Ann Arbor area lawmakers offer mixed reactions as Michigan House approves $6.9 billion state budget
The Michigan House of Representatives voted 62-48 on Wednesday to pass a Republican-backed omnibus budget for all of state government except education.
The $6.9 billion general fund budget for next fiscal year, starting Oct. 1, includes about $1.4 billion less spending than this year's budget.
Among many cuts, the budget eliminates $25 million in subsidies for filmmaking, drops 12,600 families from welfare, cuts a clothing allowance for poor children by $9 million, eliminates 34 state police positions and cuts $20 million for local public transit.
Jeff Irwin
The House is expected to vote today on a separate school aid budget that includes deep cuts to K-12 education.
Democrats cited concerns on Wednesday that Republicans introduced a 700-page budget halfway through the morning and then later in the afternoon suspended House rules to vote it through second and third reading, quickly sending it to the Senate.
"Unfortunately, the Republican budget promises deep cuts to health care programs that serve our most vulnerable residents and concurrently cuts support for jobs programs like Graduate Medical Education and workforce training," said state Rep. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor.
For Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County, Irwin said the budget cements cuts to public safety funding in the form of reduced state revenue sharing and fire protection grants.
"In the end, they passed a budget that eliminates jobs," he said. "This budget slashes jobs in public safety and economic development."
Republicans called it the first state budget in years to be structurally sound and balanced. House Speaker Jase Bolger, R-Marshall, said the GOP is standing up for taxpayers and giving the state budget a "long-overdue reality check."
The overall budget bill passed by the House on Wednesday totals $33 billion, including $6.9 billion in general fund spending covered by state revenues and $25.7 million in spending covered by money from the federal government and other sources.
Mark Ouimet
"This proposal is a wholesale change to budgets of the past, where one-time fixes and accounting gimmicks were used instead of making the tough decisions necessary," he said.
During the budget process, Ouimet said, some Democrats proposed as much as $2 billion in general fund spending increases without offering any funding sources. He called that "the old, tired approach to budgeting that has no basis in reality."
But Irwin called it "unconscionable" to cut clothing assistance for poor children and state funding for public transit and Meals on Wheels, a program that provides home-delivered meals services to people in need.
"Democrats offered 123 amendments to help our seniors, educate our kids, keep our communities safe, and help our middle-class families," Irwin said. "Only one of these amendments passed, but was later eliminated by House Republicans."
State Rep. David Rutledge, D-Superior Township, said he's "beyond disappointed" by the budget, which he said hurts children, retirees, working families and the middle class. He said the cuts will help pay for $1.7 billion in business tax cuts proposed by Gov. Rick Snyder.
"This is a short-term approach to our state's problems, and appears to reflect an attempt to shift the costs of state government to our state's most vulnerable populations," Rutledge said.
The House bill must be reconciled with Senate spending bills. Snyder has asked state lawmakers to pass the budget by the end of May.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
leaguebus
Sat, May 7, 2011 : 1:01 a.m.
We would not be using this forum if it were not for the United States government defense spending after the war. DARPA money started the internet as we know it, it funded transistor research, computer research, and so much more. Thanks to that money the US changed the world. This was not funded by private businesses. At the same time, tax policies since Reagan have almost bankrupted many of the states, sent the Federal government on a borrowing frenzy, and created the largest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation in the world. Now the NWO, the TeaPublicans are widening that gap by at least $1T with the continued tax cuts for the rich and subsequent tax increases on the poor and middle class. Doesn't is scare anyone that all the tax increases on the poor and middle class just make the rich, richer? How much more do they need? Braggslaw, how do you reconcile what you have written with the fact that Michigan has the 17 best business climate in the country? Who did this? That vile, Democratic, anti business, do nothing, spendthrift Governor, Jennifer. Thats who LOL
outdoor6709
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 3:31 p.m.
I realize JFK was a Democrat. Look at the increase in revenue to government by the expansion of economy from his tax breaks. That was the point. At one time politicians were willing to do what is best for the country. Today politicians do what is best for their chances of getting reelected. In 2008 Senator Stabenhow verbally supported measures to expand oil production, however every chance she had to support legislation to expand drilling in ANWR, or Gulf of Mexico, offshore, in Atlantic with her vote, she voted with the Democratic party against expansion of U.S. oil production.
outdoor6709
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 2:02 p.m.
