We’re about to enter the frenzied homestretch of what is certain to be a bitterly contested political contest, right down to election day.
From now till Nov. 2, we’ll hear all kinds of claims, counter-claims and counter-counter claims, some true, some partly true, some false, and some which threaten the apocalypse.
Thoughtful citizens who try and sort all these out might find cutting to the chase quicker if they focus on the real condition of our state now — and where we are likely to be in the foreseeable future:
Fact No. 1: Michigan is smaller than we used to be. Both proportionally — and in terms of actual numbers. Lots of people – sadly including a disproportionate number of better educated youth – have moved away, including those who say, “There’s nothing here for me.”
According to ace demographer Kurt Metzger, who runs the Detroit Area Community Information System, Michigan’s population peaked at an estimated 10,090,554 in 2005, and then dropped to 9,969,727 for 2009. Official census figures will likely be even lower.
Fact No. 2: We’re poorer than we used to be. At $47,950 per family median income, we’re 26th in the nation, a sharp decline from 13th just 10 years ago. Our loss of relatively good paying manufacturing jobs is the big factor.
Fact No. 3: We’ve got less clout in Washington than we once did. Our sole member of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick, (D-Detroit) was defeated in the August primary election. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Holland) who had served 18 years in the House and was the ranking minority member of the Intelligence Committee, gave up his seat to run for governor. And Reps. Vern Ehlers (R-Grand Rapids) and Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) also decided to retire after almost two decades. All four seats will be filled by people just starting out on the seniority ladder.
Fact No. 4: We may well have fewer seats in Congress representing Michigan. As a result of population shifts, we’re likely to lose a seat in the House of Representatives next year. That will give us only 14 members of Congress. Back in the 1970s, we had five more.
So how do we cope?
As anybody who has ever competed in anything knows, when you’ve got less than the other guy, you’ve got to sharpen your focus, hone your strategy and bring on your “A game.”
When it comes to state government, that’s what a governor and a legislature are supposed to do. But in Michigan, that’s precisely what they haven’t been able to do for nearly a decade.
Part of the problem has had to do with poor relationships between Governor Jennifer Granholm and the key legislative leaders. It’s pretty hard to hammer out a coherent strategy to compete with other states when you don’t get along well with each other. Partly it has to do with the fierce (and in many cases pointless) partisanship between Democrats and Republicans. With the Ds holding the governorship and the House of Representatives and the Rs the state Senate, there’s plenty of opportunity for partisan squabbling to get in the way of developing a common strategy.
And that’s what has happened. Gridlock, I’m afraid, is far more usual in Lansing than bipartisan agreement to get things done.
One big part of the problem has to do with the increasing power of single interest groups in Washington and in Lansing. These groups have lots of money to throw around on behalf of their particular agendas, which often have little to do with the common good.
There are lots of these groups — and the result of the collective influence of this myriad of special interests has been to pulverize policy debate into countless tiny splinters of parochial preference.
Practically speaking, this means Lansing policy makers are obliged to construct, case by case, working majorities sufficient to advance each tiny particular micro-point.
Predictably, they often fail — or the policies are mutated almost out of recognition. The net effect is policies formed piecemeal by expedient log rolling rather than through a clear, coherent strategy based on what makes sense. For Michigan, a weakened state in desperate need of strategic competitive focus, this is a big problem.
For contrast, consider the story of a dinner conversation between the great financial genius, William Buffett, and Bill Gates, Sr., the father of the Microsoft founder. What factor did they feel was the single most important thing in their success? Focus, according to The Snowball, Warren Buffett and the Business of Life, by Alice Schroeder. “This kind of innate focus couldn’t be emulated. It meant the intensity that is the price of excellence.”
So when Virg Bernero or Rick Snyder’s troops come knocking on your door looking for votes, you might ask them just how they propose to bring strategic focus to decision-making in Lansing.
How they answer should indicate a great deal about how each will perform as governor.
Editor’s Note: Former newspaper publisher and University of Michigan Regent Phil Power is a longtime observer of Michigan politics and economics and a former chairman of the Michigan chapter of the Nature Conservancy. He is also the founder and president of The Center for Michigan, a bipartisan centrist think-and-do tank which is sponsoring Michigan’s Defining Moment, a public engagement outreach campaign for citizens. The opinions expressed here are Power’s own and do not represent the official views of The Center. He welcomes your comments at ppower@thecenterformichigan.net.
