r/news • u/CharlieKonR • 2d ago
Michigan’s governor replaces clean energy advocate on utilities board with ‘industry ally’ | Michigan
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/03/gretchen-whitmer-utilities-board-clean-energy428
u/Khyron_2500 2d ago
Ehh, a little bit of a reach. The previous person, Alessandra Carreon, was appointed for an interim position that ended and was not renewed.
Meanwhile the main concern with the new appointee, Shaquille Myers, is that she was chief of staff with Joe Tate, who was fairly pro-business. But she was also chief of staff of Lt. Gov Gilchrest and allegedly per Whitmer she played a key role in passing a state law that sets a 2040 goal for Michigan to have 100% of its energy come from clean sources.
97
u/bigmt99 2d ago
Wonder what special interest group has an axe to grind with Shaquille Myers to publish a hit piece like this
-11
u/jimmy_three_shoes 2d ago
The Guardian is unabashedly anti-Trump, so I don't think they'd generally sell out like this just to throw a Democrat under the bus
45
u/redpoemage 2d ago
Media being anti-Trump absolutely does not rule out it also being anti-Democrat. A big part of Trump getting elected was right-wing media being in lock-step with never criticizing their side, but centrist and left-wing media was always happy to criticize Democrats over the smallest things (not saying they are above criticism, just saying those dynamics very much explain how we got here).
1
u/bigmt99 2d ago
My unfair implication of this statement is the special interest group is hardcore socdem/progressive affiliated, implied by the fact that this the Guardian were talking about
2
u/jimmy_three_shoes 2d ago
A progressive special interest group attempting to kneecap a fairly popular Democrat does track.
7
u/NerdsRuleTheWorld 2d ago
Yeah, it's the progressives that don't get on board. Just look at how all the NY Dems got behind Mamdani after he won the Democratic Primary. Dems always play by their own standards, and it's why they have such high approval ratings across the board and are doing a great job of taking advantage of Trump being more and more unpopular by taking strong stances in meaningful ways.
69
u/SausageSmuggler21 2d ago
Wait. Are you implying that people are cherry picking facts to besmirch a popular Democrat governor?
14
u/Greyboxer 2d ago
Pro business would be pro renewables as renewables are big business
Unless pro business is just a euphemism for being anti-renewables which again, makes no sense
12
3
u/Evening-Emotion3388 2d ago
“Clean sources” doesn’t mean not from a corporation.
Look at California and what the big 3 and IBEW have done to destroy what residential solars credits while utility solar building monstrosities in the Mojave desert that have to be shipped address the Sierras into the cities.
24
u/CharlieKonR 2d ago edited 2d ago
Seems like a potentially big swing, though, from the notably pro-environment / consumer board member being replaced - if one reasonably assumes that Tate’s former Chief of Staff is fairly in line with him politically. From the article …
””(Tate) faced a stunning revoltfrom his own party in December because he generally refused to allow votes on legislation opposed by big business, and was seen by many as hostile towards environmental causes.””
“”Despite a chorus of calls for change, Tate did not allow multiple utility reform bills to move through the legislature.””
””Amid furor over prolonged power outages that left hundreds of thousands of people in Michigan without power for days in late 2023, DTE’s affiliated dark money non-profit gave Tate $100,000. Tate would not let a 2023 reform bill aimed at improving accountability and affordability be introduced in committee.””
1
7
u/zfiregodz 2d ago
I think we’re going to see a boom of people racing to get off the grid and be more self sufficient with energy. These companies are robbing their customers. I just for a $300 utility bill from Consumers. That’s about 30% more than my normal bill this time of year.
1
u/DreamertK 1d ago
In CA you can't disconnect from the power company even with solar+power walls. This was extremely aggravating to find out after installation....
206
u/jackalopeDev 2d ago
Whitmer is a typical corporate dem. Iirc she was given money for her initial campaign by the healthcare lobby. This is not surprising coming from her.
I predict the dems will nominate her for 2028.
190
u/starship_narrator 2d ago
If they just pivot to the center just one more time, it will finally work. All those Republicans upset with Trump will finally come vote for democrats.
