Michigan Public Schools using Automated calling for Politics?

If this is true, it feels pretty shady...Read the original here.

Michigan Public School Illegally Uses Robocall System Against GOP Governor
Written By : Warner Todd Huston

News has emerged that a Michigan public school illegally used its automatic phone calling system to call the homes of every student to urge parents to join the recall effort against Republican Governor Rick Snyder last month. To imagine that they can illegally use public school facilities for a partisan, left-wing political effort, this is the arrogance of left-wingers in our mis-educational system writ large.

It is certainly illegal for a school to put it’s telephone alert system for partisan political use, but that is what happened nonetheless. Here is what the message said:


This is a message from the Lawrence Public Schools (inaudible) alert system. This is an informational item and not directly associated with the school. Concerned parents interested in cuts to education . . . we’re here to inform you that there is information about the problem. Also, be advised that there is a petition to recall Governor Snyder. If you want, stop by Chuck Moden’s house right by the school June 7th/8th between 3:30 and 4:00 pm. Thank you. Goodbye.

(To hear a recording of the message, click here.)

The school robocall system is supposed to be used to alert students and parents to school closings due to weather and other school business but not to push partisan political efforts.

Lawrence Public Schools Superintendent John Overley told Michgan Capitol Confidential that it wouldn’t happen again. But it shouldn’t have happened at all. According to Robert LaBrant , senior vice president of political affairs and general counsel for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the action by the district violates, “Section 57 of the Michigan Campaign Finance Act.”

LaBrant imagines that any finding of a violation would bring a fine to said persons of up to $20,000.

But all that aside, it is the arrogance of these leftist union hacks to imagine that they have the right to use the tools given them for the education of our kids for partisan political attacks on those they don’t like. It is an outrageous misuse of resources that all citizens, left-wing and conservative, pay for.

Left-wingers, however, feel that government is theirs and theirs alone and they see nothing wrong with violating laws as long as their agenda is furthered. This is yet another example of why government employees should not be allowed to unionize.

Obviously, the health and welfare of the union was more important to this school than the integrity of their education.

An Agent for Change?

Senator Obama makes much of being an "agent of change". He along with Mr. Edwards, represents himself as an outsider who seeks to change the "good old boy" network which is, admittedly, in too much control of the process. However, the hypocrisy of this stance is staggering.

If Senator Obama was truly dedicated to ending the "special interests" that dominate politics, he would have gone into the early primary system differently. Instead of repudiating a corrupt system focusing on special interests, moving from a convention and caucus primary system to an election, he has actively worked with his party to disenfranchise the voters in Michigan. For someone who says he stands against backroom politics, he's gone well out of his way to commit himself to them.

What makes me angry today

I was perusing my local school district's annual School Board statement online and was struck by the following Q&A (emphasis is mine):

Have Lincoln's union's agreed to changes that will help alleviate our district's financial challenges?

By law, the Board is not at liberty to discuss details of the collective bargaining process. We are looking forward to far and equitable collective bargaining agreements with all of our district's unions.

What kind of garbage is it that the law requires that educational financial decisions be conducted via backroom dealings?

Dickerson lays it to the State Dems

This is sheer brilliance. Brian Dickerson of the Free Press slaps around the idiocy of the Democratic leaders and their continued pursuit at Michigan voter disenfranchisement.

Salvaging the primary wreckage
The Detroit Free Press

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, Michigan's Democratic leaders have figured out a way to make participation in their party's Jan. 15 primary even more meaningless.

Most observers figured the Democrats' primary fiasco had reached bottom last month, when Democratic state lawmakers couldn't muster the votes to assure that all their party's presidential candidates would appear on the Michigan ballot.

But now, in a new voter guide unveiled this week, state party leaders are urging voters who support any of the four Democrats who've dropped out of the Michigan primary to cast their ballots for "Uncommitted," effectively ceding their voices to an unknown slate of electors to be named later in party caucuses across the state.

That's right, citizens: The same party regulators who collaborated to render Michigan's vote a meaningless footnote to the Democratic presidential contest want your proxy to do as they please at the party's nominating convention.

If that's your idea of participatory democracy, I'd suggest a write-in vote for Vladimir Putin.

So angry that I can hardly type...

The News has an article about the recently passed House energy bill.

What makes me so angry?

