If there's one person in Michigan politics who can be depended on to raise a rumpus, often at just the right time, it's Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson.  He did it again - big time - last week in his State of the County speech.

He announced he'd lead a statewide drive to repeal the Single Business Tax, and he's planning to raise $800,000 in pledges from businesses and individuals to fund a petition drive to put the issue on the November ballot.

Michigan's main business tax, the SBT is essentially a tax on payroll.  But it is complex, difficult to administer and stands out like a sore thumb in comparison with business taxes in other states.  According to state government revenue forecasts for 2006, the SBT yields $1.8 billion in revenue for the state, representing nearly one quarter of the state's total $8.2 billion General Fund.

Flourishing his reliably flamboyant rhetoric, Patterson called the SBT "damnable", a "job killer" and a "business killer".  "More than the global economy, the Single Business Tax is killing this state because it is killing jobs in Michigan," he asserted.

He assaulted "our friends in Lansing" for pussyfooting around the fundamental problem of Michigan's arcane tax structure.  "They've introduced legislation, which quite frankly nibbles around the edges of meaningful business tax reform. ... We've been arguing about the impact of the Single Business Tax in this state for more than 15 years.  The endless debates on this subject have produced more flatulence than a Super Bowl party at a MSU frat house."

Whew!

Patterson's move does two things, both very good.

First, by threatening to put a radical - and likely popular - tax cut on the ballot, he is forcing both the legislature and Governor Jennifer Granholm to get serious about a problem that they've been ducking for years.

Second, it puts front and center just what $1.8 billion from the SBT buys.  It's almost exactly the same amount the state spends in total for either all our colleges and universities or the entire corrections system.  So if you eliminate the SBT and don't make up the revenue it produces, you've got no higher education system or no jails and prisons.

Patterson's speech also sets up a magnificently sensible scenario by which Michigan can simultaneously reform its arcane and out of date tax system, begin to resolve the chronic billion dollar-plus structural state budget deficit and undo the damage to our economic future that's been caused by cuts to our universities that amount to more than $300 million over the past five years.

Here's how it could work:

The legislature passes a bill repealing the SBT, which is signed by the governor.

Contained in the bill is a requirement that the $1.8 billion in lost revenue be replaced either by an increase in the state income tax or a reduction in the rate of the state sales tax, which would then apply to both goods and services.  Voters statewide will be presented with a choice between these two on the November ballot.  And the legislation contains an earmark allocating a specified percentage of the new revenue stream to our state's colleges and universities.

Business would love it.  Politicians who want to be anti tax would love it, especially since selecting which device to make up the lost revenue would be put in the hands of the people.  Colleges and universities (and their students and their families, who have been forced to make up for legislative cuts in state support by increased tuition payments) would be thrilled.  Most importantly, anybody who knows anything about economic development would love it, as it's plain that our economic future depends absolutely on our higher education system helping us toward a knowledge-based economy.

I asked Tom Clay, the respected research director of the Michigan Citizen's Research Council, how the numbers worked.  He estimates a 5% sales tax (down from the present 6% rate) levied on most services excepting health care would come close to making up the loss in income from the SBT.

When I presented this scenario to Patterson, he jumped at the idea.  "To get the legislature and the governor to act saves me a long season of hard slogging," he told me.  "Broadening the sales tax while reducing the rate seems fair.  And earmarking part of the revenue stream for higher education strengthens just the things in Michigan that will drive our future economic growth."

OK, Governor Granholm.  OK legislators.  Brooks Patterson has teed it up for you.  Do you have the guts to do the right thing at the right time?  Or will you whiff, yet again?

It's your choice.

For 40 years, Phil Power's columns appeared regularly in his Michigan newspapers, winning many state and national awards.  An entrepreneur, former Regent of the University of Michigan, Vice Chair of the Michigan Economic Development Corporation and founder of the Center For Michigan, he brings long- time experience in business, economics, politics, public policy and education.