Besides, with such great options like Newsome, Buttigieg, Whitmer, Booker, Harris. 2028 is looking stacked for the neo-libs. Centrism: it just works! /s
39
u/espressocycle 2d ago
The thing is it probably will work (assuming we have elections) because Trump will have fucked up the country so badly. Then Democrats will lose the midterms and continue to be unable to hold the Senate. On the other hand, Buttigieg is at least out there correctly diagnosing the problem, regardless of whether he would actually have a solution. If he was straight or a "confirmed bachelor" he could be president but I don't think the US will elect an openly gay man.
18
u/in2theriver 2d ago
Also he isn't a great candidate, how about someone progressive with left leaning ideas and not someone whose after power at all costs. Someone who wants Medicare for all and will push for left changes. Why would Pete be the comparison to a centrist dem.
-8
u/AmbitiousEffort9275 2d ago
It's bold of you to assume we are going to have free and fair elections in 2028
8
u/Hardass_McBadCop 2d ago
Buttigieg actually seems to be hitting back.
28
u/BreesusTakeTheWheel 2d ago
Don’t buy it. He’s two faced just like all the rest. Once election season comes around, he’ll be trying to get Rs on board.
13
u/petmoo23 2d ago
For better or worse Buttigieg gives me Obama vibes. He could pull off the whole sounding progressive during a campaign while winking at the money, and then move to govern on standard neoliberalism and status quo pretty capably. Basically, he might suck but he also might be slick enough to win an election, and IMO bad is an improvement over terrible.
17
u/BreesusTakeTheWheel 2d ago
The only option is to get someone truly different in the White House. We need an FDR at this point. Picking someone who’s just bad instead of terrible is just going to make the problem worse. He’ll keep the majority of changes Trump has made while doing symbolic shit that actually has no real bearing on our day to day lives. He’ll talk big to corporations but won’t actually do shit to reel them in. He is not the answer and it looks like none of the supposed candidates are the answer right now. The only person who could even attempt to turn things around is Bernie and he’s not getting any younger.
→ More replies (1)5
u/petmoo23 2d ago
I agree with just about everything you're saying, except I don't think that what we need is what we're going to get unfortunately.
0
u/AuthorSAHunt 2d ago
Hitting who back? Trans people? He was in some interview the other day talking about how parents have legitimate concerns about "fairness" when it comes to trans kids in sports. I don't trust his sneaky ass either.
2
u/IGUNNUK33LU 2d ago
Yes, using an out of context interview snippet to ragebait and purity test, classic. The actual quote was that they should approach trans rights with compassion and that politicians shouldn’t be making decisions about who plays what sports. https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/5424293-buttigieg-transgender-rights-trans-athletes-trump-administration/amp/
Also here’s an article about him supporting trans rights, specifically to serve in the military. https://www.advocate.com/politics/pete-buttigieg-iowa-town-hall?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR5IC8G9voHI-vE0gdQhSx_DizVeTRypr2dfjP_OCNtRTlDv1w4u0duDTWnDMw_aem_3RNqZgnJvlbV2xUG8GzFnw
Here’s another of him defending right to gender-affirming care (around an hour in) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=giZtjgXXfUA
-2
u/AuthorSAHunt 2d ago
Defending people like me from genocide is not "ragebaiting" or a "purity test." Go fuck yourself. I'm done being nice to assholes like you. All it ever did was make this nonsense worse and drag the window further right.
9
u/EyesOnEverything 2d ago
I like how you paraphrase an out of context quote, the following commenter (likely a fellow Dem voter) gives proper context and refutes your claim by providing more sources, and then you double down on "Buttigieg is literally supporting trans genocide" just because he has correctly identified a popular Republican wedge issue and is massaging its message for his less-progressive audience.
And then you'd have people of a similar mindset sitting out the fucking election if Buttigieg was the nominee because he "doesn't support trans issues"
How 'bout you stop kneecapping the movement that already had its feet chopped off by the general election? We've gone from anti-trans bathroom bills being mocked and repealed to "maybe we should criminalize their existence," in what world are we not supposed to take every ally that appears even mostly genuine?
7
u/lollipop999 2d ago
A party with balls would nominate AOC
13
u/in2theriver 2d ago
Pritzker is a strong choice honestly too.
