Post Proposal 1 vote - What if it's voted down?

With most polls showing a 2-1 or 3-1 defeat for Proposal 1 in Michigan, I've been thinking about what would happen if the Proposal is actually voted down.  For those not familiar, Proposal 1 is a tax hike (sales and fuel) which ostensibly will be used to fix roads in Michigan (State roads anyway.  City, county, and Interstates not included).  All this at a cost of 2 billion dollars, not all of which will go to road repairs.  And what does go to road repairs will initially be quite small.  Plus a bunch of special-interest pork included to get Democrat votes in the legislature.

We can look to history for a clue as to what the Honorable Rick Snyder will do - specifically the Bridge to Canada project from a couple of years ago which the Governor lobbied hard for, but which the Senate rejected.  Rather than accept the fact that there were major questions about the cost estimates for this bridge and working with the legislators who voted down the bill in committee, our PO'ed Governor went around the legislature and got the Canadians to foot the bill for the construction, for which he didn't need any legislative approvals.

So, what does the Governor have up his sleeve this time to get around the rejection of his plans (if that happens)?  What new plans does he have to extract more money from the overtaxed populace of Michigan?

Governor - nobody disagrees with you that the roads are bad and getting worse.  We all know things need to be fixed.  But surely you understand that people are tired of tax hikes, fee hikes, and the ever-growing size and scope of government.  You really need to get your own house in order in State government before you come looking for more money from the already highly taxed populace of Michigan.

If you do that then we will all know you are serious about dealing with the problems in this state, rather than creating new burdens that only enhance your (already soiled) legacy.  You know, sort of like what you did with Detroit when you made them get their financial house in order.  You should apply the same firmness and critical eye to State Government.  If you look hard enough you will find the money you need to get the job done without raising anyone's taxes.

Proposal 1 Will Cost Average Michigan Household Up to $525 a Year in Extra Taxes

From the Michigan Capital Confidential:  (full article by Tom Gantert)

The average household in Michigan will pay as much as $525 more in taxes in 2016 if Proposal 1 is approved by voters on May 5, according to a study by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
The study estimated that increasing the sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent would cost a typical Michigan household $389 and the change in the fuel tax would cost between $88 and $136.

I'm a pretty typical Michigan household (family of 4), and I know I could use $525 in better ways than these blundering politicians can.  I have a kid going to college next year, and that would buy a lot of books for her, for instance.

No, I'll say it again:  The State needs to get its own financial house in order before it comes knocking at my door for more money to feed boondoggles and the failing public education system.

VOTE NO ON PROPOSAL 1

Spineless

Must be the tears and wailing over the Sandy Hook shooter have rusted the iron spine Gov. Snyder showed last week when facing down the labor unions, because today he completely caved in to the Gun Banners on CPL reform.

I didn't want to believe it when others on my side of this issue were wishing Jennifer Granholm was still Governor, but I have to admit, she was better at signing pro-gun legislation than the Governor we have now.

Gov. Snyder - as of today you are just another politician who won't listen to common sense and sound reason.  There is only one way you get my vote next time around:  Get with Sen. Green, write a better bill (this one had some real malodorous parts), and get it passed by June.  Here is what it must do:

1. Eliminate County Gun Boards.  Most of us wanted the Secretary of State to be the issuing authority for CPL's, but would accept Sheriffs being the issuing authority.  The bill you just vetoed had some good provisions to keep anti-gun sheriffs in line and should be included.
2. Eliminate Gun-Free Zones.  As Sandy Hook proved yet again, Gun-free zones only increase the body count.  Compare Sandy Hook to New Life Church and see what a difference a good guy (or in that case, woman) with a gun and the will to use it will make.  Schools, Hospitals, Sports Arenas - all of them - no longer prohibited.  There is no reason to require extra training or extra anything.  CPL holders in Michigan have proven themselves to be levelheaded and serious about the responsibility we take on when we carry that gun.  Extra training is superfluous.
3. Make it clear that Private Property rights will be maintained.  If a church or business or person wants to prohibit firearms on their property that is their right.  But there should be no opt-outs for schools or other public entities.  If you get state or local funding, you may not prohibit the carrying of firearms.
4. Make it clear that State preemption laws apply to MSU, UM, and Wayne State University.  They don't get to supersede state law.
5. Leave open carry alone.  If nothing else, it is what protects you if the wind blows your cover garment up and people see your pistol and call police, who then hassle you about your pistol and threaten to charge you with brandishing.
6. Eliminate the Permit to Purchase and the resulting pistol registration.