It is untrue that WWII created prosperity. <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/henderson/?articleid=8727" rel='nofollow'>http://www.antiwar.com/henderson/?articleid=8727</a> The economy grew when the Republican prewsident John F Kennedy lowered tax rates on the "evil" rich. From <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2003/08/The-Historical-Lessons-of-Lower-Tax-Rates" rel='nofollow'>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2003/08/The-Historical-Lessons-of-Lower-Tax-Rates</a> The Kennedy tax cuts President Hoover dramatically increased tax rates in the 1930s and President Roosevelt compounded the damage by pushing marginal tax rates to more than 90 percent. Recognizing that high tax rates were hindering the economy, President Kennedy proposed across-the-board tax rate reductions that reduced the top tax rate from more than 90 percent down to 70 percent. What happened? Tax revenues climbed from $94 billion in 1961 to $153 billion in 1968, an increase of 62 percent (33 percent after adjusting for inflation). According to President John F. Kennedy: Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. Corporations do not pay taxes, they hide the tax in the cost of products. Accounting 101. Politicians love corporate taxes because they can hide the cost of government. The reality is pensioners have been getting a free ride and therefore they continue to vote for the politician that will supply the most goodis. Physocolgy 101. If pensioners ar required to pay their fair shar, they will start paying attention to where money is being spent effectively and where it is being wasted.
grye
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 2:35 p.m.
First Kennedy was a Democrat. Second, I'm sure some here will say that Kennedy lowered taxes because he was rich and wanted to get richer. That seems to be the concensus amoung most.
OLDTIMER3
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 12:17 p.m.
@ EDWARD Isn't it a shame that this gtray country and state has to be at war to prosper.
OLDTIMER3
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 12:19 p.m.
That this GREAT COUNTRY & STATE, is what I typed not gtray.
Roadman
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 10:36 p.m.
Mark Ouimet is doimg a great job in getting a good and fair budget passed. I am glad he was elected.
David Briegel
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 1:16 a.m.
snicker snicker
Dennis
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 5:18 p.m.
"This state is in real trouble. Under Granholm we lost almost 1 million jobs - that is not an easy void to fill." Republicans are again using double speak. If "Government can't create jobs" then conversely Government can"t lose jobs. A million jobs left Michigan but it wasn't the Governor that shipped them out of the state. It was BUSINESS that shipped the jobs to Mexico, Taiwan, China, South America. It amazes me that people want to give business a life of it's own...."It's good for business". Sure it is but you need to remember that it's not good for Michigan or the United States. It's not the government that is raising gas prices, it's the oil companies (BUSINESS). It's not people that are reaping the benefit of billion dollar profits. Just like Engler, Snyder and his Republican thugs are cutting mental health. Remember when Engler closed state mental hospitals to save money. He expected private "business" to take up where the State stopped. They didn't! All it did was put these unfortunate people out on the street because there wasn't enough profit for business. Same way with the schools now. Snyder and his EFM's and Republican thugs want to put our schools into receivership so they can privatize (charter schools). Who gets hurt? again it's people while business profits. It will cause more unemployment and lower wages. How does that help the state regain it's tax base..It doesn't.
outdoor6709
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 2:12 p.m.
Actually you are incorrect. Government regulation costs states and US thousands of jobs. Government cancelling permits for shallow water drilling in Guld has cost US. 432,000 jobs so far. Regulations that require governmnet controcts that require prevailing wages, drives up the cost of projects and results in fewer projects, worse roads. Government policy which prohibits slant drilling under Great Lakes ( Canada slant drills under their side of GLs) means Michigan has fewer blue collar oil services jobs.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 3:28 p.m.
