The Return of Mr. Mike Rogers to Michigan

I almost wanted to say Mr. Rogers returns to the neighborhood in Michigan. And “no” it is not a wonderful day in the neighborhood. He should have stayed in Florida where he belongs with DeSantis.

Just some political ranting on an old topic . . .

He couldn’t beat Debbie Stabenow to get into the Senate. So, he retired from the House.

Funny how Mike Rogers returns to Michigan after Senator Debbie Stabenow announces her plan to retire in 2023. But then when he left Michigan, he knew he could not beat Stabenow. A senate seat was the next step in his political climb and Stabenow was unbeatable.

So off to Florida he went for 10 years. Now he is back in Michigan wanting to be the Senator he could not be when Debbie Stabenow was in office. Mikie did not waste much time in getting richer having accumulated several million dollars and a $4 million home. Now that he is back in Michigan, he claims:

“he wants to talk about taking on corporations and working for families when, the truth is that he used his time in Washington to enrich himself and his corporate donors. In office, he cozied up to big corporations—taking $5 million dollars in corporate PAC money—and advanced their agenda at Michiganders’ expense.

“Rogers then left Michigan as soon as he could, moved to Florida, and passed through the revolving door to make millions to do the bidding of corporations. He sold out Michiganders and cannot be trusted.”

Mike Rogers Worked to Change Washington to Benefit Himself—Not Working Families – End Citizens United | We the People, Not “We the Wealthy”

And there is more . . . Which The Gander reveals . . .

In 2002, Rogers voted against the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, otherwise known as the McCain-Feingold Act, which regulated political spending and required candidates to “stand by” their advertisements—namely by throwing a tagline with their name at the end of commercials.

Among other things, that legislation prohibited unlimited amounts of so-called “soft money” from being donated to national political parties and also limited campaign financing only to “hard money”—which are donations that are made directly to a candidate’s political campaign. 

When asked about why he opposed the legislation ahead of the vote, Rogers, at the time, explained to one reporter: “It’s like the old saying about a prostitute. You’ll do it for a million or you’ll do it for a dollar—it still makes you a prostitute. It’s the same way with corruption.”

The legislation passed into law without Rogers’ support and was billed as the most significant campaign finance law to be passed by federal lawmakers since at least 1974. But eight years later, the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission essentially reopened the floodgates for huge amounts of money to be spent on campaigns through unlimited corporate and other special interest political donations.

In 2006, Rogers voted against a House Resolution that sought to ban lawmakers from accepting gifts from lobbyists, including travel expenses. It also sought to close (or at least slow down) the so-called “revolving door” of ex-lawmakers retiring from Congress to pursue often-lucrative careers as lobbyists by extending the lobbying ban on former legislators from one to two years.

Later that summer, Rogers was reportedly spotted on the bow of a luxury yacht alongside lobbyists with the National Marine Manufacturers Association of 2006. The event—dubbed the “Congressional Cruise Series”—was billed, unabashedly, as a way for lobbyists to develop relationships with influential politicians, according to reports from the Chicago Tribune.

I have been out of Michigan for 3 years now. It would be difficult to return and be the thorn in Milkie Roger’s side like I used to be. He is definitely a man of two faces.

Before I left the state, it finally brought a citizens group together to determine the voting districts and the potential split amongst Dems and Repubs. The redrawing of the districts was uncontested in the courts from what I remembered.

In the past and somewhat due to the drawing of the districts, it leaned Republican with their having control of the Senate for 20+ years. The state House was under control of Dems for four of those years. State-wide Gerrymandering was the tool putting Mike Rogers into the House of Representatives numerous times as well as giving Repubs control of the state. When we left, the state was definitely leaning Dem and representation in Congress and the state changed.

I think Michigan has changed enough to reject the carpetbagger Mikey who would not oppose Stabenow for a Senate seat and send him back to his $4 million home in Florida.