News

Eye On Politics: New Move Squeezes Gov and Lawmakers

Published March 28, 2005. By Chris Christoff. Detroit Free Press.
EYE ON POLITICS: New move to ban dove-hunting squeezes governor and lawmakers

Let's assume that bird lovers unload enough petition signatures on the Secretary of State today to force a statewide referendum to repeal the 2004 law that allows dove hunting.

Look for two things to happen: First, it'll probably pass, although hunting interests might spend a few million bucks trying to defeat it.

Secondly, it could become a real nuisance to those running for office next year. Like the governor.

The Campaign to Restore the Dove Shooting Ban claims to have the 159,000 valid signatures needed to secure a November 2006 ballot spot. In doing so, it would suspend the 2004 law that allowed the first legal dove hunt in Michigan in 99 years last fall.

That means no more dove hunting if the proposal passes. To dove hunters, that must seem like forced abstinence after their hard-won gratification.

Remember that in 2001, gubernatorial candidate Jennifer Granholm told the Humane Society of the United States that she'd veto any bill allowing dove hunting. But as governor, she signed the bill, although the compromise with hunters restricted dove hunting to only six southern counties.

Still, Granholm angered many of her own supporters who view doves as peaceful creatures that bring serenity to their backyards. (To which hunters answer, "Doves are food!")

Just when everyone thought that dove hunting was old news, here comes a ballot issue to create a political minefield.

Imagine a Granholm press conference:

Reporter: Governor, do you support the ballot issue to ban dove hunting in Michigan?

Granholm: I think the people ought to decide what's in their hearts on this issue.

R:But you signed the bill. Are you still in favor of shooting doves?

G:Doves are a valued member of our wildlife community.

R:So, you're opposed to shooting doves?

G:As I said, doves are a valued member of our wildlife community.

And with that kiss of death, smart doves would immediately seek refuge in another state.

The same scenario would snare candidates for state House or Senate:

Reporter: Sir, do you support the ballot proposal to ban dove hunting?

Candidate:I'm pro-life.

R:So you oppose shooting doves?

C:I'm pro-gun, I'm a hunter and a member of the NRA

R:So, you support hunting but not killing?

C:As I said, I'm pro-life and pro-gun. Sorry, I've got to run.

No one wants to flaunt a lust for killing doves because most of the public views it as unnecessary and even barbaric. But the hunting lobby doesn't want to hear its candidates turn into wimps, either.

Here's where Granholm could seize an opportunity and play hardball.

She could march into the office of Sam Washington, director of the Michigan United Conservation Clubs. He led the lobbying effort to convince her to sign a compromise dove-hunting bill.

Here's what she'd say:

"Sam -- no, don't stand up -- I'm in a tough fight here. Republicans are hammering us. I stuck my neck out big time for you on that dove-hunting bill, and this ballot proposal is getting the backyard dove feeders riled up again. Most of them are Democrats. Frankly, the idea of shooting doves makes me a little sick, too.

"So, you owe me. I'll stay neutral on the dove ballot issue. It's your fight, not mine. But next week, you and the NRA and your pro-gun buddies will endorse me for reelection. You'll say it took courage for me to stand up for hunters and sign a bill they worked 20 years to get. You'll say hunters have a friend in Lansing: me.

"And Sam, you and your friends' PACs can make those checks out to my campaign committee, too. That's Granholm, G-R-A-N-H-O-L-M ..."

Welcome | News
| Action Alert | Your Representation
| Roll Call Vote
| Facts | What Can I Do? | Contact | Your Comments

Copyright ©2005 - Songbird Protection Coalition
Questions or Comments about this site?  Email Us
Page Updated: 04/12/05