned from a good example.

District 14: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR GILDA JACOBS (D)*

* She has been an unwavering and strong animal & environmental protection advocate when she served in the State House and more recently in the State Senate.

District 15: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR NANCY CASSIS (R)*

* Despite the disappointment of her decision to vote for dove hunting, she is a loving pet owner who is a strong advocate for animals other than in hunting issues.

District 18: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR LIZ BRATER (D)*

* Like Senator Jacobs, an unwavering supporter of animal & environmental protection, both when she was in the

State House and now in the State Senate.

District 19: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR MARK SCHAUER (D)*

* A loving pet owner and truly dedicated animal & environmental protection advocate. His role in Senate Democratic

leadership has allowed him to be very helpful in our legislative efforts.

District 20: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR TOM GEORGE (R)

District 21: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR RON JELINEK (R)*

* Senator Jelinek has been one of our strongest allies, including currently sponsoring the bill to finally legalize the use of tranquilizers by animal shelters in our state.

District 22: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR VALDE GARCIA (R)*

* Despite regretfully having to keep a previous commitment on dove hunting, Senator Garcia is a loving pet owner who has been a strong ally while in the State House and now in the State Senate.  He is now the sponsor of

our very crucial legislation  (SBs951-952) to create a voluntary state income tax donation checkoff to fund more pet

sterilizations and better enforcement of anti-cruelty laws. Because of his pro-hunting record, he was the ideal sponsor to fend off the illogical and illegitimate objections aimed at the bills by the MUCC and others who are mad about the

anti-dove hunting referendum and taking it out on all other non-related issues that help animals in any way.

District 23: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR GRETCHEN WHITMER (D)

District 24: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR PATRICIA BIRKHOLZ (R)

District 26: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR DEB CHERRY (D)

District 29: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR BILL HARDIMAN (R)*

* One of the few Republican State Senators who had the courage to stand up against the wealthy, powerful hunting

lobby and vote against dove hunting.

District 31: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR JIM BARCIA (D)*

* A long-time supporter of animal & environmental protection; first in the State House, then in the State Senate, then in

the U.S.Congress, and now again in the State Senate----despite being  a hunter who reluctantly voted for dove hunting.

District 34: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR GERALD VAN WOERKOM (R)*

                   CANDIDATE JULIE DENNIS (D)**      

                    DUAL ENDORSEMENT

 * Another Republican State Senator who voted against dove hunting and who has supported animal & environmental

protection legislation.

** A former State Rep. who voted for animal and environmental protection legislation and against dove hunting.

District 38: INCUMBENT STATE SENATOR MIKE PRUSI (D)*

* A long-time animal protection supporter, first in the State House, and now in State Senate, despite his reluctant vote in support of dove hunting.  

STATE HOUSE CANDIDATES:

State House District  1:  INCUMBENT STATE REP. EDWARD GAFFNEY (R)

State House District  2:  INCUMBENT STATE REP. LAMAR LEMMONS, JR. (D)

State House District  6:  INCUMBENT STATE REP. MARSHA CHEEKS (D)

State House District  7:  INCUMBENT STATE REP. VIRGIL SMITH (D)

State House District 10: INCUMBENT STATE REP. GABE LELAND (D)

State House District 11: INCUMBENT STATE REP. MORRIS HOOD (D

State House District 12: INCUMBENT STATE REP. STEVEN TOBOCMAN (D)

State House District 13: INCUMBENT STATE REP. BARBARA FARRAH (D)

State House District 14: INCUMBENT STATE REP. ED CLEMENTE (D)

State House District 15: INCUMBENT STATE REP. GINO POLIDORI (D)

State House District 17: INCUMBENT STATE REP. ANDY DILLON (D)

State House District 22: INCUMBENT STATE REP. HOON-YUNG HOPGOOD (D)

State House District 23: INCUMBENT STATE REP. KATHLEEN LAW (D)

State House District 25: INCUMBENT STATE REP. STEVE BIEDA (D)*

* Rep. Bieda has distinguished himself as one of the House's most ardent animal protection advocates; including

introducing numerous bills. 

