The following story describes a situation where an investigation of the behaviour of two State Senators done by their staff found both Senators "innocent". This is a staff that works for the Senate and their eventual jobs may depend on these Senators. Maybe the state should look at all of the various ethics boards or commissions and make sure that the membership is not made up of the people who are regulated by the ethics board or are paid by the individual professional being investigated. This should also include the prohibition of members of the same profession serving on the ethics board for the profession that they govern. Doctors, lawyers, judges, nurses, etc., all have a majority of their profession on their ethics boards or commissions.
Here is the news report on the Senators:
LANSING — A state Senate investigation into a heated exchange between two members in a Capitol elevator June 17 found “insufficient evidence” of behavior that would require disciplinary action, Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, announced today.
triggerAd(1,PaginationPage,2);
Bishop, in a letter sent to Sen. Irma Clark-Coleman, D-Detroit, said he would not take any formal action against Sen. Roger Kahn, R-Saginaw, who Clark-Coleman had accused of acting in a threatening manner toward her during an argument over state spending.
An investigation of the incident by Senate staff concluded the two had a loud and angry, and brief, confrontation. But there was little evidence beyond Clark-Coleman’s assertion that Kahn had given his colleague reason to be fearful, the report said.
Clark-Coleman told investigators Kahn was so angry he “looked like a blowfish” and that she feared he would strike her during the exchange. But other witnesses — there were two other senators and an aide in the elevator — said that, while both Kahn and Clark-Coleman were extremely agitated, the encounter did not appear to verge on violence.
The two senators clashed after a committee hearing in which the Republican majority voted to cut funding for Wayne County’s community mental health programs. Clark-Coleman said the vote was heartless and discriminatory.
End of Story......
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
Mental Health Cuts
Governor Granholm has proposed cutting $40 million from non Medicaid community mental health programs.
The Senate passed a 2009-10 budget that cut $61.8 million from that budget--$21 million more than the Governor proposed.
The state is trying to cut $1.8 billion from the 09-10 budget that must be finalized before October 1st when the new sate fiscal year begins. Some believe the deficit will grow to over $2 billion before the budget gets finalized.
This year the state will spend $332 million to fund the 46 community mental health srvice providers that deliver treatment. in 2008 more than 230,00 Michigan citizens were helped through these programs.
Many are concerned that as unemployment soars (over 15%) more mental health needs will be confronted by local communities and people may leave people with unmet mental health needs.
The Senate passed a 2009-10 budget that cut $61.8 million from that budget--$21 million more than the Governor proposed.
The state is trying to cut $1.8 billion from the 09-10 budget that must be finalized before October 1st when the new sate fiscal year begins. Some believe the deficit will grow to over $2 billion before the budget gets finalized.
This year the state will spend $332 million to fund the 46 community mental health srvice providers that deliver treatment. in 2008 more than 230,00 Michigan citizens were helped through these programs.
Many are concerned that as unemployment soars (over 15%) more mental health needs will be confronted by local communities and people may leave people with unmet mental health needs.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Michigan's Tax Structure Needs Reform and Sate will have 24% less revenue in 2010 FY.
(AP)
Senate Fiscal Agency director Gary Olson says money collected both for the general fund and the school aid fund are falling much faster than the state economy is shrinking, in part because residents and successful businesses are shelling out a smaller proportion of their personal income to the state.
"The revenue as a percent of personal income has just been plummeting," says Olson, who has headed the nonpartisan agency for 18 years. "These are very, very significant declines."
The percentage of their personal income that state residents and profitable businesses pay in state taxes has dropped over a full percentage point since hitting a high of 8.4 percent in the mid- and late 1990s. So far this fiscal year, the rate is 7.3 percent.
Residents aren't necessarily paying fewer tax dollars. But as their incomes have risen, they're giving the state a smaller proportion of their money -- 2 full percentage points less than they did a decade ago, Olson says.
