Support for proposals 5 and 6 not in Michigan's best interest
Vote No on Proposal 5 and Proposal 6.
Both are sponsored by Ambassador Bridge owner and monopolist Matty Moroun.
Proposal 5 would hamstring our government by preventing the state from raising taxes without a two-third's majority vote of the legislature. The paralysis created by this amendment would be tragic for our state. It may also affect our bond rating, making it more expensive for state, and local, government to borrow money for needed capital improvements and also is opposed by mainstream politicians from both parties.
Moroun is supporting Proposal 5 in a back-scratching arrangement with Americans for Prosperity, a tea party group that helped Moroun oppose the Gateway Bridge Proposal because it would be a government project.
Proposal 6 is Moroun's effort to preserve his monopoly on the Detroit-Windsor border crossing. The bridge carries about a quarter of the U.S-Canada truck traffic (the tunnel is too small for many semi-trucks). Despite the calims of Moroun's ad campaign, the bridge will be funded by the Canadian Government which will use tolls to repay the loans. The U.S. federal government will be responsible for putting in and staffing a new customs plaza. There will be no direct cost to the Michigan state government.
Both of these proposals are one man trying to push our state around. Don't let him.
Joe Dohm
Ann Arbor
Comments
Roger Kuhlman
Mon, Oct 22, 2012 : 3:50 a.m.
Vote yes on Proposal 6. Stop Michigan and the Obama administration from wasting taxpayer money on building a new international bridge to Canada from Detroit. There is no existing demonstrated need for a second bridge to Canada and this bridge is just another pork-barrel spending project that benefits special interests like the Unions and adds to our Federal Debt. When you have $16 trillion in federal debt as does the United States, the government needs to frugal and only spend on projects that are absolutely needed!
Sue
Sun, Oct 21, 2012 : 4:15 p.m.
I would never want the government owning everything and running the show, and I do believe in free enterprise, however, privately owned monopoly's are usually not good either, especially on something as essential as an international bridge. And I have absolutely no respect dishonesty in politics or business, so I'm voting NO!
jns131
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:53 p.m.
OMG! Someone with some common sense in voting no on this. Maroun needs to be put in his place or else he will own the state. Good post.
BAM
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 4:51 p.m.
The only reason I'm voting NO on Prop 5 and Prop 6 is because %#$@ NO! isn't on the ballot.
jns131
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:54 p.m.
You can put that on there. It is in the space marked other.
bobslowson
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:26 p.m.
Pretty disturbing when our government starts to go the way of New Right Paul Weyrich / Breitbart / ALEC and all these other conservative groups that want to change constitutions to say marriage is one man one woman (so they can deny rights to same sex couples) based on some fairy tale, written in some book, by some so called prophet. If we can change the constitution for that. I say we change it for all these proposals . So voting No, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No is a vote for the people!
Ghost of Tom Joad
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 7:51 p.m.
few things bring republicans and democrats together in Michigan quite like hatred for the Moroun family
BAM
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 6:03 p.m.
No Doubt Ghost. I gota say tho, nothing irritates me more than having to agree with Snyder!
jns131
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:55 p.m.
The guy has corrupted so many and yet he says his hands are clean. This guy needs to fix his Windsor Bridge before it goes falling down.
Rick Stevens
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:37 a.m.
But check out how many Republicans took campaign money from Matty and did his bidding by blocking Snyder. Money talks. Just check your rep's campaign funding and you'll see the Moroun money there in various forms (like from his wife). Lot of money. But that's our 'free enterprise' system right - the best government money can buy. We can make it wasted money by voting NO.
JimmyD
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 11:47 p.m.
Ain't it heart-warming?
fjord
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 7:47 p.m.
You know how the state of California's finances are all screwed up and they're in big, big trouble? Do you know how that happened? If Proposal 5 passes, you'll find out firsthand. VOTE NO ON 5!
JimmyD
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 11:45 p.m.
Fjord: Yep, Calfornia is a mess, partly due to the super-majority rule. Maybe someday it'll work out but for now I'd prefer to let them blaze the path. (Ain't it great to have 49 States to watch work this stuff out and then pick the best answer?) Until then, Down on 5.
michael Limmer
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 11:35 p.m.
Agreed. It will not slow down or stop spending, it will only increase borrowing. If it only takes 50.1% to increase spending, but 75% to increase taxes, well, California here we come.
walker101
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 7:42 p.m.
Sounds like you would only say yes if you belong to the 1% club.
Halter
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 11:18 p.m.
Actually, that isn't true at all -- The 1% club (ME, for example), are voting YES for Prop 1, and NO for all other proposals)...but that has nothing to do with these terrible proposals....its pretty much going to be unanimous as they get voted down
1bit
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 7:33 p.m.
Vote no on these. These are terrible proposals that restricts the ability of our governing bodies to govern. They are a step towards endless budget deficits and a stranglehold on any bridge-building we may ever want to do. We elect legislators for a reason, let them do their job.
jns131
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:56 p.m.
I say keep your hands off my amendments.
Jim
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 6:43 p.m.
Joe is correct is saying these proposals should be voted down. But, I would like to add that all the proposals should be voted down. Prop 1 is Emergency Managers law that the state voted to extended rights for EM's. Prop 2 thru 6 are to repeal and install new laws that protect small groups. This is the wrong way to fix problems. Just rewrite the state constitution to protect groups that do not need extra protections.
Joe Dohm
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 6:46 p.m.
Jim has a good point. We all need to think about the correct relationship between statute and the constitution, and what should be in each.
Halter
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 6:25 p.m.
I am 100% with you, Joe -- vote NO on both....per recent polling, they are actually significantly going to lose at this point, at least on 6...5 is a huge problem. I already elect my officials to make those decisions.
Goober
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 5:50 p.m.
So, Matty pushed our politicians around and got both proposals in front of the voters? I don't think so! I am voting YES for both.
Angry Moderate
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 8:59 a.m.
They pay people $1 per signature to stand on the sidewalk and say "Would you like to make it harder for the government to raise your taxes?". It's not really that rigorous of a system.
kathryn
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:38 a.m.
Of course, some people will believe (or sign) anything.
Itchy
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 8:44 p.m.
Let me get this straight. Matty isn't the only one who thinks both proposals would be good for Michigan - eh?
Cory
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 6:41 p.m.
Actually, he didn't push the politicians around to get them on the ballot, he just turned in enough signatures. You could have a proposal that says "Everyone must wear a hat on Monday" if you got enough signatures, and call it Prop 313. Politicians have nothing to do with the voting in this case.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 6:14 p.m.
Goob...Of course he did! If you lie enough with millions and millions and millions of dollars in advertising, you can convince a lot of people to go along. It's the Big Lie theory. You know, pick big lies, and then say them over and over and over, and eventually they get to be "truth." Sorry you don't get it, Goob, but Andy and Aunt Bea are voting NO.
David Briegel
Wed, Oct 17, 2012 : 5:43 p.m.
I agree with you Joe.