State House District 26: INCUMBENT STATE REP. MARIE DONIGAN (D)

State House District 27: INCUMBENT STATE REP. ANDREW MEISNER (D)

State House District 28: INCUMBENT STATE REP. LISA WOJNO (D)

State House District 30: INCUMBENT STATE REP. TORY ROCCA (R)*

* Tory is the son and stepson, respectively, of retired State Reps. Sal and Susan Rocca, and shares their strong

dedication as petowners to animal protection.

State House District 31: INCUMBENT STATE REP. FRED MILLER (D)

State House District 35: INCUMBENT STATE REP. PAUL CONDINO (D)*

State House District 37: INCUMBENT STATE REP. ALDO VAGNOZZI (D)*

* Both Reps. Condino and Vagnozzi have been strong animal and environmental protection advocates.

State House District 39: INCUMBENT STATE REP. DAVID LAW (R)

State House District 41: CANDIDATE ERIC GREGORY (D) vs. Candidate Marty Knollenberg (R)

State House District 42: INCUMBENT STATE REP. FRANK ACCAVITTI, Jr. (D)

State House District 50: INCUMBENT STATE REP. PAULA ZELENKO (D)

State House District 51: INCUMBENT STATE REP. DAVE ROBERTSON (R)*

* Although pro-dove hunting, he has been a strong ally on all other animal protection issues.

State House District 52: INCUMBENT STATE REP. PAM BYRNES (D)*

* Rep. Byrnes has distinguished herself by introducing a bill to strengthen the felony anti-cruelty law by allowing judges to use consecutive sentencing when there have been mutiple animal victims. Her bill was in response to the

numerous animals that were mutilated and killed and dumped in her Washtenaw County district. Unfortunately, the

House Republican Leadership was not willing to even let her bill have a Public Hearing.

State House District 53: INCUMBENT STATE REP. CHRIS KOLB (D)

State House District 54: INCUMBENT STATE REP. ALMA WHEELER SMITH (D)*

* Rep. Smith has been a long-time advocate for strong animal and environmental protection in both the State House and previously in the State Senate.

State House District 57: INCUMBENT STATE REP. DUDLEY SPADE (D)

State House District  60: INCUMBENT STATE REP. ALEXANDER LIPSEY*

* At the request of a constituent, Rep. Lipsey commendably introduced a bill to require students to have alternatives to dissections if they find it objectionable.  He is also a strong environmental protection advocate. 

State House District 67: CANDIDATE BARBARA BYRUM (D)

State House District 72: INCUMBENT STATE REP. GLENN STEIL, Jr. (R)

State House District 98: INCUMBENT STATE REP. JEFF MAYES (D)

COUNTY COMMISSIONER CANDIDATES: 

 OAKLAND COUNTY:

District 2:   INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER BILL BULLARD, Jr. (R)

District 13: CANDIDATE STEVE JOHNSON (D) vs. Candidate Robert Gosselin (R)*

     * When he served in the Michigan House of Representatives, Gosselin was notoriously against  animal and

environmental protection legislation, and even behaved disrespectfully and rudely toward constituents who were pro animal protection.

 District 16:  INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER GREG JAMIAN (R)

 District 18:  INCUMBENT COMMSSIONER DAVE WOODWARD (D)*

    * When he served in the State House of Representatives, Dave distinguished himself by consistently voting for and supporting strong animal and environmental protection legislation.  He was one of our best allies.

  District 21: INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER VINCENT GREGORY (D)

  WAYNE COUNTY:

District 5:  INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER ILONA VARGA (D)

 District 7:  CANDIDATE BURTON LELAND (D)*

    * Burton Leland was an unwavering animal and environmental protection supporter when he served in the State House and then in the State Senate, and voted against dove hunting repeatedly over the years.

 District 11: CANDIDATE KEVIN McNAMARA (D)

 District 13: CANDIDATE GARY WORONCHAK (D)*

District 14: INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER JOE PALAMARA (D)*

    * Both Woronchak (when he was a Republican State Rep.) and Palamara (when he was a Democratic State Rep.)

supported animal and environmental protection legislation, including voting against dove hunting.

MACOMB COUNTY:

District   7: INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER SUSAN ROCCA (R)*

District 19: INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER PAUL GIELEGHEM (D)*

    * Both Rocca and Gieleghem were strong animal and environmental protection advocates when they served in the

State House.