1. All Michigan Democrats voted for the bill, even though it will kill Michigan jobs and continue our one-state recession.
2. The authors claim that Americans would save $2 billion in gas taxes without mentioning that Americans would spend $4 billion a year in costs to implement.
3. The authors claim that consumers would save "as much as $1,000 a year" in fuel costs, without mentioning that they would spend between $5,000 and $7,000 more for a new car - or between $1,000 and $2,300 a year (plus interest payments) for a car.

What kills me about this is, first, the dishonesty. This is not going to provide net financial savings for consumers. There is not a single hybrid on the market which is a net financial savings over the same vehicle with a standard power train. Eliminating the ability of GM and Ford to sell the only vehicles they make a profit on will not mysteriously "save" the companies by "forcing" them to "get with the times."

I hate to break it to the hippies, but no one in this country buys a car based on mileage. Even those who buy hybrids generally do it based on cosmetic reasons and precious few Americans buy hybrids. Cars in America are sold based on power, performance, safety, and utility - all items which will need to be reduced in order to comply with these guidelines.

Secondly, the solution to emissions problems is being placed primarily on Michigan. Cars account for about 25% of emissions but are expected to account for 90% of the solution. I'm still waiting to see the bills demanding a reduction in the emissions from California beef farmers or mandating "no-till" farming, even though agriculture dwarfs the automotive sector in emissions and switching strictly to "no-till" farming would have the same net effect as raising average fuel economy to 50 mpg.

Either way, we in Michigan have been betrayed by members of our representation. The UAW, the Union workers, the employees and management at GM, Ford, and Chrysler have placed their faith in Michigan's Democrats to protect them. They then turned on them, stabbed them in the back, and are working actively (knowingly or not) to destroy the auto industry and further wreck Michigan's economy. Is it too much to ask that Michigan voters hold these individuals accountable? They are: John Dingell, Sander Levin, John Conyers, Dale Kildee, Carolyn Cheeks-Kilpatrick, and Bart Stupak.

When the next round of Union layoffs comes around, know that these men and women actively worked to make it happen.

House OKs 35 mpg rule
But energy bill faces Senate, Bush opposition
The Detroit News

WASHINGTON - The U.S. House approved a landmark energy bill Thursday that increases fuel economy standards by 40 percent by 2020 but the measure faces substantial hurdles in the Senate and a likely veto by the White House.

"Democratic leaders in the House today pushed a partisan bill that members had very little opportunity to study before the vote, which they knew was unacceptable to the president and had no chance of being signed into law," the White House said. It is "a misguided approach and if it made it to the president's desk, he would veto it."

Raising fuel efficiency requirements to an average 35 miles per gallon for the total fleet of cars and light trucks built in the United States is the centerpiece of the bill approved by the House in a 235-181 vote.

The bill also requires the use of 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022 and forces utilities to produce 15 percent of electricity from renewable sources, such as wind and solar power. The measure will be funded by rescinding $21 billion in tax breaks, largely for oil companies.

Buy Michigan

Since 2002, 49 states in the nation have experienced job growth. Michigan is the only state which has lost jobs. We currently rank dead last in unemployment at 7.6%. That's significantly higher than Mississippi and more than twice the rate of Louisiana. For many this holiday season, Christmas and the New Year will be met with joblessness and poverty. As the holiday season approaches, we can all pitch in.

In the short term, please consider adopting a family through organizations such as Volunteers of America. The Michigan branch is sponsoring a holiday adopt-a-family program. Please consider the program. Even a small donation, $10 or $20, can make a significant difference.

For long-term help, please consider making a concerted effort to purchase primarily Michigan products. This will help spur job growth here in Michigan and many of these products are less expensive than their national counterparts. The organization Buy Michigan Now has a handy holiday guide on their website.

Please consider spending your holiday money in Michigan this holiday year.

The Final Betrayal

John Dingell has completed his sell-out of the American Auto Industry. The auto fuel economy standards will increase 40% over the next 13 years, which will cost the auto industry - and let's be honest, that means it will cost Michigan - $4 billion a year. Dingell has completely surrendered the entire battle without a fight, something I have been predicting for months. He wants to avoid a contentious debate in the House, he wants to avoid giving up the power he has in his party, and he has made it clear that his power and his party come before his constituents.