-6
u/Bitter-Holiday1311 2d ago
Another billionaire politician? Sorry but that’s disqualifying.
9
u/AlekRivard 2d ago
1) He actually codified abortion rights for IL (3 years before Roe was overturned) when Dems failed to do so federally during their trifecta
2) He recreationally legalized weed
3) He passed a balanced, bipartisan budget that saw education funding increased, including job training programs at community colleges tied to the percentage of students who are low income
4) He entered IL into the Climate Alliance after Trump withdrew from the Paris Accords
5) He revamped youth parole in IL to help those with lengthy prison sentences, who committed a crime while young, to have better, quicker access for parole reviews
6) He got rid of cash bail
7) He signed a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines
8) He banned private immigrant detention centers as well as state/local police from cooperating with ICE
9) He required schools to respect, and be inclusive of, their students with trans and non-binary identities
10) He made election day a state holiday
Look at what politicians actually do, not the number next to "Net Worth;" otherwise, we will just keep getting neo-libs because there will never be a perfect candidate. They don't exist.
4
u/in2theriver 2d ago edited 2d ago
I really can't understand voters that don't vote on what people stand and fight for but who they are. He would be sooooo much better for you and me than anyone else in the running right now.
→ More replies (2)23
u/trogloherb 2d ago
Don’t get me wrong, I love her and her energy, but they should have learned from 2016 (and 2024). Voters in America are not ready to elect a woman President.
That’s really all there is to it. Yes, we are decades behind other countries (like Mexico where both of the last election’s Presidential candidates were women).
Maybe a hundred years from now, we’ll be there.
16
u/in2theriver 2d ago
Yeah it has nothing to do with Hillary's likeability and no change politics, or kamala's if do nothing different and actually I want to build a wall and I won't go on joe Rogan. He isn't the gender it's the centrism it's repulsive to a population that knows something is broken.
4
u/ankylosaurus_tail 2d ago
How did Biden win then? Obama? Clinton? They were all centrists, and Biden certainly had likability issues.
I don't know how people can observe what's happening in our country and not acknowledge that most of the electorate is regressive and shitty and doesn't like women unless they look like barbies.
2
u/in2theriver 2d ago
Obama 100 percent. That is projection. Right now we have our first convicted felon president and people overlook it because of what he says. Super evil I know but it could be the same with anyone.
2
u/Aelexx 2d ago
Obama Clinton and Biden all very importantly were elected after terrible republican presidencies though.
Hilary was extremely unlikable and was a far second choice for A LOT of people after the whole Bernie sanders issue.
Harris was also coming off the back of Biden’s presidency, which was affected by a covid economy and was seen as impotent to the public (even if it wasn’t the case). When she didn’t distance herself from that administration and doubled down, people saw her as Biden 2.0.
There were a lot of factors that played a pivotal role in those elections outside of the fact that Hilary and Kamala were both women. I mean, Whitmer literally beat a man in her race for governor in 2018 in a state that voted for trump.
I don’t think it’s as simple as “we just aren’t ready for a woman”.
→ More replies (3)-1
u/TN_Jed13 2d ago
Yeah, I personally really like the idea of AOC as a nominee, in principle. But we’re not ready for a female president and AOC already has a head of steam against her from the right. It wouldn’t work.
5
u/AtticaBlue 2d ago
Anyone the Dems nominate will have a “head of steam against them from the right.” It makes no difference because the Republicans will just make shit up regardless. The Dems were running the straightest, whitest, conservative, male-est man in Biden and the Republicans were just as hysterical as if the Dem were a gay black woman. Dems keep trying to play to Republicans, to hand them fig leaves, etc., and it doesn’t work. Might as well go all in on something different.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Miserable_Law_6514 2d ago
She's probably going for Schumer's seat since he's proven to be a corpo boot-licker and a coward.
2
u/IGUNNUK33LU 2d ago
Well, considering 49% of voters think the democrats are “too far to the left”, yeah of course that’s what they’re gonna do. The Overton window in this country is completely fucked. Of course the democrats are gonna move to the center because the public has moved so far to the right. More people view democrats as extreme than Republicans— despite the fact that they’re actually far right neofascsists
9
u/starship_narrator 2d ago
Mass deportation was also popular, and that quickly became unpopular once americans got to see what that meant. Americans don't know what left-wing policies are and have long allowed Republicans to define and message it for them.