INGHAM COUNTY:

District 5:  INCUMBENT COMMISSIONER ANDY SCHOR (D)

District 7:  CANDIDATE TODD TENNIS (D)

 STATE LEGISLATIVE NEWS UPDATE:

STATE SENATE BILLS 951-952

SPONSORS: Senators Valde Garcia (R) & Robert Emerson (D)

PURPOSE:   To create a voluntary state income tax donation checkoff that would establish an Animal Welfare Fund within the state Treasury. The money raised would be disbursed as grants through the Michigan Dept. of

Agriculture to public and private shelters, licensed and practicing veterinarians, and non-profit Rescue/Adoption/

Sterilization groups to increase the number of dogs and cats who are sterilized; and as grants to public and private shelters to improve enforcement of state anti-cruelty laws (since they enforce those laws).

STATUS:  Bills have been held up because Treasury was taking so long to devise a system for adding new checkoffs to the state income tax form without increasing the length of the form from its current 2-pages and thus costing the state more money to print out and mail the forms.  Governor's office recently stepped in at my request and told Treasury to finish their work so that these, and other worthy, checkoff bills could still be passed into law before session ends at the end of this year.  Hope to get the bills moving as soon as the legislature reconvenes after the November 7th election.

 STATE SENATE BILL 1328

SPONSOR:  State Senator Ron Jelinek (R)

PURPOSE:  After many years of being opposed by the State Board of Veterinary Medicine and many, if not all, members of the Michigan Veterinary Medical Assn. (MVMA),  we were finally able to introduce this bill to legalize the use of certain animal tranquilizers by public and private animal shelters. 

STATUS: How can a shelter operate effectively and humanely if it cannot tranquilize aggressive, injured, or running-at-large animals, as well as those who need to be calmed before euthanasia?  Many shelters have been using

tranquilizers illegally and this situation had to be resolved.  Changes in leadership at both the state Board and MVMA, as well as the determination and leadership exercised on this issue by State Veterinarian, Dr.Steve Halstead, we now have consensus and and swiftly moving to get this bill passed into law this year.   SB1328 has been passed in the

Senate and is awaiting action in the House upon their return from recess.

HOW YOU CAN HELP:  Write to your State Rep. and ask him or her to please vote in favor of this compassionate

and necessary legislation.

 [You can write to your state legislators in care of:  State Capitol, Lansing, MI 48909. Calls and emails are not necessary until November when they are back in Lansing.]

  CONCLUSION:

 Please share the information in this Report with as many people as possible.

 If anyone has any concerns or questions about this HEAL PAC Report and its Endorsements, do not hesitate to

contact Eileen Liska at 248-634-8485, or at eliska01@comcast.net 

From time-to-time, people ask why I usually provide Michigan animal and environmental proection advocates

with so much detailed information.  I have always believed that people will only rise to the expectations set before them. Many animal protection organizations provide limited information; often based on the belief that people don't need to know the details of governing. They prefer to present information in a "dumbed-down" manner. I have never and will never do that, as I do not believe that the majority of animal advocates who get involved in grassroots lobbying should be treated with such condescension.  You can only be as effective as the information you have, and  ultimately, that knowledge equals political power.  With that power we can change the world into a place that recognizes the complexity of the web of life. What a society does to the weakest among it (whether animals, children, elderly, disabled, or minorities) is not only a reflection upon that society's lack of moral values, but ultimately will be a society's undoing.

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A DONATION TO CONTINUE OUR UNIQUE AND VITAL

POLITICAL WORK FOR ANIMAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, PLEASE FILL

OUT THE FORM BELOW AND MAIL IT AND YOUR DONATION CHECK TO "HEAL PAC" 

in care of our new office address:  10714 W. Braemar Drive, Holly, MI 48442

NAME:                     ______________________________________

 ADDRESS:             _________________________________________________________________

 HOME PHONE:       ______________________________________

 EMAIL ADDRESS: ______________________________________

By providing this information, you will also be placed on Heal Pac's Legislative Alert List so you can be kept

informed and up-to-date on all legislative and political developments on behalf of animals. 

Thank you for caring, and helping be a voice for animals and the environment!

EILEEN LISKA