"Then you must love the three wars and all the jobs those create via government spending? LOL ...again, those who confuse selective Googling with truth rarely find it." I suggest you ask the employees of Newport News Shipyards (builders of the Ford-class of nuclear-powered a/c carriers and the Virginia-class nuclear sub), Lockheed-Martin (builder of the F35), Grumman-Northrup (which has literally dozens of defense-based contracts), Boeing-Sikorsky (builder of the V-22 Osprey and recipient of the contract for the USAF's new generation of air-to-air tankers), and General Dynamics (general contractor for virtually every major ground combat system in the United States Army--e.g., the M1A1 Abrams), about whether or not they think government spending creates real jobs. And, of course, these major contractors barely scratch the surface. And go talk to the civillian businesses that provide services to the nation's major military bases (e.g., Fort Hood, Texas, Norfolk Naval Station, VA, Pope AFB and Ft. Bragg, NC, among many others, to see if they think government spending creates jobs. And then go to Oscoda, MI, and see what the people of that town think of government spending that is no longer happening there with the closure of Wurtsmith AFB. Or to Marquette, MI, and see what they think of the government spending that is no longer happening with the closure of K.I. Sawyer AFB. But gotta love your comment about Google, Shep, which is now becoming de rigueur. Means you have no facts--not one--to support the fiction in your posts. Works for me. Please keep it up. Good Night and Good Luck
grye
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 2:22 p.m.
I didn't compare our defense expenditures against other countries. Only against our GNP. Read my words. Double the non-defense businesses. See the number of jobs rise. Pouring more money into defense is not going to lift the economy to the same degree.
Ed Kimball
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 1:20 p.m.
@grye: In fact, the US spends about 4.7% of its GDP on defense, higher than all but 10 other countries, the largest of whom has a GDP about 1/16 of ours. Our expenditures on defense are nearly 43% of the defense spending in the entire world. <a href="http://www.sipri.org/" rel='nofollow'>http://www.sipri.org/</a> Is that a "drop in the bucket" or the cost of being the world's policeman?
shepard145
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 3:24 a.m.
"But the fact that our economy today utterly DEPENDS on defense...." Sure thing - and they're making B-24's in Dearborn!! LOL That's a good one! But like the space program once was, we enjoy tremendous ancillary benefits from all the research and technology required to maintain a strong national defense capability. I was in central Asia on 9/11 and as we watched the towers come down in a feed through Russia, I told my equally outraged hosts that within months we would be on the ground at war in the nation responsible. Returning a week later, it was coldly amusing to see Clinton lovers who took national defense for granted as he gutted our capability, suddenly worried about public safety in this country.
grye
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:37 p.m.
I would venture to say that the defense industry is just a drop in the bucket of our gross national product. What say we double the number non-defense jobs. What will happen then?
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 3:48 p.m.
And, BTW, no, I don't love the wars. But the fact that our economy today utterly DEPENDS on defense contractors reminds the thoughtful among of President Eisenhower's admonition about the creation of a military-industrial complex. Try Googling it. It's good reading. And, if you're not into reading, there is a video, too. Good Night and Good Luck
shepard145
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 2:52 p.m.
Then you must love the three wars and all the jobs those create via government spending? LOL ...again, those who confuse selective Googling with truth rarely find it.
David Briegel
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 1:17 a.m.
lol, yeah, we really love Perpetual War Profiteering. lol For Jesus of course! lol
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 2:25 p.m.
Shep wrote: "The democrat party apparently resents the fact that private business creates jobs, not government." All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. The single largest expansion of the American economy in history happened between 1941 and 1945 due to massive government spending, massive government intervention into the economy, and the highest personal and corporate tax rates in history. Yes, all of that happened so that we could fight the Second World War, but the principle remains the same. Government spending--whether for tanks and bombers, or for roads, cops, and teachers, creates jobs. Another TeaPubliKan myth. Good Night and Good Luck
grye
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:35 p.m.
I think he is advocating that everyone give all their money to the govt. The govt will then supply the jobs so that we can give all our money to the govt. The govt will then supply the jobs so that we can give all our money to the govt. The govt wil then supply the jobs so the we can give all our money to the govt. The govt........ Why, I believe this is a broken record. If govt will control spending and allow businesses to grow, there may be proof in the pudding that less govt and sound policies will allow economic growth. The issue over the past several decades is that govt does not want to control spending.
braggslaw
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:28 p.m.
nope. WWII was a once in a century event and any attempt to apply govt. spending to today's environmnet is fundamentally flawed.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:10 p.m.
