My Opinions

1.) Since the gas tax has not been raised since 1997 and inflation was ~2.6% on average for those years the gas tax should now be $0.25 per gallon. That is to make it equal to 1997 dollars. Basically it needs to be raised immediately to $0.25 per gallon from the current $0.19 and beginning in 2008 it needs to be raised to $0.30 per gallon. This will accomplish two things A.) Produce much needed state revenue and do it fairly because it is a user tax. B.) Entice drivers to use better driving habits such as stop driving so aggressively and observe the speed limits. This will more than make up for the higher price by increasing miles per gallon; Go to www.fueleconomy.gov if you do not believe me. These changes would save drivers at least the increase in the gas tax as well as make our roads much safer. Those State Troopers that are not laid off could help enforce the existing traffic laws and also bring in extra revenue with the tickets they could easily write (low hanging fruit).

2.) Temporarily raise the income tax 0.5% as was mentioned in the Sunday 4/8 Argus Press. According to the editorial this would bring in about 0.85 Billion dollars a year and get us through 2008.

3.) During that time our state leaders (including the governor) would be responsible for figuring out how to run the show without the above income tax increase. If they cannot work together and figure it out by the end of fiscal 2008 then we start docking their pay and benefits until they do, say 10% per month for a start. No party finger pointing because we will not care who is responsible because we will hold them all responsible!!!!

Mike Dewey
Howell

First I appreciated the bluntness and honesty in outlining the fiscal mess we as a state now find ourselves. We in the Upper Peninsula are sometimes insulated from the urgency of such a crises and I appreciated the proactive vision he shared to provide systemic solutions to stablizing Michigan's future. Second, I would also like to address point three of the Center for Michigan ideas concerning consolidation and service sharing ides in local governments.

My home town of Iron River, located fast on the Wisconsin border in the Western U.P. has accomplished this goal by consolidating three small communities of Iron River, Stambaugh, and Mineral Hills into one government entitiy: Iron River. It began years ago with the merger of public saftey services and ended with forward thinking leadership able to convince independent minded Yoopers that such a consolidation was in everyones self-interest. Yes, there were bumps in the road, including the renaming of duplicate streets, but the merger has at least given the area hope that brighter economic times are ahead and the sacrifices the early iron ore miners made to build those communities will be rewarded with sustainability into the future.

Might this be an example to study?

John G. Evans

You've said that Michigan state government is broke. These recommendations hardly constitute fixes to a broken system. They merely tinker around the edges and, if adopted, will leave us with more of the same that we're currently experiencing.

I will comment mostly on the areas of term limits and redistricting. However, the issues of lobbying and campaign finance deserve a mention.

Until lobbying is made a capital offense, the sure solution is to constitutionally require that lobbyist or lobbying organization may not contribute to a politician or his/her campaign. Simple. If you're going to lobby a representative or senator, you can't try to buy him/her in the election campaign.

How do campaigns get financed? Again, simple. Public financing.

TERM LIMITS:
From where I sit, eliminating term limits could well be titled "Cropsey Forever". For those of you who favor elimination of term limits, I'm confident that you conjure up images of Bill Ryan and Bill Bryant reappearing with their "institutional memory". Please don't forget that you'll be back to a world of Bill Copeland, Dominic Jacobetti, Joe Mack, Gar Lane, Harold Hungerford, Andy Cobb and Carol Newton. My favorite and a tribute to institutional memmory, however, was "Fightin' Phil" Rahoi who distinguished himself in entering his explanation of a "no" vote in the House Journal with the remark that, "While I was one of the sponsors of this bill, I voted against it because I didn't know what was in it."

REDISTRICTING:
Redistricting is a problem that doesn't need to exist if we truly believed in representative government. The fact of the matter is that, at the present, we do not have representative government. Somehow, the word "competitiveness" has become the mantra that stands for perfection in a democracy. I submit that the more competitive a district is, the less representative it is.

Consider two Michigan House districts: the 27th in Oakland County and the 90th in Ottawa County. In both cases, the winners in these districts garnered 78 per cent of the votes cast. One could argue that these winners represent nearly four out of five voters. On the other hand, one out of five voters is not represented in the Michigan House of "Representatives".

By contrast, look at two other House districts which you would no doubt classify as "competitive": The 39th in Oakland County and the 84th in Huron/Tuscola Counties. In these districts, the winners got 50.2 and 51.5 per cent, respectively, of the votes in the 2006 election. This means that one-half of the voters are represented and one-half are not represented.

Similar examples exist in the case of the Michigan Senate.

Somehow, there is a disconnect between the Network's call for "competitiveness" and the need for "representativeness" in the Michigan Legislature, House and Senate. It is particularly interesting that reference should be made in the Network's report to "democracy in the Middle East". It is my understanding that particular attention has been paid to make certain that representation is given high priority in designing those budding democracies. We should be able to do that here.

So, where does this leave us? Statewide in the 2006 election, 36 per cent voted for losers in the Senate races; 34 per cent voted for losers in the House races. That means that 1.3 million voters are not represented in the Michigan Senate and 1.24 million are not represented in the Michigan House.

Predictably, more voters will be unrepresented if the goal of greater "competitiveness" is achieved. Is that what you really want?

What's the solution? Again, simple. Figure out a system in which future would-be losers are represented. It is interesting that Bernie Apol's name is invoked with reference to redistricting. I believe his (respected?) name is associated with a system of representation that would give voice to the minority of voters in a district who are not currently represented. Other approaches to representation have been advanced. Harold Norris proposed a system in the Constitutional Convention in the early '60s as did Zolton Ferency's P.A.L.P. effort in the '90s.

SUMMATION:
Redistricting essentially becomes a non-issue if an approach is achieved in which all voters are represented and the resulting elected candidates carry with them a vote in the Michigan Legislature that reflects the strength of the vote they garnered in the general election.

The Network's proposal does NOT respect minority representation.

Yet the people of Michigan do as Mr. Power describes - and clear the road!

Following is a vote for value definition using right brain creatvity. A small tale of a business that seeks out the customers definition of the value received. Take the challenge and value this business for yourself. See what it is worth to you.

One local business I deal with returns $9.81 for every dollar invested! And it has been a consistent performer at this level of ROI for more than fifteen years.

A return of this magnitude requires cooperation and collaboration between all the components of an organization. The entity providing this financial reward is committed to supplying the benefit to its investors every day! Their employees work incredibly hard to customize their product offerings to each individual customer. Their leadership has created a culture of incremental continuous improvement that is evident in all aspects of every activity. (Certainly not the characteristics of our Legislature)

To get a snapshot of the data behind the numbers and see an assessment of VALUE, visit a small Michigan library's web page, http://salemsouthlyonlibrary.info/ and click on the link to the Library Services Calculator, http://www.ssldl.info/libcalc/.

Yes, a library, a business focused on delighting each customer and protecting the investment their taxpayers have made!

The sofware (program) is open source and could be adopted by anyone with the courage to put the definition of value in the customers hands.

And with knowledge of what the customer values maybe Michigan's government would begin to move with force and clarity - clear the damn road!