Much of the reason for the drop is that Michigan has been cutting taxes and adding exemptions, essentially forcing state government to shrink. That's a welcome move to some, but a concern to others who worry the state is cutting too deeply into services such as education, policing and the safety net for the poor.
The state tax system also has failed to change as taxpayers' behavior has changed. Consumers are spending less of their personal income on sales taxes, for instance, because they're buying fewer goods, which are taxed, and more services, which are not.
"Our tax system, for a variety of reasons, is not keeping up with the economy," Olson says. "Part of it is tax cuts, but part of it is that we are not taxing things that are growing in the economy."
A number of public policy groups have been studying Michigan's tax structure, and a consensus is forming that some type of change is needed.
Among the possibilities being discussed so far: Dropping the overall sales tax rate and extending it to services; changing to a graduated income tax that would collect a higher percentage from the better-off; and changing the gasoline tax to generate more money for roads and bridges.
The revenue drop-off has contributed to the state's growing budget hole. Gov. Jennifer Granholm and state lawmakers have cut more than $400 million from the current budget and must find a way to make up a $2.7 billion shortfall in the budget year that starts Oct. 1, with a $1.8 billion deficit in the general fund and a $900 million shortfall in school aid fund.
Much of the deficit likely will be filled with federal recovery dollars. But those dollars disappear in 2011, when the state is expected to be facing an even bigger deficit.It's already in serious trouble because tax revenues have fallen dramatically in the past two years.
In the 2007-08 fiscal year, the state netted $9.4 billion for the general fund, its main checkbook. But it's expected to get 24 percent less in the budget year that starts Oct. 1. Net revenue for K-12 schools is expected to drop about 8 percent, to around $12.1 billion in the next fiscal year.
That means $3.2 billion less is being collected than two years ago for state programs ranging from prisons to child protection to K-12 schools and help for seniors, universities and local governments.
A 1978 constitutional amendment caps state spending at 9.49 percent of personal income, but tax revenue has dropped so low, the state could spend $7.5 billion more without hitting the limit, Olson says.
"These are very, very significant declines in revenues," he says. "There's been a pretty dramatic downsizing of state government."
He warns that, even when the economy improves, state revenues won't keep up with the growing prosperity.
State Sen. Gilda Jacobs, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, is starting to hold public hearings around the state to explain to voters that Michigan must change its tax structure if it's going to be able to support its schools, universities and state services in the years ahead.
"It's hard to go and tell people we really don't have a high tax burden when ... people are reeling from the effects of this bad economy," the Huntington Woods lawmaker said. "But if we're really going to be honest about how we're going to fix things, we need ... to give the people the correct facts so that when we do make changes, they'll understand."
House Republican Leader Kevin Elsenheimer of Kewadin agrees the state needs to revise its tax structure, but not as a way to solve the upcoming year's budget troubles.
"As we found out two years ago, it can be very messy, even disastrous, to try to solve budget problems through changes in tax policy," he said, referring to 2007 tax increases passed in a rush in the middle of the night to avoid a government shutdown. "Let's get the budget done and then start focusing on these major reforms."
Mike Boulus of the Presidents Council, which represents Michigan's 15 state universities, says the state needs to look beyond the quick fixes of its recent budget deals, and even beyond the proposals for the upcoming budget to close tax loopholes and cut spending.
"That might get us through this year, but it won't get us through next," Boulus said. "At what point do you deal with the broader issue of restructuring our whole system? Our tax system needs to be addressed."
On Wednesday, 27 of the state's human service advocacy groups ranging from the Michigan Catholic Conference to the Food Bank Council of Michigan and Michigan's Children warned Granholm and lawmakers that any more cuts to the state's safety net would leave many Michigan families without the resources to get by.
Jacobs said she's telling constituents about the options that could help Michigan change its tax structure to meet its future needs, and hopes taxpayers and her fellow lawmakers realize that trying to move forward with the current tax structure isn't going to work.
"We need to have a tax structure that is responsive to a growing economy. We don't have that right now," she says.