"Ok great let's start a world war." . . . which is, apparently, the only way that TeapubliKans see as an appropriate reason for government intervention into the economy. Shows the limits of your dogma. Has nothing to do with my point. To quote from the original: "Government spending--whether for tanks and bombers, or for roads, cops, and teachers, creates jobs." You, apparently, missed everything written after the word "or". Good Night and Good Luck
braggslaw
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 5:27 p.m.
Ok great let's start a world war..
Dennis
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 5:22 p.m.
If you go back a little farther you can show where the "great depression" was extended and took longer to end when Republicans cut government spending.
Townie
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 2:15 p.m.
Edward - there you go again. Citing facts and 'things'. Those kinds of things really mess up a great discussion of myths, misinformation and outright lies from Republicans and really ruin their day. Stop being so mean and let them lie shamelessly. After all Donnie Trump and Fox Snooze get to do it.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 2:20 p.m.
Expecting people to live in a reality-based universe is one of my many manifest faults. ;-) Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 2:08 p.m.
DonBee wrote: "Illinois raised business taxes, and two major corporations who were founded there are leaving. Plants are closing and jobs disappearing." Nice Fairy Tale. Clearly you are speaking of Caterpillar and Jimmy Johns. RE Caterpillar: <a href="http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=8036143" rel='nofollow'>http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=8036143</a> and <a href="http://napervillesun.suntimes.com/business/4561886-420/caterpillar-isnt-leaving-illinois-but-many-speculate-on-its-future.html" rel='nofollow'>http://napervillesun.suntimes.com/business/4561886-420/caterpillar-isnt-leaving-illinois-but-many-speculate-on-its-future.html</a> From the first link above link: "a spokesperson for Caterpillar says the letter, which they say they did not intend to be made public, was only an attempt to open a dialogue and certainly not a threat. Caterpillar officials say if Illinois doesn't shape up its business climate, the heavy equipment maker may have to ship out." Note: "may have to ship out". Hasn't happened yet. No decision has been made. Plants are still operating. Jobs not gone. And, as an aside, a good friend works for Caterpillar and he thinks there next to no chance that they are going anywhere. From the second link above: Note the Caterpillar CEO's significant backpedaling. RE Jimmy Johns (there would be a loss for certain): <a href="http://chicagoist.com/2011/01/19/how_fast_can_jimmy_johns_leave_illi.php" rel='nofollow'>http://chicagoist.com/2011/01/19/how_fast_can_jimmy_johns_leave_illi.php</a> Note: The above link suggest that the owner of Jimmy Johns is a bloviating blowhard. Would seem to be the case, because a Google search of "Jimmy Johns leaving Illinois" reveals not a single news item on the subject dated after January 20, 2011, and all of the news items that date and before are based on the owners' single statement. There is not a single piece--NOT ONE--about the decision having been made and and the move begun. I think that would have made the Chicago news. So, no "two major corporations" are NOT leaving Illinois due to the increased business taxes. And, yet once again, you have your so-called "facts" wrong, DonBee Good Night and Good Luck
leaguebus
Sat, May 7, 2011 : 12:39 a.m.
The Granholm business climate which Snyder inherited, is number 17 in the country. Not 17th from the bottom, but from the top. So he is tilting at windmills thinking that this is the reason we cannot create jobs. At the same time Caterpillar threatens Illinois over their raising their business tax but has been for the last few years hiring many more overseas than in this country. Their business here is going great guns, but they are using their large profits, to build overseas. Until the TeaBaggers realize that a lot of American businesses are never going to hire here, because they are building in China and are slowly selling the US down the drain. Why give them anything? The only kind of incentive I would give them was if they hired here. I would raise taxes on any company that showed it was going to go overseas and import their goods here.
grye
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:55 p.m.
Ghost: It's all about putting away the credit card and if there is no money in the wallet, then no extra order of fries.
braggslaw
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:49 p.m.
Unemployment is one factor and growth is another Where people are fee to fail or succeed there are will always be those who choose to fail. The south because of its history has always been behind the north e economically, but their business friendly policies are creating more jobs and growth than the north. Of course they are stuck with their jim crow and agrarian legacy but they are also attracting companies and jobs. The shift in population is north to south because of opportunity. States with the biggest budget shortfalls<a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/01/14/10-states-with-the-largest-budget-shortfalls" rel='nofollow'>http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/01/14/10-states-with-the-largest-budget-shortfalls</a> California $21,300 Illinois 17,000 New Jersey 10,500 Texas 10,000 New York 8,200 Connecticut 3,800 Minnesota 3,800 North Carolina 3,000 Ohio 3,000 Florida (tie) 2,500 Oregon (tie) 2,500 The northern states are counting on economic inertia but that will only work for so long.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:07 p.m.
