Talk:Jim Lower

COI Edit Request

I want to disclose that I am Jim Lower. I am looking for help with this article about me. In my opinion, the current version violates the NPOV policy and places too much weight on negative points of view.

My principle concern is with citation 19 related to the work I conduct with Eureka RDC. The issue is positioned as factual in the way it is written. In fact, if you read the article cited, it was simply an allegation thrown out by the opponent of one of the clients I did political consulting for. There is no proof for the allegation at all. I don't think it is fair to cite an unsubstantiated claim in this way. Eureka RDC is far from a shell company. We have done political consulting for many clients over the years. This can be seen by searching expenditure reports at: https://miboecfr.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/cfr/exp_anls.cgi . By putting this issue on my bio is not fair at all and the newspaper never should have published this claim without any sort of proof or without the opportunity for a rebuttal. I think the claim itself is libel.

I also believe the references to the number of bills I passed are positioned in a negative light. The article only references bills I passed during the 2019-20 legislative session without regard to the bills I passed in the 2017-18 session. I had 9 out of 23 bills passed that session https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(lad00ju0c2ehikdrg5qzwxku))/mileg.aspx?page=SponsorSearch. However, keeping essentially a score sheet in this way is not common for political figures and is not common on these types of articles. This is because often times members resolve issues within bills that don't necessarily have their name on them. For these reasons I believe this 19-20 score carding is designed to make it seems as though I was ineffective. I believe the reference is not necessary and is overly negative. At a minimum reference to my work in 2017-18 should be added. But, it would likely be fairer and easier to move away from this scorecard method altogether.

The reference to my work on the sex offender registry lacks context. The court ordered the Michigan legislature to revise the sex offender registry or else the entire system would be thrown out. My bill simply brought Michigan's Sex Offender Registry into compliance with the court order. The way it is positioned on that page makes it seem like I was advocated for less regulations on sex offenders. The articles below clearly show this was not the case.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/12/02/house-oks-court-ordered-changes-michigans-sex-offender-registry/3793818001/ https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/12/30/whitmer-signs-bill-implementing-changes-sex-offender-law/4084952001/ https://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/2021/07/michigan-supreme-court-says-sex-offender-registry-punishes-cant-be-applied-retroactively.html https://www.mlive.com/news/2020/04/court-ordered-changes-to-michigan-sex-offender-registry-law-put-on-hold-due-to-coronavirus.html

The first paragraph where it talks about my work with Edmore is clearly designed to minimize my work there. The enumeration of what my salary is completely unnecessary and does nothing to advance the readers understanding of my work there. The article goes on to say I resigned after 18 months to run for state rep. This is okay but the overall design of the paragraph seems calibrated to suggest I just used the job as steeping stone. In fact, I accomplished great things for Edmore, none of which are mentioned. Here is one for reference: https://www.thedailynews.cc/articles/just-in-edmore-bag-factory-grant-official-870000-project-underway/

I have three kids, Aaron, Kate, and Weston so that portion is out of date.

In closing, I would appreciate any help with this. I realize I am not neutral myself but the article seems to be designed to cast me in a negative light. I have had several people mention this to me and I would hate for it to negatively effect me in someway. I can provide any more information that might be needed. I would just like to see this article brought back into balance if possible

Thanks you for your consideration! SpartaSpartanFan (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Remember that all claims need reliable sources. An update on your family situation, for example, cannot be included without a reliable source. Actualcpscm (talk) 22:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)