By The Center for Michigan - October 15, 2007
Everyone has - or should have - a vision for Michigan the way they would like it to be. How would you like to share yours - and maybe win a prize that could include a college scholarship, a vacation at one of our nicest resorts, or a shopping spree?
I've been writing a lot recently about a forthcoming citizen engagement campaign, Michigan's Defining Moment. The goal is to bring thousands of Michigan citizens and leaders together in "community conversations" to grapple with some of the pressing economic and political problems we face - problems, quite frankly, that our political leaders have utterly failed to resolve.
Our problems are serious. The base of our economy - the auto industry and the United Auto Workers union - is struggling to survive. Our state's budgeting, legislative and political systems are broken.
Taken together, we're facing the biggest crisis since the Great Depression, truly a "defining moment" for Michigan.
What we can't allow this campaign to become, however, is the usual fog of "policy wonks" blathering at other government junkies.
That would make for a sterile, emotionless discussion that is totally disconnected from the lives and minds of "normal" people.
Well, we aren't doing that. And that's why an important part of the Michigan's Defining Moment campaign is something called "EnvisionMichigan." It's an invitation for anybody to share their vision for Michigan. What's your vision for our state?
What kind of Michigan would keep your grandchildren here ... or bring your children back from Chicago?
And, most importantly ... how do we get there?
We want you to tell us. You can tell your Michigan story in words, in photos, or online audio/video stories. And Envision Michigan is offering more than $30,000 in prizes, including college scholarships, vacations to top Michigan resorts and weekly Meijer shopping sprees. Just go to www.thecenterformichigan.net to enter.
Here's a sample, submitted by Bill and Nancy Woods, from Kalamazoo, together with a lovely photo of their dog, Ginger, in a snowy scene at Kalamazoo College's Lillian Anderson Arboretum.
"Michigan inspires wonder with its mixture of woodland and prairie, lakes and streams, cities and villages. Our hope is that we can join together in common pursuit of prosperity while preserving our natural resources. Those resources should be considered an integral part of economic planning, not only for the tourist industry, but also as part of what attracts employers and workers to our state. "If you seek a pleasant peninsula, look about you!"
Submissions like this will help set the tone for the community conversations that will take place all over Michigan in the next two months. Once we've shared our visions for Michigan, it will be easier to discuss how we can find common ground to get there.
But there's a larger dimension to all this, as well. Here's what lay beneath the chaotic, frustrating and embarrassing spectacle that we saw acted out in Lansing a couple weeks ago: Basically, it was the inability of members of the legislature to come to a clear, common vision of the kind of Michigan they wanted to help create.
Lacking a common vision, they were unable to develop - much less agree on - a rigorously focused and disciplined plan to tax and spend the right amounts needed to achieve our goals.
What we got instead was an unfocused and expensive outcome: An increase in the income tax, plus a 6 percent sales tax on a bewildering and seemingly unrelated set of activities from palm reading to coin-operated blood pressure testing.
That, and - oh yes - a pledge to cut "$435 million in state spending," over the next 30 days. Is this a rigorously focused and disciplined taxing and spending plan?
We know better. If, for example, our lawmakers had agreed with Bill and Nancy Woods that the beauties of our natural resources and our environment are a vital part of our plan for prosperity, they would have made sure there was plenty of money in the budget for the Department of Natural Resources to do its job.
But that didn't happen, and the DNR will almost certainly get its budget cut yet again. What if our lawmakers had agreed that a clear vision of Michigan's future meant we need our universities to attract talented people from around the world? People, that is, who can help companies develop laboratory inventions into commercial products.
That vision alone ought to have been enough to spur the legislature into voting a special appropriation for our universities, reversing years of scandalous disinvestments. But the sad truth is that Michigan colleges and universities will be lucky just to get back the money withheld from their appropriations last year.
They aren't slated to get a dime of additional money, not even to keep pace with inflation - which means that in reality, we are cutting higher education once again.
Now, you have a chance to have your say about this, The Michigan's Defining Moment campaign offers a way for citizens to come together, develop a shared vision of what they want our state to look like - and then, to derive from that focused and disciplined policy and spending plans. Plans, that is, which allocate budget money to what's important and weeds out what's not. To learn more and reserve a seat at a conversation near you, go to www.thecenterformichigan.net.
Former newspaper publisher and University of Michigan Regent Phil Power is a longtime observer of Michigan politics and economics. He is also the founder and president of The Center for Michigan, a centrist think-and-do tank. The opinions expressed here are Power's own and do not represent the official views of The Center. Power welcomes your comments at ppower@thecenterformichigan.net.



2 Comments
I find the titles of your related posts very interesting. I guess we have to provide the vision. So because you think it will ruin the state to recall the members of the legislature, we should pay them over $80,000 a year plus great benefits while we do their work. Sounds like a plan. After all, we do not want to destroy their self esteem.
Rose Bogaert, Chair
Wayne County Taxpayers Association, Inc.
Phil is right to note that Michigan's economic problems are serious.
They can get worse, or they can get much, worse, depending on what our elected officials do. We are on the brink. In either case, we are probably looking at something along the lines of a 15 year slide. In 1998, the Big 3 had a market share of 75%. Now they have 50%. In another 10 years, their UAW-inspired cost disadvantage may drive their share down to 30%.
As the local economy shrinks faster than the government, tax rates will go up, making Michigan even less attractive, but manufacturers are not going to return to Michigan in large numbers as long as the local workforce fails to appreciate employers. Who is going to locate a plant where people earn $50 an hour for doing a $20 an hour job, and complain about it in the meantime?
And Granholm's recent blather about "attracting alternative energy" sounds like a collection of ill-conceived notions that you might expect from a 6th grade social studies class. I hope she was simply pandering to that part of the electorate too stupid to know any better -- and that she's doesn’t actually plan on wasting a lot of money on any of that cock-a-hooie.
If she is sincerely interested in energy, there are worthwhile projects to support. Consider that American power companies are now on the verge of building 20 to 30 new nuclear power plants. The greatest barrier up to now has been the approval process. Where energy is available, there also will go manufacturing. Each nuclear power plant generates 2,000 construction jobs during the building phase, and 400 high paying jobs on a permanent basis. While the North and Northeast has some of the greatest needs for power, most of the plants are planned for the South.
If Michigan would actively work on a bi-partisan basis to attract investment perhaps we could attract a project for Michigan. We can show a receptive disposition for projects, as well as remove regulatory hurdles in advance, which would also be taken as a sign of support. Reducing the perceived approval-risk would have tremendous value for a potential investor, yet could cost very little.
If Granholm insists on something more “alternative," she might consider working to attract a plasma gasification facility, which burns landfill trash at some unholy temperature, generating power in the process. Or for something less cutting edge, but still “edgy,” how about coal gasification?
The other big issue is the failure of Detroit public schools to provide a basic education. Democrats will never have the political will to address this problem since they are in hock to the teachers’ unions. Perhaps the solution is more money for teachers’ pensions. (But we’ll say it’s for the kids.) We will soon condemn another generation to whatever economic life awaits the uneducated.
Let's start with plans to completely privatize all education through full-fare vouchers and scale back plans from there. With an educated workforce, and with people able to buy homes in a metropolitan area for $20,000, Detroit would have tremendous potential. Or, it can slip into a hole, weighed down by rising taxes, capital flight, an overpaid skilled workforce, and an uneducated unskilled workforce.
Post a Comment