***********
Many of these tax structure issues will have to be put on the ballot for a vote of the people. There is a big push for a graduated income tax instead of our flat tax in Michigan. Others seem to be willing to go to a lower sales tax rate and a new tax rate for a new service tax, but in exchange want Michigan's corporate tax, the Michigan Business Tax, eliminated. So lots of big, big revenue/tax issues for the legislature to debate. They do not return to session until after Labor Day and have not left themselves much time to resolve these huge issues--not to mention time to convince Michigan voters to support these tax reforms when they are on the ballot in 2010. Todays legislature's method of having all issues debated and resolve only via Legislative Leadership and leaving the vast majority of legislators out of the debate is not suited to getting a consensus that will then go back home to the neighborhoods and sell the reforms to the voters.
Senate Fiscal Agency director Gary Olson says money collected both for the general fund and the school aid fund are falling much faster than the state economy is shrinking, in part because residents and successful businesses are shelling out a smaller proportion of their personal income to the state.
"The revenue as a percent of personal income has just been plummeting," says Olson, who has headed the nonpartisan agency for 18 years. "These are very, very significant declines."
The percentage of their personal income that state residents and profitable businesses pay in state taxes has dropped over a full percentage point since hitting a high of 8.4 percent in the mid- and late 1990s. So far this fiscal year, the rate is 7.3 percent.
Residents aren't necessarily paying fewer tax dollars. But as their incomes have risen, they're giving the state a smaller proportion of their money -- 2 full percentage points less than they did a decade ago, Olson says.
Much of the reason for the drop is that Michigan has been cutting taxes and adding exemptions, essentially forcing state government to shrink. That's a welcome move to some, but a concern to others who worry the state is cutting too deeply into services such as education, policing and the safety net for the poor.
The state tax system also has failed to change as taxpayers' behavior has changed. Consumers are spending less of their personal income on sales taxes, for instance, because they're buying fewer goods, which are taxed, and more services, which are not.
"Our tax system, for a variety of reasons, is not keeping up with the economy," Olson says. "Part of it is tax cuts, but part of it is that we are not taxing things that are growing in the economy."
A number of public policy groups have been studying Michigan's tax structure, and a consensus is forming that some type of change is needed.
Among the possibilities being discussed so far: Dropping the overall sales tax rate and extending it to services; changing to a graduated income tax that would collect a higher percentage from the better-off; and changing the gasoline tax to generate more money for roads and bridges.
The revenue drop-off has contributed to the state's growing budget hole. Gov. Jennifer Granholm and state lawmakers have cut more than $400 million from the current budget and must find a way to make up a $2.7 billion shortfall in the budget year that starts Oct. 1, with a $1.8 billion deficit in the general fund and a $900 million shortfall in school aid fund.
Much of the deficit likely will be filled with federal recovery dollars. But those dollars disappear in 2011, when the state is expected to be facing an even bigger deficit.It's already in serious trouble because tax revenues have fallen dramatically in the past two years.
In the 2007-08 fiscal year, the state netted $9.4 billion for the general fund, its main checkbook. But it's expected to get 24 percent less in the budget year that starts Oct. 1. Net revenue for K-12 schools is expected to drop about 8 percent, to around $12.1 billion in the next fiscal year.
That means $3.2 billion less is being collected than two years ago for state programs ranging from prisons to child protection to K-12 schools and help for seniors, universities and local governments.
A 1978 constitutional amendment caps state spending at 9.49 percent of personal income, but tax revenue has dropped so low, the state could spend $7.5 billion more without hitting the limit, Olson says.
"These are very, very significant declines in revenues," he says. "There's been a pretty dramatic downsizing of state government."
He warns that, even when the economy improves, state revenues won't keep up with the growing prosperity.
State Sen. Gilda Jacobs, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, is starting to hold public hearings around the state to explain to voters that Michigan must change its tax structure if it's going to be able to support its schools, universities and state services in the years ahead.
