Why is there an Aisle?

What we need in Michigan and in America from our elected representatives are solutions, results and long term thinking.  We need long term plans, not one-month budgets or last minute budget deals. We need to satisfy the general interests, not the special interests. 

Two phrases which seem ever present in contemporary political campaigns, yet seem to have become truly meaningless are “I reached across the aisle” and “bi-partisan.”  Why is there an aisle?  Why is there this conceptual separation of the people we elect to represent us?  Why aren’t our representatives in the state and federal legislatures joining each other to solve the big problems in front of us.  When there is a problem there should be work on a solution.  The people we elect are sent to the legislatures to solve problems and to build opportunities.  Why do they sit apart?  Seems like they should choose an important problem to solve, go into a room together and come out only when they have a long term solution.  The sound bites seem endless with the words “bipartisan effort,” yet I want to hear about the mutually developed results of work of our legislators putting in place long term solutions, long term programs pulling our country and our state in a good direction. 

An even more terrible situation in our own state is the attack on our constitution.   We are seeing commercials everyday pushing opinions which are misrepresented as facts.  Perhaps the worst ones are the commercials on Proposal 6. Tuesday morning, I joined with other board members of our Greater Farmington Area Chamber of Commerce at a presentation by the Consul General of Canada on the topic of building the new bridge.  In summary, he pointed out how the Michigan-Ontario border carries the largest two-way trade volume in the world and how more crossing volume brings more trade.  He pointed out the specifics on how Canada is fully funding construction of this new bridge.  How the steel will be American and Canadian steel.  He shared how the agreement signed with our Governor provides a $50 million per year return to Michigan in future years after the bridge costs are covered.  He pointed out how the owner of the Ambassador Bridge is pouring millions of dollars into tv commercials to protect his business from the competition of a new bridge.  The commercials opposing this bridge do not portray the facts, the agreements or the significant adverse consequences of not having this bridge built, on all of us as residents of Michigan.  

I urge all voters to study these proposals carefully, and be cautious about any votes to change the fundamental guiding document for our state, the Michigan constitution.  Pay attention to the motives of the special interests who have created wonderful, emotional and appealing ads.  Please don’t make up your mind based on who made the best television commercial.