Lawmakers Reach Gas Mileage Boost Deal
Fox News

WASHINGTON - An agreements among congressional Democrats - including those from auto industry states - to support a 40 percent increase in vehicle fuel efficiency is likely to be the tonic needed to push energy legislation through Congress before Christmas.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., a longtime protector of the auto industry, settled their differences in an agreement late Friday on the fuel economy, or CAFE, issue, clearing the way for a House vote on a broader energy bill, probably on Wednesday.

Automakers would be required to meet an industry wide average of 35 miles per gallon for cars and light trucks, including SUVs, by 2020, the first increase by Congress in car fuel efficiency in 32 years.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada called the compromise "good news" and said he hoped to take up the legislation quickly after the House acts.

Democrats: Every vote must count!

The Democrats have finally, officially voted to disenfranchise the voters of Michigan. Not only will the Democratic Presidential contenders not campaign in Michigan, not only have half of them pulled out of the race, but the Democratic National Convention has now officially made it clear that no Michigan vote will count.

Michigan Democratic Chairman Mark Brewer apparently expects that the Democratic presidential nominee will make sure that Michigan's delegates will be counted at the convention. If it's a close race, however, and Michigan's delegates will make the difference - don't count on democracy to win out.

Democrats punish Michigan for early primary
MSNBC News

VIENNA, Va. - Democratic leaders voted Saturday to strip Michigan of all its delegates to the national convention next year as punishment for scheduling an early presidential primary in violation of party rules.

Michigan, with 156 delegates, has scheduled a Jan. 15 primary. Democratic Party rules prohibit states other than Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina from holding nominating contests before Feb. 5.

Florida was hit with a similar penalty in August for scheduling a Jan. 29 primary.

Michigan officials anticipated the action by the Democratic National Committee's rules panel. But Michigan Democratic Chairman Mark Brewer said before the vote that he didn't think the delegates would be lost for good. He expects the Democratic presidential nominee will insist the state's delegates be seated at the convention.

A win for democracy in Michigan...

The Michigan Supreme Court has reinstated Michigan's January 15th primary.

Michigan court OKs early primary
USA Today

LANSING, Mich. -- Michigan's Jan. 15 presidential primary is a go again.

Overturning a pair of lower court rulings, a majority of the state Supreme Court Wednesday morning found the law setting the primary date and granting exclusive access to voter lists from it to the Democratic and Republican parties was not unconstitutional.

The 4-3 decision, after a string of setbacks for the seemingly star-crossed election, means the vote can be held as planned.

State election officials had said they needed to know the primary's fate by noon Wednesday to have time to prepare and deliver absentee ballots.

The court majority said reserving lists of voters (sorted by which primary ballot is chosen at the polls) to the two parties was within the authority of the Legislation and governor when they approved the primary bill last summer.

A new paradigm

An interesting article from The Detroit Free Press this morning points out an interesting twist to the new UAW agreements with Ford and GM. With the shift of retiree health care from being a corporate responsibility to being a responsibility of a trust being managed by the UAW, the two companies gave the UAW the ability to convert debt owned by Ford and GM to the trusts into stock in the company. This gives the UAW the potential to own 16% of GM and 15% of Ford.

The potential for this is staggering: instead of an adversarial relationship, this would turn GM and Ford into a company which is largely employee-owned; basically the world's two biggest co-op companies. This would help hasten the company towards the new paradigm they need for survival: cooperation between the Union and the companies in order to beat back the non-Union foreign automakers, the Democrats trying to give amnesty to illegals and dramatically increase CAFE standards, and to reach broadly into new foreign markets and take control of the North American market once again.

UAW's new role: Shareholder
Health trust could own key chunks of Ford, GM
The Detroit Free Press

The UAW, traditionally a mighty force in the struggle of Labor against Capital, could be on the brink of a new role: Detroit's biggest stockholder.

New 4-year labor agreements that UAW members ratified with the Detroit automakers shift retiree health costs to an independent trust under the auspices of the union, which could take control of hundreds of millions of shares of General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. The fact that the UAW could virtually be holding almost one-sixth of the equity in the nation's two biggest automakers could drive profound changes in the way the union thinks and acts, experts say.

"Equity as part of the VEBA does bring the UAW membership into being an investor group," said David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor.

"What we are witnessing is the transformation from a confrontational way of working to one of collaboration, which is absolutely necessary."

GM = "Green Motors?"

