From Poker to Politics

 

 

 

PART 6: THE 2008 ELECTION CAMPAIGN

 

At the Denver convention, I was interviewed by John Heiner, the Editor of the Bay City Times (his town is 13 miles north of mine). One of his questions was, “What do you think of John McCain’s chance of winning in Michigan?” Most of the people asked this type of question do not want their party to sit back and relax, so they portray the race as close. In fact, Obama had only about a four-point lead over McCain in Michigan at this point. But I gave Mr. Heiner the same opinion that I had all summer. I said, “McCain hasn’t got a snowball’s chance in hell.” And so it was. McCain pulled his campaign out of my state with a month left to go before the election (an event that did not please my Republican friends, as it hurt their chances in state and local races). The eventual margin of victory here for Obama was about 20 points.

 

I decided early on that I did not need to work hard campaigning for Obama; I had another cause that needed help. Michigan had a group that put “Proposal 2” on the ballot for the fall election. This ballot proposal would loosen the severe existing restrictions placed on embryonic stem cell research. Michigan was tied with about five other states for the title of “worst state law restrictions in the country” on this needed medical research. I had put on an informal seminar on this subject in June of 2008, bringing in a couple of speakers to discuss the need for this research. In the fall, I planned to host a debate between the two point of views on this proposal, and made arrangements with Saginaw Valley State University to use it for a venue. My job was to line up the opposing debate teams.

 

I discussed the formatting of the debate with John Kaczynski, who heads the SVSU Political Science Department. My suggestion was to have three debaters on each team. One person would be the researcher, the second an ethicist, and the third a political person. John agreed, and said he would get a moderator for the event.

 

I, of course, was a supporter of the ballot proposal that would be kinder to medical research. I had not decided whether to take part in the debate myself. For our researcher, I had one of my two speakers from the Informational Forum in June, Doctor Carol Brenner of Wayne State University, who I knew would be terrific. I had read a number of books on fertility clinic procedure and embryonic stem cell research, and was interested in talking about the ethics of this research if I were a participant. I naturally tried to line up a political person through the people who were putting on the political campaign. They were not only unhelpful, but the person heading the campaign said he would not give me any help, not even a phone number, unless I turned over responsibility for the whole debate to him. I said no to that idea. I could just imagine a person as rude as this guy trying to get panelists for our opposition. His last words to me were, “I hope you don’t mess up my campaign.”

 

To find opposing debaters, I talked to Paul Long of the Michigan Catholic Conference and Suanne Thompson of Michigan Right to Life. Suanne was happy to have her organization participate in the debate, and said she would get a three-person debate team. She and I talked about the formatting, and we had no problem in drawing up mutually satisfactory terms. I can honestly say she was a pleasure to work with.

 

I was willing to handle the political part myself and procure an ethicist, if need be. In fact, that is what finally happened. I was able to get the head of Alma College’s philosophy Department as my ethicist. He had several years experience teaching medical ethics.

 

Right to Life actually got another medical lady from Wayne State to be their researcher, and the Library Director of University of Michigan’s Flint branch as their ethicist. My political opponent was supposed to be State Senator Roger Kahn, the heart doctor from Saginaw who had beaten us in the 2006 election. However, Kahn cancelled a week before the debate was to take place (no reason given). His last-minute replacement was a lady who was a divorce lawyer from Macomb County. She had neither the background nor the preparation time to do a good job.

 

I was well-prepared. In addition to my reading, I had been to a couple of seminars on stem cell research put on by the University of Michigan. In addition, I met with the lady who was the Director of the Taubman Institute, which did the stem cell research at the university. Strangely enough, she already knew who I was from poker. Her mother was an avid poker player and a fan of mine. I gave her some books for her mom, and she sent me several tapes on all aspects of the medical research.

 

All three of us who favored “yes” vote on the ballot proposal did a fine job. And after the debate, the two opposing teams had a friendly chat together. This was a far cry from the way most of the adversaries on religion-related issues behave toward each other. Everyone connected with the event was happy with it.

 

On election day, the balloting on Proposal Two was fairly close, but the old restrictive law was changed. The Michigan Catholic Conference spent $4,810,000 to keep the old law, but billionaire Al Taubman spent around six million dollars on the other side. Michigan now has a reasonable law, and the University of Michigan is able to go forward with its stem cell research unhampered.

 

To complete my joy on election day, Barack Obama became our new President.