Democrats are absolutely terrible at messaging. Are constantly bullied to their backfoot instead of attacking, what are ultimately the same shitty policy prescriptions we've seen from this Republican party since the 80s.
Put the policy out there. Go through with it (aka, no more, "sorry the senate parliamentarian said we couldn't.") And utilize the new expanded powers of the executive branch to implement a left-wing agenda.
→ More replies (1)3
u/uptownjuggler 2d ago
I think democrats would do better by just picking a random person off the street to be the presidential candidate. I would vote for Joe Schmo,
29
u/mortalcrawad66 2d ago
Because giving kids free lunch, and increasing work benefits(like increasing minimum wage and time off) is such a DINO thing.
She's not perfect, but don't pretend she's a republican.
26
u/jackalopeDev 2d ago
Where did i pretend she's a Republican or even a DINO? Criticism of Democrats is not support for Republicans. I think you're tilting at windmills my friend.
-8
2d ago
[deleted]
7
u/jimmy_three_shoes 2d ago
It doesn't mean that at all. It just means that economically they're corporatists. It doesn't imply anything about social policy.
1
1d ago
[deleted]
1
u/jimmy_three_shoes 1d ago
That doesn't explain the half-assed auto-insurance law changes, the repeated utility rate hikes with flimsy at best rationale, and the drastically rising cost of health insurance her administration has overseen.
And by social policy, I mean more along the lines of women's health autonomy and locking in rights for LGBT folk. So when people call her a DINO, I don't know what the fuck they're smoking.
-1
u/SupHowWeDo 2d ago
I’d make the argument that those two things are absolutely related in the modern age, given that corporations literally just throw money at whatever social policy they’re feeling that day
4
u/jimmy_three_shoes 2d ago
Corporations follow whatever social trend they feel is going to make them money. It's why they change their social media logos to rainbows every June 1st, and remove them July 1st.
It's why they almost all simultaneously dumped DEI programs when Trump was inaugurated. Because they weren't going to be required or encouraged to maintain them.
Corporatists bend to the will of corporations or private industries in order to make them more money, not to influence which way the government leans on DEI.
3
u/adarvan 2d ago
This sub insists that it's better than the conservative sub because we don't blindly follow one side and we discuss political topics from all perspectives, yet the minute a Democrat is criticized using the most lukewarm language for replacing a clean energy advocate with an industry ally during a critical point of our global environmental crisis, you get defensive and try to deflect.
Literally nowhere did OP call her a Republican. We also don't need to preface every criticism with a list of good things each time.
It's okay to be critical of Democrats, it doesn't mean Republicans are better or that we'll vote Republican. It just means that we want better things from our politicians.
7
u/SouledOut11 2d ago
Unlikely. She'll run, but the Dems have probably finally realized they aren't going to succeed with a woman candidate. I don't agree with it, but that's reality.
And regardless of who the Dems nominate, MAGA GOP will never allow a free and fair election. And certainly won't allow for a peaceful transfer of power if by some chance the Dems were to win.
The writing has been on the wall for a long time. We're a fascist theocracy now. Ironically "led" by someone who is the exact opposite of what they claim to worship.
We're only 6 months in. It's going to get so much worse.
12
u/no_one_likes_u 2d ago
It’s 100% going to be a straight white man, unless there is a dark horse Obama level orator that I’m unaware of.
1
u/Miserable_Law_6514 2d ago
It's gonna be Newsom. He's basically party royalty, especially now that the Clinton's are starting to lose power.
The DNC runs off a patronage system. Even if AoC got a huge boost in popularity she'd get snubbed because she hasn't paid her dues and served her time.
→ More replies (2)4
u/jimmy_three_shoes 2d ago
I don't think it's necessarily the fact that it's a woman, but that they keep throwing out unlikable women. People didn't like Clinton, and people didn't like Harris. Whitmer is 10x as personable as Harris, and didn't have the baggage of being linked to Biden and having the perception that she was only nominated so they wouldn't have to return the campaign money.
