Mark Totten enters race for Michigan attorney general
Mark Totten made his announcement Wednesday, with
a website
, video and press release. He is the first major candidate to step into that race. He had previously run in 2014 as a Democrat for state attorney general, losing to Republican Bill Schuette.
Michigan's current state attorney general Dana Nessel, a Democrat, is facing term limits and is unable to run for re-election.
"Michigan needs a fearless Attorney General who will fight for justice, fairness, and the rule of law, and that's exactly what I will do," Totten said in the press release. "We are in turbulent times and need leaders determined to protect our state, our rights, and our safety."
Totten was most recently U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Michigan,
leaving that role in January
after having started in May 2022 as an appointee of President Joe Biden/
In that assignment, he was the chief federal law enforcement officer for 49 counties in Michigan, including the western half of the Lower Peninsula. Cases and projects handled by his office included addressing criminal organizations, seeking justice against crime rings, prosecuting public corruption and protecting civil rights.
"Right now, it feels like everything is on the line – our safety, our rights, our future," he said in his campaign video, pointing to his record in that office and the current political environment.
Previous to his federal appointment, Totten was chief legal counsel for the Michigan Governor's office from 2019 to 2022. He also taught criminal law at Michigan State University from 2009-2018.
He began his legal career at the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington D.C.
Totten received his B.A. from Cedarville College and his law degree and a Ph.D. in ethics from Yale University.
Totten and his family live in Kalamazoo.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
13 minutes ago
- USA Today
House Oversight Committee subpoenas top Dems, DOJ and FBI officials in 'RussiaGate' probe
The subpoenas order former President Bill Clinton, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, top FBI and DOJ leaders to testify about Russia election probe. WASHINGTON −The House Oversight Committee announced Aug. 5 it has issued subpoenas to a host of former attorneys general and top Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to appear for depositions in its expanding "RussiaGate" investigation, committee Chairman James Comer said. Comer, a Kentucky Republican, did not specify what the subpoenas are for, but has suggested in recent days that they are part of a sprawling probe into GOP accusations that Democrats "weaponized" the government against President Donald Trump, including investigating him for allegedly colluding with Russia in the 2016 election in which Trump defeated Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. 'We knew it was a Russia hoax. ... Now it's time for the Comeys, the Brennans—those guys—to pay a price. It's illegal. It's wrong. And they need to be held accountable," Comer said in a July 30 Fox News appearance. "@FBIDirectorKash, @CIADirector Ratcliffe, @DNIGabbard, and President Trump's entire administration are exposing the darkest corners of our federal government. Americans deserve the truth: Democrats have weaponized the government for political gain," Comer added in an Aug. 1 post on X. The Oversight Committee also voted July 23 to subpoena the Justice Department for files related to Jeffrey Epstein, answering calls from lawmakers and voters alike for more information on the disgraced financier and sex offender. Here's a list of those subpoenaed and the dates they are instructed to appear, according to Comer: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: October 9 Former President Bill Clinton: October 14 Former U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland: October 2 Former FBI Director James Comey: October 7 Former U.S. Attorney General William Barr: August 18 Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales: August 26 Former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions: August 28 Former FBI Director Robert Mueller: September 2 Former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch: September 9 Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder: September 30
The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Are you ready for ‘Hawley Bucks'?