A Detroit Free Press article this morning reports that the Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid has won the Green Car of the Year award at the L.A. auto show. Of the five finalists, three were GM vehicles - the Tahoe, the Saturn Aura Hybrid, and the Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid. GM appears to be abandoning the small-car hybrid market to Toyota in order to concentrate on midsize cars, trucks, and SUVs. Being the first to market with a full-size hybrid SUV (the Tahoe) combined with their other hybrid products (the Saturn VUE, Aura, and Malibu) should help encourage consumers on the coasts to give GM a try once again. Here's to hoping that this helps the company's - and Michigan's - turnaround.

Green In A Big Way
Hybrid Tahoe's honor helps Chevy redo image
The Detroit Free Press

LOS ANGELES - Chevrolet's new campaign to establish itself as an environmentally friendly brand got an early endorsement when its Tahoe hybrid full-size SUV was named Green Car of the Year at the Los Angeles Auto Show on Thursday.

The hybrid Tahoe is a revolutionary vehicle that combines the room and capabilities SUV owners need with a 50% increase in city fuel economy to 21 m.p.g., Green Car Journal editor and publisher Ron Cogan said. The hybrid is to go on sale early next year. No price has been set.

"This is a milestone in many respects", he said. "People don't think green when SUVs are concerned and generally for good reason. Chevrolet's Tahoe hybrid changes this dynamic."

The Tahoe's win capped a strong performance for General Motors, which also placed its Saturn Aura and Chevrolet Malibu hybrid midsize sedans among the five finalists. The Nissan Altima sedan and Mazda Tribute SUV were the other finalists for the award, which is given by the editors of Green Car Journal and a panel of outside judges that includes performance-car legend Carroll Shelby and undersea explorer Jean-Michel Cousteau.

Why can't the Freep do math?

The Detroit Free Press is once again advocating a massive release of criminals from our state's prisons. This isn't a surprise; what is a surprise, though, is their justification:

"Michigan's incarceration rate - 502 inmates per 100,000 people - is out of wack. It is by far the highest in the Great Lakes region - Illinois, for example, is 354, Ohio is 414 - and eight-highest among the 50 states, according to the latest report from the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics. The state's staggering prison costs might be worth it if Michigan also was among the lowest-crime states, but it's not."

Perhaps this is beyond the Freep's basic ability to understand: when crime rates are higher, it leads to more people being incarcerated. Of course we're going to have a higher incarceration rate; we have a higher crime rate. The way to deal with this is to reduce crime overall. The massive release of criminals from the system, particularly when Michigan has a 50% recidivism rate, isn't going to do that. It's going to drive up crime. As the Free Press points out, Michigan's crime rate is already high. Why are we trying to put more criminals out on the street?

Don't throw away the key
Prisons can safely save state millions by revising sentencing, parole rules
Detroit Free Press

Facing its worst budget problems in modern times, the State of Michigan still incarcerates 50,000 people at a cost of nearly $35,000 per inmate per year. That adds up to nearly $2 billion -- more than 20% of the general fund budget -- for the Department of Corrections. While most of the people behind bars in Michigan are right where they belong, the state can and should take more steps to safely reduce the inmate population.

Michigan's incarceration rate -- 502 inmates per 10,000 people -- is out of wack. It is by far the highest in the Great Lakes region -- Illinois, for example, is 354, Ohio 414 -- and eighth-highest among the 50 states, according to the latest report from the federal Bureau of Statistics. The state's staggering prison costs might be worth if it Michigan also was among the lowest-crime states, but it's not.

Nor are Michigan prisons much more than warehouses, lacking education and rehabilitation programs that might make a difference in the return rate for offenders, now at nearly 50%.

The state Department of Corrections has begun some efforts to cut costs. It has slightly increased parole rates in conjunction with its prisoner re-entry program; released some old, infirm or deathly ill inmates; and closed two prisons. But there is much more to be done, including revisiting the guidelines under which Michigan judges sentence people to prison and complying with a recent court ruling that could affect about 1,000 "lifers" who committed crimes before 1992.

Why do we call Democrats "Liberals"?