And one more thing, which can't be written into law but should be written in your mind every day:  Stop listening to whining bedwetters who go into a panic whenever something bad happens and immediately want to ban guns.  The problem is not guns - the problem is evil.  And at some point evil needs to be addressed forcefully.

Gretchen Whitmer - whiny crybaby

According to an article in the Washington Times, Gretchen Whitmer, Michigan Senate Minority Leader is, in essence, saying to Gov. Snyder "If you don't give me what I want, I'm going to get my Big Brother to beat you up".

From the article:

Senate Democratic Leader Gretchen Whitmer, who on Thursday called the votes to approve the right-to-work measure “petty and vindictive politics,” sparked more backlash Friday when she said she wants the president, who is set to visit Detroit on a previously scheduled political trip on Monday, to push back on Republican Gov. Rick Snyder by holding back federal money for a new international bridge project to Canada and a badly needed mass-transit program in ailing Detroit.

Well, Senator - to take a page from your big brother's book, since a 3 point victory means he has a mandate, I guess the crushing defeat of Big Labor at the Michigan Ballot Box in November means that the Governor has a mandate to pass Right-to-Work.  You just need to sit down and shut up and take it.

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, after all.

Romney = More Big Government

Yes, the Republicans have come to Michigan - well, at least Romney and Santorum have.  Therefore, the "vote for me" ads are now saturating the airwaves.

Mitt Romney has one that talks about how Santorum admits he's no longer a deficit hawk and thinks earmarks are a great thing, and we should vote for Mitt because he will get rid of Obamacare, and his test to see if we need to keep a Federal program will be "whether we are willing to borrow money from China to pay for it".

Umm, excuse me Mr. Romney, but isn't it borrowing that has gotten us into the economic mess we're in in the first place?  You're telling me that you are willing to continue to saddle future generations of Americans with huge debt loads?  That's your great plan for reforming the government?  Mr. Romney, that isn't reforming government, that's more of the same.

If your ad is truly reflective of Santorum (which I doubt), then all you have done is prove to me that you are as clueless as he is about what the problems are in DC, and you have no vision for solving them.  Why would I vote for that?

The Problem, encapsulated

Reading The Detroit News coverage of the Michigan House debate overnight on the state budget, and I gleaned this nugget:

The lone Republican "yes" vote was cast by Rep. Chris Ward of Brighton. Because he voted against the Republican tide, he temporarily stepped down from his leadership position as House minority floor leader.

"Our state is on the brink of a constitutional crisis, and the time has come for all of us, regardless of party, region and philosophy to pull together to show that our state government can work," Ward said. "The institutions of our government are bigger than any one person."(emphasis mine)

Rep. Ward's comment epitomizes the problem with government at every level. Those who are in government think it is their job to perpetuate and increase it. That it is their job to take money away from people who can't afford to have it taken away, and turn around and give it away to people or entities who either don't deserve it or who shouldn't be getting government money anyway.

Rep. Ward, not only should you resign from your Minority Floor Leader position, you should resign from your House seat. You are a disgraceful example of the worst things in government.

Here's a news flash for ya Rep. Ward, straight from a real Republican - Ronald Reagan: "Government isn't the solution to our problems, Government is the problem." Learn it, live it.

Question of the Day

As the Socialist Administration of Michigan Governess Granholm continues to look for ways to solve the deepening budget crisis, it didn't take long for her to put tax increases on the table. She is proposing a 2% increase in the income tax, a 1% decrease in the sales tax, and an expansion of sales tax to services. So now you would pay an extra 5% for your haircut, car wash, legal fees, lawn care, snow removal, car repairs, day care, and all sorts of other services.

Kudos (sort of) to Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, who is indicating that there must be budget cuts and service cuts before even thinking about tax increases.

Which brings me to the question of the day: What is it about politicians that allows them to think that just because government exists, it must expand? That every idea they have must be codified into law and have money spent from the public treasury on it? And if there isn't enough money for their new idea, then we need a tax increase to pay for it!

At what point will these elected ones say "Our goal for this session is to not pass any new laws. We think we have enough laws and our people are regulated enough."? Now there's a novel idea! Ronald Reagan said it best: "Government isn't the solution to our problems, Government is the problem!"