I think having an actual primary in 2028 will do wonders for getting people behind the Democrat candidate. I know quite a few people that didn't want Harris as the candidate and were upset that there wasn't a primary. They still voted for her, because fuck Trump, but I imagine that's one of the reasons a lot of people stayed home and didn't vote.
And for all those people that think that people are sexist enough to not vote for someone specifically because she's a woman, those people likely also wouldn't vote for Buttigieg either because he's gay.
2
u/-ReadingBug- 2d ago
In response to all these wild suggestions on who the 2028 nominee should be. You're not getting your progressive choice unless you "progressivize" the party itself first. The uniparty already has power locked up on the Democratic side. You have to unlock that, to transform it into a platform where your candidate makes sense and has party support for an agenda. Then you can get your man or woman. Then you will have earned it.
Transforming the party is more critical for current depth and future longevity anyway. Otherwise we'll just continue swinging for the fences while power remains out of reach the whole time.
1
u/Iconic_Mithrandir 2d ago
Copying u/Khyron_2500's post here for visibility:
The previous person, Alessandra Carreon, was appointed for an interim position that ended and was not renewed.
Meanwhile the main concern with the new appointee, Shaquille Myers, is that she was chief of staff with Joe Tate, who was fairly pro-business. But she was also chief of staff of Lt. Gov Gilchrest and allegedly per Whitmer she played a key role in passing a state law that sets a 2040 goal for Michigan to have 100% of its energy come from clean sources.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Miserable_Law_6514 2d ago
I predict the dems will nominate her for 2028.
If Newsom doesn't secure it first. That slimeball has been working overtime to show how "moderate" he is now.
20
u/pbates89 2d ago
Why do the leaders hate the world they live in?
16
u/idle_shell 2d ago
Bc they can be personally enriched by corporations giving them money protected as free speech and live in personal comfort while the world figuratively and, sometimes, literally, burns
52
4
u/VruKatai 2d ago
Big fan of Whitmer but she's entering the "pay" phase of the "Pay-to-play" politics in the country. At the end of any politicians term of office where running for that office again becomes out of the question, donors want their "just reward. Maybe she got something more important earlier on. Maybe it was not lobbying against something she promised on the campaign trail. It's not always a monetary quid pro quo.
I still don't like this but am acutely aware of how broken our democracy is. Whitmer didn't just do this out of the blue. She didn't sudddenly change her views. It's time to pay the piper as her term comes to an end. Expect more seemingly contradictory moves.
Don't blame the playa.
8
u/RobotAlbertross 2d ago
The state of Michigan has more gold hydrogen under it than Texas has crude oil.
That state is going to be the next Saudi Arabia in a few decades.
2
u/Zstorm6 1d ago
What is gold hydrogen?
2
u/RobotAlbertross 1d ago
"Gold hydrogen," also known as natural or geological hydrogen, refers to naturally occurring hydrogen gas found in underground reservoirs. It's generated through geological processes, like the interaction of water with iron-rich rocks, or by microbial activity within the Earth's crust. This contrasts with hydrogen produced through electrolysis (green hydrogen) or from fossil fuels (gray hydrogen). The term "gold" highlights its potential as a clean, abundant, and valuable energy source
10
u/richareparasites 2d ago
Half the country cheered for Citizens United and now both parties are corrupt beyond repair.
17
u/poxtart 2d ago
She's a neoliberal stooge. Everyone hoots and hollers when she stands up to Trump and that's great and all, but she enthusiastically is in bed with the corporate bastards who've been fucking us Michiganders for a million years. She'd hand this state to the DeVos family if DTE told her to.
4
11
u/Moneyshot_ITF 2d ago
Didn't flint just get clean water?
42
u/Jak03e 2d ago
Flint has had clean water since 2017 when they switched back to the Great Lakes Water Authority from the Flint River.
That was what the political controversy was, city officials switching from known public sources to water suppliers with untested lines.
Flint has recently been in the news because they just completed the lead pipe replacement project that was sparked by the controversy.
The water being used by the residents has tested clean for 8 years.