The State Legislature, led by the Republicans, is trying to reinstate the January 15th primary election after an Ingham County judge has struck it down. The Republicans in both the House and Senate are trying desperately to create a law which will hold up to judicial scrutiny. There are three problems facing the issue:

1. House Speaker Andy Dillon, a Democrat from Redford, wants to just scrap the whole thing and go back to the caucus/convention style of selecting a Presidential candidate.
2. Senate Democrats have the votes to enact the primary law but are waffling about enacting it in time for this election. They want to enact the law, but not have it in place for this election.
3. The current law has a provision stating that the entire law would be invalid if any part is removed; therefore, a judicial decision striking down a small portion of the law would not be a solution which would work in this case.

In all, you have Democrats who are once again working as hard as possible to deny the right to vote to the citizens of Michigan. Like the Democrats on a national level, local Democrats like Andy Dillon are working to ensure that backroom influence peddling will choose a nominee, not a vote by the people. Why the Democrats are so gung-ho about disenfranchising Michiganders and why Democratic voters are so willing to excuse this is beyond me. Frankly, as a Michigander, the only Democrat I'd even consider voting for would be Hillary Clinton because she has co-operated the least in Democrat's disenfranchisement of Michigan.

It is becoming clearer that the Liberal Elites who run the Democratic Party view the world in an elitist prism: a ruling class made up of them and the ignorant, incapable, uneducated masses who they have to direct. It's not enough that the so-called Liberal's envisioned ruling class chooses what schools people go to, how much they make on their jobs, where they live, what they do in their own homes - they now want to make sure that the masses don't butt their way into their choice of which members of the ruling class get to run for President.

State Legislature works to save Jan. 15 primary
Detroit Free Press

LANSING -- Michigan's Jan. 15 presidential primary remained on life support Thursday as the state Legislature tried and failed to push through changes in the primary election law that would help it survive a legal challenge.

The State Senate worked into the evening on legislation to address objections from an Ingham County Circuit Court judge, who a day earlier ordered the primary suspended because of a provision to give exclusive access to voter lists to the Democratic and Republican parties.

But the Senate fell short of garnering enough votes to put the changes into effect immediately, which was crucial.

Some supporters of the legislation said it could be revived in the next week, in time to meet deadlines for the election, and that negotiations would continue.

The Al Gore Sore Loser Award goes to...

This past Tuesday was Michigan's local elections. For some incomprehensible reason, Michigan chooses to waste money and reduce participation in local elections by holding elections every year - national and state elections in even years with local elections in odd years. This past Tuesday, nearly the entire city government of Ecorse was replaced. The mayor and five of the seven city council members were voted out of office. A sixth council member chose not to seek reelection. In retaliation, they have voted 5-2 (one outgoing council member, Angela Smith, and the member who chose not to seek reelection were the two against) in order to dramatically cut the pay of the winners.

The incoming council members will have their pay cut from $15,000 a year to $5,000 a year, while the new mayor will have his pay cut from $69,000 a year to $12,000 a year. Talk about vindictive...

Election's losers cut pay for the winners
Part-time intentions cited
Detroit Free Press

Only hours after Ecorse's mayor and five of the City Council members were voted out of office for the next term, they slashed their successors' salaries by much more than half.

The mayor-elect is considering going to court over the decision.

The 5-2 vote Wednesday night adopted the Local Officers Compensation Board's decision to cut council members' annual pay from $15,000 to $5,000 and the mayor's compensation from $69,000 to $12,000.

Losing re-election bids Tuesday were Mayor Larry Salisbury and council members Brenda Banks, Nathaniel Elem, Robert Hellar, Arnold Lackey and Angela Smith. Councilwoman Theresa Peguese didn't seek re-election; she and Smith were the two nay votes Wednesday. Salisbury defended his vote in favor of the pay cuts. He said Thursday that he treated the job like a full-time position, but "The incoming officers failed to commit to anything but a part service."

Judge blocks Michigan's primary

A circuit judge in Ingham County, one of the three counties that surround Lansing, has ruled that the January 15th Presidential primary cannot be held. His ruling was based on a technicality that held that a Presidential primary election is somehow a "private" event. Likely, the basis of that ruling revolved around ownership of the lists of people who voted in the election, lists which would go solely to the parties to distribute as they saw fit.

The clear and obvious solution to this would be to release the voting roles to all interested parties; instead, Judge William Collette has sided with the national party powerbrokers and against the citizens of Michigan.