There is no public policy idea so dumb to preclude some member of Congress from whole-heartedly supporting it. And the latest example is a proposal to hand out billions of taxpayer dollars to taxpayers to offset taxpayers paying billions of dollars in taxes — that is, tariffs. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has just introduced the American Worker Rebate Act. Consider it a plan to rob Peter in order to pay … Peter. President Trump's tariffs are forcing American businesses and consumers to pay billions of dollars in tariffs, which are taxes. So far this year, the U.S. government has collected about $150 billion in tariffs. Normally, the federal government collects between $75 billion and $80 billion for the whole year. The White House is ecstatic about all this increased revenue. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, 'In reality, tariffs are a source of massive revenue.' But that 'massive revenue' is a result of new taxes coming from Americans. In years past, Republicans went to great lengths to avoid passing anything that could be construed as a tax increase. And, in fairness, no Republican currently in Congress voted for these tariffs. They exist because one Republican, Trump, has unilaterally imposed, then unimposed, then reimposed, then delayed, then reimposed the tariffs. And while many Republicans quietly grumble about Trump's tariffs, they hedge their public remarks so as not to 'poke the bear.' Now that Trump's tariffs are extracting billions of taxpayer dollars from Americans, Hawley proposes to have the government hand out checks to most Americans. Let's call them Hawley Bucks. According to The Hill, Hawley's proposal would offer $600 'tariff rebates.' Children are included, meaning that it 'would give a family of four $2,400.' The senator says, 'Like President Trump proposed, my legislation would allow hard-working Americans to benefit from the wealth that Trump's tariffs are returning to this country.' What a stupid statement. That 'wealth' Hawley's referring to belonged to Americans, and the money isn't 'returning' to America because it was already here. Trump's tariffs took that wealth away from Americans by forcing them to pay the tariffs. Why does the government need to return the money? The Hill reporter nails it: 'The payments are designed to offset higher prices resulting from tariffs.' Just consider some of the many problems with this proposal. First, the renewed inflationary pressure leading to higher prices is self-imposed by Trump's tariffs. Bizarrely, Hawley is modeling his rebates on the COVID-19 stimulus checks, which helped ignite a years-long inflation battle that consumers are still feeling and the Federal Reserve Bank is still fighting. Second, tariffs, like sales taxes, are regressive. They tend to hit lower-income families harder than higher-income families. So, Hawley plans to means-test the rebates. 'The payments would be reduced for households that earn $150,000 or more, a head of household who earns more than $112,500 and individuals who earn more than $75,000.' That's a form of income redistribution. Everyone pays the tariffs, but higher-income families won't get the rebates. There was a time when Republicans strongly opposed income redistribution, while progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) strongly supported it. Now a Republican, with Trump's backing, is proposing income redistribution. Third, some tariff supporters claim the increased revenue will help reduce the current federal budget deficit, which the Congressional Budget Office projects will be $1.9 trillion for 2025. But the tariffs won't reduce the budget deficit if the government is rebating the tariff revenue to Americans. Fourth, the tariff revenue will vary, in part because Trump keeps shifting the tariff rates on various countries. But Hawley's rebates aren't variable. So, if tariff revenue comes in low and the rebates remain the same, the rebates could add to the federal deficit. Finally, progressives have long supported a universal basic income (UBI), in which the government hands out checks to everyone — a guaranteed income for every American. Republicans have opposed proposals that would create a new entitlement program. But Hawley's tariff rebate takes us very close to a UBI. Of course, a new president entering office in 2029 may repeal the tariffs. Or the U.S. Supreme Court may decide that Congress never gave the president the power to impose sweeping new tariffs on any and all countries for whatever reason or for no reason. In that case, tariff revenue would decline sharply. Yet the public would be very reluctant to see their Hawley Bucks eliminated. Although Hawley's proposal is terrible policy, you can appreciate its politics. He is trying to limit the negative consequences of another terrible policy. But rather than create a new entitlement program, Republicans should take steps to eliminate the cause of the problem: Trump's tariffs.
The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Nebraska congressman Flood gets an earful over Trump's tax cut law in raucous town hall
LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Rep. Mike Flood has gotten an earful during a public meeting in Lincoln aimed at discussing his support for the massive tax breaks and spending cuts bill that passed Congress and was signed into law by President Donald Trump. Flood, a second-term Republican who represents the GOP-leaning district that includes the University of Nebraska, on Monday braved the ire of a college town audience dominated by hundreds of people intent on expressing their displeasure chiefly with cuts to Medicaid benefits and tax reductions tilted toward the wealthy. Flood described the law as less than perfect but stood firm on its Medicaid and tax provisions, fueling a 90-minute barrage of jeers and chants in a scenario House Republican leaders have specifically advised GOP members to avoid. 'More than anything I truly believe this bill protects Medicaid for the future,' Flood said, setting off a shower of boos from the audience of roughly 700 in the University of Nebraska's Kimball Recital Hall. 'We protected Medicaid.' How voters receive the law, passed with no Democratic support in the narrowly GOP-controlled House and Senate, could go a long way to determine whether Republicans keep power in next year's midterm elections. Flood was resolute on his position but engaged with the audience at times. During his repeated discussions of Medicaid, he asked if people in the audience thought able-bodied Americans should be required to work. When many shouted their opposition, Flood replied, 'I don't think a majority of Nebraskans agree with that.' Dozens formed a line to the microphone to engage Flood, most asking pointed questions about the law but many others questioning moves by the Trump administration on immigration enforcement, education spending and layoffs within the federal bureaucracy. During Flood's discussion of his support of the law's tax provisions, which he argued would benefit the middle class, the audience exploded in a deafening chant of 'Tax the rich.' Republican lawmakers' town halls have been few and far between since the bill passed early last month, in part because their leaders have advised them against it. Trump and others say the law will give the economy a jolt, but Democrats feel they've connected with criticism of many of its provisions, especially its cuts to Medicaid and tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy.