"It's hard to go and tell people we really don't have a high tax burden when ... people are reeling from the effects of this bad economy," the Huntington Woods lawmaker said. "But if we're really going to be honest about how we're going to fix things, we need ... to give the people the correct facts so that when we do make changes, they'll understand."
House Republican Leader Kevin Elsenheimer of Kewadin agrees the state needs to revise its tax structure, but not as a way to solve the upcoming year's budget troubles.
"As we found out two years ago, it can be very messy, even disastrous, to try to solve budget problems through changes in tax policy," he said, referring to 2007 tax increases passed in a rush in the middle of the night to avoid a government shutdown. "Let's get the budget done and then start focusing on these major reforms."
Mike Boulus of the Presidents Council, which represents Michigan's 15 state universities, says the state needs to look beyond the quick fixes of its recent budget deals, and even beyond the proposals for the upcoming budget to close tax loopholes and cut spending.
"That might get us through this year, but it won't get us through next," Boulus said. "At what point do you deal with the broader issue of restructuring our whole system? Our tax system needs to be addressed."
On Wednesday, 27 of the state's human service advocacy groups ranging from the Michigan Catholic Conference to the Food Bank Council of Michigan and Michigan's Children warned Granholm and lawmakers that any more cuts to the state's safety net would leave many Michigan families without the resources to get by.
Jacobs said she's telling constituents about the options that could help Michigan change its tax structure to meet its future needs, and hopes taxpayers and her fellow lawmakers realize that trying to move forward with the current tax structure isn't going to work.
"We need to have a tax structure that is responsive to a growing economy. We don't have that right now," she says.
***********
Many of these tax structure issues will have to be put on the ballot for a vote of the people. There is a big push for a graduated income tax instead of our flat tax in Michigan. Others seem to be willing to go to a lower sales tax rate and a new tax rate for a new service tax, but in exchange want Michigan's corporate tax, the Michigan Business Tax, eliminated. So lots of big, big revenue/tax issues for the legislature to debate. They do not return to session until after Labor Day and have not left themselves much time to resolve these huge issues--not to mention time to convince Michigan voters to support these tax reforms when they are on the ballot in 2010. Todays legislature's method of having all issues debated and resolve only via Legislative Leadership and leaving the vast majority of legislators out of the debate is not suited to getting a consensus that will then go back home to the neighborhoods and sell the reforms to the voters.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Ballot Initiatives: bypassing the legislature
The Michigan Democratic Party is proposing a series of ballot initiatives and is looking to put some or all of them on the ballot in 2010. The highlight of this proposal is a $10 minimum wage (currently $7.40)--which would make the Michigan minimum wage the highest in the nation. This would be a 35 percent increase. The ballot proposals would bypass the legislature and go directly to the people in 2010.
Which ballot proposals to pursue for the ballot would be picked via an online survey and/or a statewide poll.
The Michigan Chamber of Commerce, called the proposals "anti-jobs, anti-growth" and said they may be used by economic development directors in other Midwestern states to discourage businesses from locating or expanding in Michigan.
The Democratic Party ballot proposals include:
• Require all employers to provide health coverage or pay a fine.
• Increase unemployment benefits by $100 a week, extend benefits by six months and make all workers eligible for unemployment. The maximum unemployment benefit is now $387 a week.
• Cut utility rates by 20 percent.
• Impose a one-year moratorium on home foreclosures.
Many believe that the Democratic Party will only circulate petitions to put one or two proposals on the ballot--after polling. Circulating of the petitions for signatures would start in early 2010.
Many Republicans feel that the Democratic Party is just trying to get the base Democratic vote excited and interested enough to increase their party vote in the 2010 elections.
This proposal also reflects the increasing disappointment in the legislature's ability to get "the job done" or to make difficult or controversial decisions--especially in an upcoming election year when the entire House, Senate, the Governor position, the Attorney General and Secretary of State positions are all up for election in 2010 (with no incumbents on the ballot, except in the House, and eight in the Senate). Due to term limits only 8 of 38 State Senators would be returning after the November 2010 election, so 30 senate seats are open and control of the Senate could change with this many vacancies.