10 of the 14 worst states for unemployment (in ascending order, NV, FL, MS, KY, GA, SC, NC, ID, TN, and AZ) are low tax freedom to work states. Looks like the business climates in those states aren't very good. And gotta love your example of Texas, which is 23rd. High tax pro-union states like NY, PA, MA, WI, and MN have better unemployment rates. Oh, and by the way, Texas, which has had a RepubliKan governor since 1995, and in which both houses of the legislature are DOMINATED (not just controlled) by RepubliKans, faced a $15-27 billion deficit this year. Source: <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/19/news/economy/texas_budget_deficit/index.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/19/news/economy/texas_budget_deficit/index.htm</a> Gee, how could that be possible in a well-run RepubliKan state. And, to get there, they slashed spending on public education, community colleges, and universities. That will certainly attract to Texas those companies in the information economy that depend on an educated workforce and whose workforce wants quality education available at all levels for their children. So much for TeaPubliKan dogma. Good Night and Good Luck
braggslaw
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 5:21 p.m.
I think you are missing the point... Boeing is moving jobs to South Carolina because of the harsh business environment in Washington. This is an accepted truth. There is also a trend for businesses and people to move south. While much of the south is still poor the movement of jobs and companies to the south has improved their lives. BMW built plants in South Carolina, Merceds in Alabama etc. etc. These companies did not care about the unemployment rate. you also have to take into account that the south has been historically depressed when compared to the north...because of its agrarian roots and historical legacy. BUT the south is growing faster than the north and states like Georgia and Texas are becoming the destinations of choice for capital. so much for tealiberaionapulicanliberallcan dogma
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 4:55 p.m.
South Carolina has such a good business environment with its low taxes and being a right-to-work state that it currently is 42/51 (counting D.C.) in unemployment. <a href="http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm</a> So much for TeapublKan myths about taxes and unions. Good Night and Good Luck
braggslaw
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 4:47 p.m.
I think a better analogy is the trickle of aerospace jobs to South Carolina from Seattle WA. Boeing at some point will move all of its manufacturing to South Carolina because of unions and taxes.
DonBee
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 1:16 p.m.
Illinois raised business taxes, and two major corporations who were founded there are leaving. Plants are closing and jobs disappearing. Whether this is a direct result of business taxes being raised, I can not tell you. The Michigan Business Tax was a sigular mess, it only benefited the accounting profession. Over the last 8 years Governor Granholm gave away hundreds of millions in possible business tax income by offering abatements, and special treatment. Whether you like what Governor Snyder is doing or not for business taxes it does do 3 things: 1) closes thousands of loopholes, abatements and special deals 2) reduces the complexity of the tax system, making it easier to comply 3) stops double taxation on small business income 4) stops small businesses that lost money from paying taxes on profits they never had 5) removes the inventory and equipment taxes that stopped companies from putting new equipment in factories With the simplification comes a period of "breaking in" where the abatements need to expire, so over the next 3 years more money will be raised from the business tax, this year will be the low year, even if the economy gets no better. It will take a year to see if this is working or not. But the early unemployment data since the first of the year - Michigan seems to be improving faster than other Mid-West states - However Michigan had a lot more improving to do. Governor Snyder has made mistakes and he has compromised on a number of issues. He started at the bottom of a deep hole with a teaspoon. So far I see a lot of folks kicking dirt down on him, rather than helping to dig out of the hole.
shepard145
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 1 p.m.
The democrat party blew it! You were VOTED OUT OF OFFICE partially because you had a chance to transition into many of these cuts over the last 8 years but lacked the political intelligence, courage and maturity to do so. Now you sit back and carp about what you "would have done". WELL YOU DIDN'T! DEMOCRATS FAILED US. Divisive, nonsensical mantras like "….serve our most vulnerable residents.." no longer explain away spending tax dollars Michigan does not have. With the baby boom generation retiring and general demographic shifts, we will be forced to return to an age of self reliance and hard work so Michigan better get used to it. The democrat party apparently resents the fact that private business creates jobs, not government. Rather then continuing to lie about economic fundamentals and push your divisive class warfare nonsense, democrats better figure out soon that what's good for private business is good for jobs and is good for workers. Those expecting cradle to grave hand outs might start looking at wealthier states.
shepard145
Sat, May 7, 2011 : 12:57 p.m.