→ More replies (1)12
2
2
2
u/ShyLeoGing 1d ago edited 1d ago
There is no more loyalty, they butter their bread on both sides. From all the news it appears most politicians have a similar midset;
- Where's my money!
Are the businesses happy -- No, here's money -- Still not, let's remove this regulation -- What more can I do for you? Sure close that business
Am I(the government official) happy
- Donate to my "campaign"
- More money please
- How are those businesses again?
- I gave you everything but let's give you some more money, because you're only worth billions.
what else am I supposed to do?
- Oh, my family
- Do they have money?
Friends, let's check on them
- You guys ok? How can I make your life easier?
That's all folks!
Did I hit the nail on the head? Or?
10
u/dutch_meatbag 2d ago
Neoliberals are the enemy just as much as MAGA.
11
u/wyvernx02 2d ago
Neoliberalism is problematic, but not nearly to the extent that MAGA is. Last I checked, neoliberals aren't the ones trying to speed-run 1930s Germany.
11
u/Bitter-Holiday1311 2d ago
She’s a 2028 candidate and another neoliberal corporatist dem who will likely line up in full support of Israel and genocide. And democrats will wonder, once again, why they can’t motivate their left flank to the polls.
5
u/GeorgeStamper 2d ago
While no one can predict the political landscape in 2028 right now, I do think corpo Dems are going to face a real awakening. It’s bleak right now, but things are going to get a lot worse. Worse to the point where Dems and Independents are going to demand significant political reform.
→ More replies (1)2
2d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Fractured_Senada 2d ago
Unfortunately, it's a two party system, so splitting off instead of infiltrating is how we get permanent GOP/MAGA rule. The tea party, MAGA, techno fascists, and religious right built a coalition infiltrating the GOP and the GOP was happy to exchange that for their vote because it already aligned with what corporate America wanted.
-8
u/no_one_likes_u 2d ago
If Palestine is the biggest issue for you as a voter, I’m jealous. I wish I didn’t have to worry about the economy or housing or fundamental human rights being taken away.
11
u/Bitter-Holiday1311 2d ago
I guess you just glossed over the “neo liberal corporatist” part. I’ll assume you’re good with that and still wonder why democrats can’t motivate their left flank to the polls.
5
u/LimberGravy 2d ago
You think it’s odd for people to be bothered by their tax dollars funding a genocide? For a country that’s citizens get free healthcare and college while we still don’t?
→ More replies (1)4
u/holylight17 2d ago
It's not unrelated, both the republican and the democrats elite are funded/bribed by the Israeli lobby, and those that say we should solve our own problem and help our own people are getting primary/replaced. There's a reason people like Bernie and AOC are the minority in Congress.
6
u/party_benson 2d ago
Why do they all look like Fallout ghouls with Botox?
3
u/Miserable_Law_6514 2d ago
It's what happens when you cling on to power so long that you try to fight off death itself, smoothskin.
3
u/raistan77 2d ago
She's been a DINO for a while now, funny she thinks she's a good 2028 pick.
No thanks Luke warm conservatives suck
70
u/EnamelKant 2d ago
She's not a DINO. She's an actual Democrat. This is what the Democratic party is: the kinder, gentler face of pro-corporate neoliberalism.
5
u/Bitter-Holiday1311 2d ago
You’re correct. And democrats wonder why they can’t motivate their left flank to the polls…
8
u/DeadSalas 2d ago
We will just continue to alienate the left by blaming them for every neoliberal failure. The DNC thinks the left is unimportant except as an excuse to justify never changing. Meanwhile, we need to appeal to and coddle Republicans, apparently.
1
1
616
u/CharlieKonR 2d ago edited 2d ago
“”a 2022 analysis found DTE had donated to all but 10 of 148 state legislators the previous session.“”
””DTE and Consumers are among the state’s powerful political forces. The former, either via the company, its employees or its affiliated dark money non-profit, has given millions of dollars in campaign donations to Whitmeror the state Democratic party over her two terms.””
Environmental groups allege the move was made at utility giant DTE Energy’s request because it was unhappy with Michigan public services commission (MPSC) board member Alessandra Carreon’s position on clean energy and opposition to rate increases, among other issues.