Michigan could see a ballot that looks like the California ballot--long, complicated and multiple ballot proposals. Other groups are also considering ballot questions and are planning to circulate petitions: tax reform (service tax, repeal of Michigan Business tax, graduated income tax, etc), same sex marriage, right to counsel funding, etc., etc..
Looks like 2010 might be a good year for pollsters, campaign managers and staff, public relations companies and lobbyists. So what is new?
Which ballot proposals to pursue for the ballot would be picked via an online survey and/or a statewide poll.
The Michigan Chamber of Commerce, called the proposals "anti-jobs, anti-growth" and said they may be used by economic development directors in other Midwestern states to discourage businesses from locating or expanding in Michigan.
The Democratic Party ballot proposals include:
• Require all employers to provide health coverage or pay a fine.
• Increase unemployment benefits by $100 a week, extend benefits by six months and make all workers eligible for unemployment. The maximum unemployment benefit is now $387 a week.
• Cut utility rates by 20 percent.
• Impose a one-year moratorium on home foreclosures.
Many believe that the Democratic Party will only circulate petitions to put one or two proposals on the ballot--after polling. Circulating of the petitions for signatures would start in early 2010.
Many Republicans feel that the Democratic Party is just trying to get the base Democratic vote excited and interested enough to increase their party vote in the 2010 elections.
This proposal also reflects the increasing disappointment in the legislature's ability to get "the job done" or to make difficult or controversial decisions--especially in an upcoming election year when the entire House, Senate, the Governor position, the Attorney General and Secretary of State positions are all up for election in 2010 (with no incumbents on the ballot, except in the House, and eight in the Senate). Due to term limits only 8 of 38 State Senators would be returning after the November 2010 election, so 30 senate seats are open and control of the Senate could change with this many vacancies.
Michigan could see a ballot that looks like the California ballot--long, complicated and multiple ballot proposals. Other groups are also considering ballot questions and are planning to circulate petitions: tax reform (service tax, repeal of Michigan Business tax, graduated income tax, etc), same sex marriage, right to counsel funding, etc., etc..
Looks like 2010 might be a good year for pollsters, campaign managers and staff, public relations companies and lobbyists. So what is new?
New Taxes
Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the largest business advocacy group in Michigan, has proposed raising the Michigan gasoline tax and vehicle registration fees. The increase would raise of $1.5 billion a year for road construction/repairs and for mass transit improvements. The last time it was raised was in 1997.
Republicans in the legislature have said no new taxes. New taxes appear to be off the table as the legislature and the Governor negotiate the FY 2010 state budget (begins October 1, 2009). The Chamber and former Senate Republican Majority Leader Ken Sikkema have said that Republicans could still remain the party of fiscal restraint and tax increase resistance if they support this gas tax increase.
The gas tax and the vehicle registration revenue sure would put people back to work on road projects, bridges and mass transit repairs/expansions. Would also result in workers coming off of unemployment compensation and off public assistance.
Republicans in the legislature have said no new taxes. New taxes appear to be off the table as the legislature and the Governor negotiate the FY 2010 state budget (begins October 1, 2009). The Chamber and former Senate Republican Majority Leader Ken Sikkema have said that Republicans could still remain the party of fiscal restraint and tax increase resistance if they support this gas tax increase.
The gas tax and the vehicle registration revenue sure would put people back to work on road projects, bridges and mass transit repairs/expansions. Would also result in workers coming off of unemployment compensation and off public assistance.
Shutting Down Government
Interesting column written by Tim Skubic in Dome Magazine that says that there is a strong possibility that the legislative leaders might not get the FY 10 budget resolved by the beginning of the fiscal year--October 1, 2009 and thereby shutting down state government.