Sure thing - you think the democrats succeed and I'm the one detached from reality!! LOL More Kool Aid!!
David Briegel
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 3:47 a.m.
This post shows the same detachment from reality as your last one. lol An inability to differentiate State from National is a symptom. lol
shepard145
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 3:06 a.m.
Then you were very pleased with Granholm's work over the last 8 years - the nation leading unemployment, population loss and the state's economic model entering the national conversation as what NOT to do? LOL Clearly many who write here are clueless about business and broader economics and I'm glad it's not my job to educate you. Those of you who are Pelosi/Obama fans who think the economy will be restored via unemployment/welfare checks and the government continuing to borrow $138,000,000 per hour are no longer taken seriously. Those senators who share your view of economics will continue the 2010 trend, returning home in disgrace where they can do far less harm to our nation selling aluminum siding...
David Briegel
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 1:42 a.m.
Your dreaded class warfare is precisely what has been waged on the American middle class and working poor for the last 30 years. lol Only our Oligarchs and rulers expect cradle to grave hand outs from their hired hands in that evil gubbermint. lol For 30 years we have had to listen to that trickle down lie. No More. It's a lie. It's not true. It's false. No matter how many times you repeat it the facts are staring us in the face. Believe your eyes. Even you can see the failures. Only a TeaPublican could possibly lol.
Bertha Venation
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 5:34 p.m.
Thanks, Shep. for telling it like it really is!
mojo
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 12:05 p.m.
This state is in real trouble. Under Granholm we lost almost 1 million jobs - that is not an easy void to fill. If Michigan can stabilize the tax-base, then the State can go on another spending spree and buy up all the "programs" it wants. Until jobs come back and wages with them and the tax basis with that - it will only get worse. Nobody likes hand-outs, even people who get them - handouts are demoralizing - it is to accept the fact that someone can't make it on their own. That they have failed somehow. That they can't pay there own way for whatever reason. This does not build dignity, nor skills, nor does it build self-confidence. It builds just the opposite. A safety net is needed, to be sure. It helps solve some problems but does it generate other problems?? In the end, jobs would be a better "State Program" than give-aways or other freebies.
Roger Roth
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 8:19 p.m.
Granholm was MI's CEO, not GM, Ford and Chrysler. The demise of the Big Three rests squarely on the shoulders of their CEO's who refused to recognize market inroads from Japan and the reasons for them--for decades. Now, finally, they seem to be catching on, only after tens of thousands of high paying mnfg. jobs have gone south, literally and figuratively and after the US gov. and courts gave them the green light to bust the unions and ditch their pensions and health insurance.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 1:44 p.m.
Why not blame Republicans who controlled the state legislature in Granholm's first term, who controlled the state Senate in her second, and who made clear they had not intention whatsoever to work with the governor to achieve her legislative agenda? Or did I miss the part in the State Constitution where the governor gets to wave her magic wand and make everything better? Good Night and Good Luck
mojo
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 1:09 p.m.
Why not just blame Elvis? Everyone saw Big Detroit Auto losing market share - Granholm knew the problem well before she was elected Governor - She was in charge of this State and decided to kick-the-can down-the-road with accounting tricks while taking Big Union campaign donations for re-election -instead of working to fix the grossly out of balance cost problem. Those 1 million jobs lost in Michigan are squarely on Granworms 8 years as Governor and her missing leadership during that period. She never made a tough call - and only raised taxes. Single State Recessions belong to the Governor.
Roger Roth
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 12:58 p.m.
Correction, mojo, "under Bush, Congress and the inept Big Three Management"
Roger Roth
Thu, May 5, 2011 : noon
On second thought, scratch the minimum wage worker from that list. They serve a very important function in the almighty "financial order."
Roger Roth
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 11:38 a.m.