The primary system is broken. If a technicality as to who owns the voting lists is what is going to keep the broken system in place then the leaders of both state parties need to stand up and agree to release the voting roles to the public in order to make it clear that we're talking about a public interest, not a private one.

Judge blocks Michigan's Jan. 15 primary
The Detroit News

LANSING -- An Ingham County Circuit Court judge today ruled that Michigan's Jan. 15th presidential primary cannot be held.

Judge William Collette said the contest is unconstitutional because it allocated public money to be used for a private purpose, which would require a two-thirds cote of the legislature. The law passed this summer establishing the contest didn't pass by a two-thirds vote.

"Clearly there's an injury to the public interest," said Collette.

At issue are the lists with the names of voters who take part in the Jan. 15 balloting. Under the law, voters would have to request one ballot or the other, and the Republican and Democratic parties would take sole ownership of the lists of who voted in each contest.

Would term limits fix bad judgement?

Inexperienced governor? She's on her second term! She's been in office 6 years!!!

Would voters loosen term limits?
Legislature may ask, but hurdles loom
Detroit Free Press

Michigan voters were in a surly mood in 1992 when they voted overwhelmingly to limit the terms of the state's elected officials.

The thinking went something like: If we can't get them to behave, let's make them leave.

Fifteen years later voters appear surly again, in part because many people blamed the recent budget crisis on the chaotic performance of an inexperienced governor and legislators.

Consider that the top three leaders in the House today have less than 13 years of legislative experience among them, compared to 40 years for the same three positions in 1992.

Still, would voters change the law?

We're spending what?

The Detroit News has a nice breakdown on the new Michigan budget.

One item - we've expanded health spending alone by an amount ($650 million) almost equal to the job-killing sales tax increase ($725 million).

Here's an idea: instead of killing jobs and moving people onto state assistance, why not create a few jobs so we can move people off of it?

Budget breakdown: Here's how 2007-08 spending plan is shaping up
The Detroit News

While the $43 billion 2007-08 state budget does not become law until Gov. Jennifer Granholm signs each of the 17 budget bills, she and state lawmakers have agreed to major pieces of the spending plan.

But it wasn't an easy task: Debate was long and acrimonious and spanned two seasons; annual taxes were raised by $1.5 billion; and parts of the state government shut down for a few hours Oct. 1.

Taxes

New this year

$770 million in higher income taxes; $725 million a year in taxes on services

Highlights

On Sept. 30 and Oct. 1, the Legislature narrowly approved an increase in the income tax and expanded the sales tax to a mixed bag of services.

The income tax already has increased from 3.9 percent to 4.35, projected to net about $770 million a year. That's an 11.5 percent increase. The average family of four will pay an additional $157 a year after typical deductions.

What's fair about raising taxes on the poor to overpay the upper-middle class?

Patrick Devlin, Chief Executive of the Michigan Building and Construction Trades Council, writes in a Detroit News editorial: "Michigan's Prevailing Wage Act ensures workers who build our roads, bridges and schools are paid a fair wage so they can contribute to the economy and provide for their families."

Mr. Devlin: There's nothing "fair" about fleecing working class Michiganders so that contractors working for the state can make 30% more than those in the private sector. There's nothing "fair" about raising taxes on poor Michiganders and prohibit competitive bidding in order to protect the disgustingly overpriced wages that state contractors are paid. There's nothing "fair" about a worker in the private industry having his net salary slashed by the state in order to keep the artificially inflated salary of a worker doing the exact same job for a government contract and making substantially more for it.

State's prevailing wage law ensures fair pay
The Detroit News

Michigan's Prevailing Wage Act ensures workers who build our roads, bridges, and schools are paid a fair wage so they can contribute to the economy and provide for their families.

However, lately it's become open season on workers here in Michigan. The latest episode as Chris Fisher's guest column in The Detroit News ("Killing wage law helps budget and creates jobs," Oct. 11).

When you pay Michigan workers measly wages with little to no benefits, everybody loses.

Remember, the hardworking construction and trade workers who are building Michigan's 21st century infrastructure are taxpayers, too. When you pay them a pittance, the economy shrinks.

Why subsidies when savings are already there?

A study has looked into a commuter train connecting Howell with Ann Arbor. That would be a great start towards using desperately needed mass transit in the state. If this plan could work, it would provide incentives for other areas to follow suit. The problem? A study has determined that the commuter train would need a $2.3 million annual subsidy.