Skubic believes that the Speaker would allow this to happen to get the Governor to agree to his controversial legislation that reforms and merges all state health plans. The theory goes that after government shuts down on October 1st he goes to Granholm and offers to get her the votes in the House for the budget resolution IF she agrees to his reform plan (she is opposed now). State employee and K-12 school employee unions are fighting his plan very, very strongly but Granholm may have no choice but to go against the unions in order to get her budget completed.
Skubic believes that then Senate Majority Leader Bishop goes to the Governor and uses the same strategy to get her to agree to his tax reform plans.
Interesting theory--especially since Speaker Dillon is running for Governor in 2010 and Majority Leader Bishop is running for Attorney General in 2010.
Not sure how fighting with the unions helps Dillion get a victory in the 2010 August primary. Winning a Democratic primary election without union money and votes is very, very difficult. However, the government shutdown strategy might work for Bishop in a Republican primary.
Skubic might be on to something. Hmmmmmmm.
Skubic believes that the Speaker would allow this to happen to get the Governor to agree to his controversial legislation that reforms and merges all state health plans. The theory goes that after government shuts down on October 1st he goes to Granholm and offers to get her the votes in the House for the budget resolution IF she agrees to his reform plan (she is opposed now). State employee and K-12 school employee unions are fighting his plan very, very strongly but Granholm may have no choice but to go against the unions in order to get her budget completed.
Skubic believes that then Senate Majority Leader Bishop goes to the Governor and uses the same strategy to get her to agree to his tax reform plans.
Interesting theory--especially since Speaker Dillon is running for Governor in 2010 and Majority Leader Bishop is running for Attorney General in 2010.
Not sure how fighting with the unions helps Dillion get a victory in the 2010 August primary. Winning a Democratic primary election without union money and votes is very, very difficult. However, the government shutdown strategy might work for Bishop in a Republican primary.
Skubic might be on to something. Hmmmmmmm.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Tax Ballot Initiatives: The Legislature and The Governor
Michigan's legislature is considering to do tax reform by ballot initiative. They will attempt to do this before they adjourn in July. They will need a super majority to get this issue on the ballot. They want to attempt to complete this by the end of July because they want to reserve time if they fail to circulate petitions to Michigan voters to place on the ballot what the legislature could not get done with legislative votes. They will need 500,000 plus signatures to get it on the ballot--more signatures than required but they will need a safety net of signatures to buffer against disqualified signatures. They will need to get the signatures done by the end of August or so.
Tax issues to be considered for ballot presentation might include going from a flat tax to a graduated income tax. Eliminating the Michigan Business Tax Surcharge and the entire MBT. Replacing this with a service tax and changing the sales tax rate.
Will this be too much for Michigan citizens to consider and they will just vote no on matters that are too complicated or matters that they do not understand? Does the legislature and the Governor have the leadership and committment to spend the Fall explaining to the people why these tax reforms are good for Michigan citizens and how it will lead us to a more financially secure future? How is the legislature going to get bi-partisan votes to put this on the ballot
Other key questions are whether citizens or legislative ballot initiatives are good public policy? Do we want citizens voting on matters as complicated as tax reform or is this the job of the legislature and the Governor--should they buckly down, work together to fix the tax system and prepare for a new future economy? Isn't this what they are paid to do?
Tax issues to be considered for ballot presentation might include going from a flat tax to a graduated income tax. Eliminating the Michigan Business Tax Surcharge and the entire MBT. Replacing this with a service tax and changing the sales tax rate.
Will this be too much for Michigan citizens to consider and they will just vote no on matters that are too complicated or matters that they do not understand? Does the legislature and the Governor have the leadership and committment to spend the Fall explaining to the people why these tax reforms are good for Michigan citizens and how it will lead us to a more financially secure future? How is the legislature going to get bi-partisan votes to put this on the ballot
Other key questions are whether citizens or legislative ballot initiatives are good public policy? Do we want citizens voting on matters as complicated as tax reform or is this the job of the legislature and the Governor--should they buckly down, work together to fix the tax system and prepare for a new future economy? Isn't this what they are paid to do?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)