6 Comments
Bitter partisan battle ? I don’t think so.
Synder is not going to get down and dirty like Bernero. He’s already won based on the disaster of the last eight years of Granholm.
I would not even debate Bernero, he’s just Granholm with shorter hair.
We simply need to cut, cut, cut ourselves to prosperity. Look at the impact Governor Christie has had ?
Just tell it like it is !
I completely agree; we need to pinpoint our long term goals and short term strategy. That should begin with a discussion about “Smart Government.” Government that focuses on the bottom line and utilizes every tax dollar to it’s fullest potential. Government that CUTS WHERE WE CAN AND INVESTS WHERE WE NEED. Start with investing in education and the industries of tomorrow. Focus on jobs, jobs, jobs, and everything that goes into creating a vibrant economy. That’s the type of focus we need.
Unfortunately because of partisanship and narrow self interests the common good is no longer priority number one. Maybe we should focus on minimizing partisanship first.
Nick Goebel @ ThePragmaticCenter.com
Stacy Mathia has a tight focus for Michigan.
From her own website:
Common Sense Principles I will use to Guide my Decisions as your Governor
1. Just as all of us have had to tighten our belts and cut back on spending, so must our government. We must cut our government budget by a minimum of 15% upon inauguration.
2. Excessive taxation has contributed heavily to our current economic freefall. I will examine each and every tax and fee levied by our state, and pledge to eliminate those that are strictly punitive, such as the MBT. I will reduce those that are excessive, in order to stimulate job creation and entrepreneurial risk taking. As a result, tax revenue will increase, and jobs will be created, all without punishing Michigan families or entrepreneurs, but rewarding them for their faith in the American Dream!
3. Our education system needs to be overhauled. Failing schools, and those that run them can no longer be rewarded. Parents and educators must bear their responsibility in our children’s education. My administration will support schools that educate, and ensure that children attending a school that is failing to educate them will have the opportunity to transfer to one that will.
4. As your Governor I will enforce and ensure that Michigan’s rights are protected under the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution. I will not allow the Federal Government to dictate by fiat, to the citizens of Michigan, impermissable control of our daily lives, or the businesses we run.
http://www.staceymathia2010.com/
It’s unusual that her position is not mentioned by The Center for Michigan.
Why is that, Mr. Power?
Cut ourselves in to prosperity. Whoever wrote that has not really kept up with what has been going on in this administration for the past decade. This administration has 10,000 less employees than the previous one, Has cut billions of dollars out of the budget for every year that she has been in office, and we still have not cut ourselves in to prosperity. Our future (Students, workforce, etc) have left the state in droves which will kill our chances of ever returning to being a powerhouse any time soon as we will be left with fewer representatives seats at the table in Washington. Here is an article that sums it up pretty well of the past decade:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/us/12michigan.html
It’s our partisan bickering that has our state in Gridlock and makes no one want to move here to Michigan. We need to decide what kind of future we want in Michigan and decide to fund it. Saying; “NO” to poor people will only make them that much more desperate which will force people to do bad things to get their needs met. If they commit crimes they will be sent to jails and prisons which we are closing in record numbers. Cities are on the verge of bankruptcy which is due to the lack of revenue sharing dollars and has resulted in an extreme cut to law enforcement. Our roads are the worst in the nation. Our schools keep getting chopped more and more. Pretty soon we will be compared to the hills of Tennessee. What do we want Michigan to look like in a decade?
Let’s get rid of the state senate and have only one legislative body. That will save $30 million a year–$1.5 billion over the next 50. We get by with one county board, one city council, one school board. We can make do with one legislature. Streamlinining Michigan’s government is the number one reason we need to vote yes Nov. 2 for a constitutional convention. One legislature will reduce gridlock, eliminate the behind-the scenes conference committee (to reconcile differences of opinion between our two legislatures), make government more business like, reduce the influence of campaign contributions (38 less campaigns to fund), make legislative districts more walkable (I have walked huge sections of a house district, but a senate district is too large for that).
Four “Agreements” for legislators and wannabes to abide by:
One. Be impeccable with your word.
Two. Don’t take anything personally.
Three. Don’t make assumptions.
Four. Do your best (not perfection, just your best).
That little bit of Toltec wisdom from Ruiz, “The Four Agreements.”
Seek “effectiveness” as you pursue the common good and remember, “There’s no such thing as instant pudding. Read the box.” (J.K. Bakken)