Now here's a little good news for a change -- a glimpse of what can happen when the political system works and politicians rise out of their ideological trenches to try and do what's right.

This came last week, after months of intense partisan squabbling about Michigan's business tax structure. Finally, we saw the beginnings of a breakthrough that could lead to an agreement.

Those with long memories will recall that last year, a petition drive launched by Oakland County Executive L. Books Patterson led to the repeal of the Single Business Tax, the state's main levy on business, a tax that brings in around $2 billion annually.

But the legislature abolished it without putting anything in its place, effective at the end of this year. In a state already facing billion-dollar deficits for both this fiscal year and the next, that threatened to add enormously to an already daunting financial crisis.

Governor Jennifer Granholm's early ideas for replacing the SBT were declared dead upon arrival, and much of this year has been consumed by complicated arguments about what to do about it.

These arguments involved not only the political parties (Democrats generally wanted any new business tax to be revenue-neutral, while Republicans pushed for a $500 million tax cut) but also various sectors of Michigan businesses (manufacturers wanted reduction of the personal property tax, while insurance companies wanted to maintain their favorable position in the tax code.)

Those arguments became more intense as lawmakers discovered - duh! - that businesses were simply not going to consider moving to or expanding in Michigan without knowing what the tax environment was going to be like.

Jim Epolito, CEO of the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, reported that up to $5 billion in potential investment here was being held hostage until it was known just what Michigan's business tax structure would be.

Moreover, there is even less time left than might appear. Officials at the state treasury began noting that it would take at least six months to develop the forms and procedures needed to actually collect whatever tax the legislature agreed on.

So, as the calendar moved forward into May, everybody began to recognize that time was running out. Enter three groups not usually noted for working closely together: The powerful Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Michigan House of Representatives, and the governor's office and her appointed state treasurer. Robert Kleine.

Under the leadership of Speaker Andy Dillon (D-Redford) and tax committee chairman Steve Bieda (D-Warren), House Democrats proposed a tax package that would fully replace SBT revenue.

The money would come from taxing a combination of business income and net worth, provide around $900 million in personal property tax relief and offer some $700 million in new tax credits for companies that invest in Michigan.

A lot of interested people said they liked the package. Capital intensive manufacturers, who dislike the personal property tax more than the SBT, were happy. Local government folks were relieved that reduction of the personal property tax wouldn't hurt their revenue stream. Major corporations, business groups like the Michigan Manufacturers Association, organized labor and universities all had something nice to say.

Most important was the state Chamber of Commerce, which said it was "intrigued" with much of the plan. Tricia Kinley, the chamber's tax expert, praised features that would give businesses incentives to expand in Michigan. At that point, momentum for a bipartisan, broadly acceptable business tax plan began to build.

When I talked to Rich Studley, executive vice president of the Chamber late last week, he was cautiously optimistic. "Of course, there will be some political maneuvering and posturing," he said, "but we want to play a constructive role in this. This is not a political issue, but a public policy issue."

The chamber has, he said, pulled together more than 100 business leaders around the state, surveyed business tax conditions in other states, and held meeting after meeting of its tax committee over the past year. "Having supported SBT repeal, we felt an ethical obligation to play a constructive role in the process."

Studley also praised State Treasurer Robert Kleine. "I talked with Kleine, who is a smart and sensible guy. He made it clear that we really had to have some time of detailed act passed in time for Treasury to work out how to collect it. He was very responsive." Studley concluded, "if we miss the deadline for passing a business tax, Michigan will look like some kind of banana republic."

Of course, given a package as complicated as this, there will be no end of debates as the process moves forward; both the House and the Senate passed differing plans last week by largely straight party-line votes. The Senate plan gives businesses a $600 million tax cut, and a lot of work will have to be done to mold the plans together. But the fact that there is, at long last, momentum to get something done is an important sign that lawmakers and interest groups can come together and do the right thing.

This was an example of how Michigan should work and a cautionary tale about what hasn't worked in times past.

Now imagine what would happen if people actually got together and earnestly tried to find common ground on issues like prison spending, higher education, and the current budget deficit.

We might even have a state that worked once again.

***

Phil Power is a longtime observer of politics, economics and education issues in Michigan. He would be pleased to hear from readers at ppower@hcnnet.com. Phil Power is president of the Center for Michigan. However, these opinions and others expressed in Phil Power's columns are individual opinions and do not in any way represent official policy positions of the Center for Michigan.