You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Sun, Feb 21, 2010 : 5:42 a.m.

Lawmakers need to bring state spending in line before raising taxes

By Tony Dearing

Doug Rothwell remembers when Michigan was known for prosperity and economic growth, and he dreams of the day when it could be again. But he says that may take 10 years. And that’s his best-case scenario.

Thumbnail image for State of State_Keep.jpg

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm delivers her State of the State address to a joint session of the Legislature on Feb. 3 in Lansing.

Rothwell is the head of Business Leaders for Michigan, which is promoting a major overhaul of state government that is intended to transform the state’s economy and create new jobs. Whether you subscribe to his plan, or one of several others being talked about these days, you have to be disappointed - and Rothwell is - with the budget that Gov. Jennifer Granholm has proposed in her final year in office.


At a time when Michigan needs fundamental, structural change in Lansing, the governor has proposed a budget that relies too much on higher taxes and federal stimulus money, and not enough on the kinds of hard reforms that are desperately needed to turn Michigan’s economy around.

That is why we cannot support the governor’s spending plan, even though it includes a very attractive promise to protect our local governments and schools from additional cuts in state spending. As painful as it is to see the city of Ann Arbor talking about laying off 19 firefighters and cutting 17 positions in the Police Department, the budget distress being felt here and across Michigan is a direct result of our economic woes, and that pain will only continue until the state makes fundamental changes to position itself for a recovery.

Granholm’s primary solution for avoiding further cuts to education and local government is to reduce the state sales tax from 6 percent to 5.5 percent, but expand it to cover many consumer services, a move that would generate some $550 million in additional revenue. The idea of taxing services is hardly radical, and most other states already do.

But even a group like Business Leaders for Michigan, which has been pushing a tax reform plan very similar to what Granhom proposes, has said it cannot support the governor’s budget because tax reform will only help Michigan back to prosperity if it’s accompanied by significant reforms in government spending.

By most measures, Michigan is leading the nation in economic distress, yet it continues to spend as though it were still prosperous. Here is just one example: the average total compensation for state employees in Michigan is $17,000 more than the private-sector average. Senate Republicans estimate that having state employees pay 20 percent of their health-care premiums - which is the norm in the private sector - would save $68.8 million a year.

We say this not to pick on state employees, but to point out that the state continues to maintain salaries and benefit levels that are not based on the economic realities that private businesses have had to accept. Nor has government been willing to enact other necessary reforms that could save money. For instance, the Center for Michigan has estimated that local governments could save $250 million by sharing services, and that school districts could save $300 million by doing the same. Yet even as cities and local schools face deep budget cuts, there’s been little real movement toward consolidations or shared services.

At a time when Michigan residents are hurting economically, it’s not fair to ask them to pay higher taxes while the state remains unwilling to bring its spending in line with the private sector or other state governments. Even more important, higher taxes not accompanied by structural reform in spending will move Michigan further from economic recovery, not closer.

State lawmakers face painful decisions in the coming budget, and those decisions should be shaped by some coherent plan for reinventing Michigan to create a climate that attracts new business and creates new jobs. The governor’s budget proposal falls short of that.

The worst thing that could happen would be an election-year stalemate that results in important budget decisions being deferred. Uncertainty over whether the state is or isn’t going to expand the sales tax to consumer services would leave businesses unwilling to make investments in Michigan, further stalling our economy.

Our hope is that the projected $2 billion deficit facing the state - coupled with the level of anger and frustration being expressed by taxpayers - will compel lawmakers to act boldly on broad-based reforms aimed at both tax policy and spending. We believe voters will respond to lawmakers who are willing to make unpopular but necessary decisions, and anything less will leave Michigan mired in economic misery for years to come.

(This editorial was published in today's newspaper and reflects the opinion of the Editorial Board of AnnArbor.com.)


Comments

Diagenes

Sat, Feb 27, 2010 : 10:43 a.m.

Gail, I agree completely that the legislature is overpaid in both wages and benefits. The bottom line is that we have more government than we can afford. It needs to be cut. California's state government is insolvent and Michgan's will be as well soon. Its not because its taxed too little, its because the state spends too much. Bad decisions by politicians, voter apathy, and a sense of entitlement by state employees has either killed the private sector or drove it to other states. P.S. If you are unhappy with your wages and benefits then quit. Make your own job and pay yourself as much as you want.

Jill

Mon, Feb 22, 2010 : 3:14 p.m.

State employees no longer have a defined benefit retirement plan. It was changed to a defined contribution plan over 14 years ago. The only reason I mention it is that it makes it harder to take you seriously when you don't seem to have all the facts.

Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball

Mon, Feb 22, 2010 : 11:17 a.m.

15-30 percent Unemployment is not exactly the right time to raise taxes. Historically high Foreclosures and Bankruptcies are just not the time to add yet another Governmental burden to Michigan workers.. We need small business to come to Michigan - not to leave Michigan. Any net gain in Taxes is a net lose to the working public and just another reason to close shop and go down to OHIO or Indiana. If Jenny would cut Government by 50% then and only then would I go with a tax increases. Has Lansing ever cut anything? And by CUT - I mean the budget goes down from year one to year two - not some twisted decrease in the amount of yearly increase. If so - I never seem to hear about it.

gail gerstenlauer

Mon, Feb 22, 2010 : 10:37 a.m.

I am absolutely outraged that AnnArbor.com is simply knee-jerking repeating the false information that the Republican legislatures have been promulgating for years about state employees. So let me clarify, as a long term state employee here are the facts; 1 under gov. engler we did not receive one single raise for over a decade. While inflation continued to eat at our incomes and benefits were not cut 2. the first livable contract we've received came under gov granholm however WE STILL ONLY MAKE 62 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR COMPARED TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR. If you were to pay attention to the study by a U OF M ECONOMIST which was distributed to the media by UAW LOCAL 6000 you woud know this. 3. We have had "BLT" which is "work 80 hours and get paid for 78" in 2003 and 2005 and are alated to get it again this year 4. Health care benefits have been cut in the last two contracts 5. We had furlogh days (layoff days for which NOONE GETS UNEMPLOYMENT: IT IS SIMPLY LOST INCOME) in 2009 and are slated to get them again this year 6. Many of us are being forced into early retirement by the threat of having our vision and dental benefits canceled for the rest of our lives if we do not take retirement. 7. AND THE REPUBLICAN DOMINATED LEGISLATURE VOTED ITSELF A 76% PAY RAISe, DID NOT MAKE ANY SACRIFICE AT ALL WHILE IMPOSING HARDSHIP ON STATE EMPLOYEES AND HAS VOTED ITSELF RETIREMENT BENEFIT FOR LIFE AFTER A SINGLE TERM: THERE IS NO OTHER SECTOR THAT PROVIDES A PENSION AND HEALTH CARE FOR FIVE YEARS SERVICE: CERTAINLY STATE EMPLOYEES DON'T GET ONE! Yes, Michigan has fallen on hard times; and state employees have borne the burden budget cuts for nearly two decades. Being constantly villified for this is frankly slanderous, untrue and reflects what appears to be the average conservative lawmaker's belief that it's okay to lie and know your lying if it suits your ideological agenda. Frankly, I expected better from the media. Are you interested in balanced presentation or are you simply ideologues?