The study points out that the average form Howell to Ann Arbor spends $27 a day on transportation costs. The numbers work out to a charge of about $2.82 each way or about $5.65 round-trip with an additional subsidy that would be pretty much equal.

Here's the important question: if the commuters are saving an average of over $22 a day, why are we subsidizing the trip? If it's a $10 trip each way, that's still cheaper than the $27 a day that the study says is being charged. Charging each of the approximately 1,800 expected daily riders $225 a month would generate the $4.8 million needed for the annual expenses and would cost significantly less than the $500-$600 the study implies that an average commuter is currently paying. Even the gas costs (about 2 gallons a day or $6 for a relatively fuel efficient car getting around 28 mpg or 3 gallons ($9) a day for commuters getting a more average 19 mpg) alone would be alleviated by unsubsidized use of the train.

In short, if they're already saving considerable amounts of money then why should we subsidize it at all? If I could take a train to work instead of driving and it was going to cost me less money than I'm spending now. I'd jump on that and I certainly wouldn't expect anyone else to foot the bill for me.

Study: Ann Arbor-Howell commuter train needs $2.3M annual subsidy
The Associated Press

ANN ARBOR, Mich. (AP) - A study says commuter rail service between Ann Arbor to Howell would save users a lot of money but require a $2.3 million annual subsidy.

The study says a car commuter from Howell to Ann Arbor spends about $27 a day.

The Washtenaw Area Transportation Study estimates the annual operating cost of the train from Ann Arbor to Howell at $4.8 million.

It says 884,000 rides a year would generate $2.5 million in fares. The study says the subsidy would be about $2.66 per ride.

Michael Cicchella is supervisor of Washtenaw County's Northfield Township and a commuter line backer. He tells the Ann Arbor News the capital costs would be about $2.8 million.

When it's rainy every day...

Ray Burrsma, of the Holland Sentinel, had an opinion piece yesterday which lambastes the Michigan legislature for cutting taxes several years ago when we had a surplus of tax money. He feels that, instead, we should have saved for future lacks of funding like the one we currently are experiencing.

It's a nice thought, but it assumes the legislature has one important quality that is in small quantity amongst politicians: self-restraints.

The principal advantage of the Engler tax cuts is that it prevented runaway spending from getting even worse. Mr. Burrsma attacks those calling for spending cuts without realizing that if we did not cut back on taxes several years ago, the spending would be even higher and even more dramatic cuts would be required. He imagines that no one could find places in the budget to cut.

Hard cuts are required. By definition, they won't be easy. A good place to start, though, would be to insure that the compensation that is paid out for contracts and state employees is comparable to what is paid in the private sector. It should be shocking that the state, with its size and the amount of contracts that it puts out, should be paying even the average amount for contractors. The fact that the law forces the state to pay 20-30% over the private sector average is criminal. Allowing unfettered competitive bidding will dramatically cut the cost of state contracts. Also, why is the state still providing a complete pension? In the private sector, those have been nearly completely eliminated. Why not do the same at the state level and switch everyone over to a self-funded 401(k)? The state could pitch in a small amount for a short while, but the pension costs are prohibitively expensive. Also, this would be a better deal for workers who could invest in stocks instead of just very low risk bonds.

All in all, while saving surplus funds might bail us out of trouble in the short term, responsible budget cuts will keep us out of trouble in the long run.

We failed to save for a rainy day
Holland Sentinel

Good economic times come and go. The economy waxes and wanes. It grows hot but eventually cools. Then the cycle repeats. Hot. Cold. Again and again. Over and over.

The state of Michigan's revenue correlates with Michigan's economy. When the economy is strong, revenue is high. When the economy is weak, revenue dips.

Obviously, then, our state government's income varies from year to year. It has more money when the economy thrives and less when the economy waffles.

State expenditures, on the other hand, are relatively constant. From year to year the state funds similar numbers of Secretary of State offices, State Police posts, K-12 students and so on. Yes, there are variations, but they are minor relative to the state budget.

Now, if we know our expenses are constant but our revenues vary, what is the prudent course to take? Ask any good Hollander from the mid-1900s and he will tell us. We establish a surplus when times are good so we can weather the bad times. Anyone who has read Joseph's interpretation of Pharaoh's dream in Genesis understands the concept. Save during times of plenty for the time of famine.