Exactly what does a state like MI look like after the ax wielding is over? We now know that a lot of kids, poorer by $9million, may be shoeless. I just don't get the Republican vision. Can you paint me an accurate picture? I'm a visual learner. May I propose another option to balance the state budget to my Republican friends? Buy a one-way bus ticket for all those who live at or below poverty level in this very moral state, all those at minimum wage, all those who can't make it on their own and send them away, so they're not a liability to the all-important, almighty "financial order" of this place. Then, you can have the life you want, need and deserve.
grye
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 2:27 p.m.
If they need to leave Michigan to find a job, then so be it. You need to do what is best for yourself. I am hoping the Snyder is creating policies that will encourge businesses to grow and new businesses to start. Increasing everyone's taxing certainly will not do the same.
grye
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 2:25 p.m.
I don't stand around and complain. I get up and do something about it. It appears that many on this site would rather wait for Ed McMahon to show up at their door. Well if you are not aware, Ed McMahon is dead. So pull up your boot straps and be productive.
Roger Roth
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 9:49 p.m.
Glad things are going well for you, gyre. Apparently you have the formula to turn this thing around! BTW, quite a large # of people have left MI. Is that a good thing?
grye
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 2:47 p.m.
There are some people with issues that need social help. There are others that have lost their jobs and are not willing to do what is necessary to find work. This is a big country with 50 different States. No one is chained to the ground. If it becomes necessary to leave Michigan and work somewhere else, then so be it. If you choose to sit here until the job fairy comes knocking on your door, I have no sympathy. I moved to Michigan not by choice but to start a job after my last one went away in Georgia. I moved from Los Angeles to take a job in Georgia. There are plenty of jobs available all over the United States. Get out and look. Quit whining. And if you have to sell your house, it is better to have a job and be productive than pan handle for your next meal.
Mike D.
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 11:37 a.m.
Republicans eliminate taxes on businesses and the the rich and then claim there's no money for social services and education. It's called top-down economics AKA Reagenomics AKA trickle-down economics. The claim is that the rich will create more jobs if they are even richer, but the only thing that trickles down to working folks is warm and yellow. The reality since Reagen is that the rich have gotten *much* richer while the poor have gotten *much* poorer. The new jobs never happened; they were shipped by Snyder and pals overseas. Yes middle-class folks still votes for these Republicans because they are fooled into thinking their own taxes will be reduced. Amazing.
grye
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 6:30 p.m.
Ghost: Change. Same reason Obama was elected. The public wanted change. Regarding fiscal responsibility - If you remember, last time there was any fiscal responsibility was during the Clinton administration when we had a Democratic president and a Republican controlled congress. This seems to have brought together the best of both sides. We were reducing the deficit until Bush took over and some idiots decided to fly airplanes into buildings. It all went to "you know where" in a hand basket after that.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 3:01 p.m.
". . . something that hasn't happened with the federal or state govt for many years." Given that Republicans controlled both houses of the state legislature for most of Engler's time in office and for Granholm's first term, and continued to control the State Senate for the second term, and given that the National Debt more than doubled during the Bush presidency, why on God's green earth would anyone think that Republicans are the solution to the problem of deficits, debts, and spending? Good Night and Good Luck
grye
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 2:38 p.m.
Middle class people voted for Snyder because they wanted fiscal responsibility, something that hasn't happened with the federal or state govt for many years. Deficit spending has put us at a dissadvantage. To rectify this problem will take some hardships, just as it would if you wanted to pay off your high credit card debt. Something has to go. It is not easy. It would be great if the number of businesses in Michigan were to double overnight thus increasing the tax revenues available, but that is not going to happen. So we as a people must tighten our belts and live within our means. Of course if you have any better suggestions other than take all the money from the rich and give it to the poor, or take all the profits of businesses so they can't grow, then by all means, tell us.
tdw
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 12:06 p.m.
Could you please point out what jobs shipped overseas ? If it's what I think you're talking about he was long gone from the company when that happened.
braggslaw
Thu, May 5, 2011 : 10:44 a.m.
"Hurt" "harm" "vulnerable" "unconscionable" What really "hurts", "harms" a "vulnerable" Michigan is the "unconscionable" spending that we have engaged in. The "vulnerable" will never be protected unless Michigan can get its financial house in order.