Thank you!

We're a couple of days removed now from the Governor's State of the State address.  As someone who had a chance to listen from the floor of the House and now to reflect on it for a few days what are your thoughts?

It sounded to me that Governor Granholm would like to further expand government programs.
Each year she comes up with new ways to increase the power of the State while paying lip service to the idea of reducing government.  

She knows what appeals to the majority of our Michigan citizens and has the sound-bytes to back it up.  As usual, her public rhetoric includes reducing the size of government, but privately she will do what she has always done; kill those reforms through the legislative process and grow the size of State bureaucracy.    

I've been watching these speeches for ten years or so now and I don't remember ever seeing a Governor literally have to beg for a reaction from the House and Senate the way Governor Granholm had to implore the chamber for a reaction.  Why wasn't she connecting with you?

Because we have all seen her speak before.  She is a wonderful speaker but follows a predicable pattern.  She makes all sorts of sweeping declarations and grand schemes but when it comes down to putting those ideas on paper they fail the common sense test.  

On the one hand though, it is interesting to see the reaction to her proposed tax breaks and incentives to lure new jobs to Michigan.  You and your House GOP colleagues have been hammering home the importance of tax relief for years now and she's always ignored it until now.  Any chance she's actually had an epiphany or is she just trying to get government to pick winners and losers?

Governor Granholm has had over 5 years to lead.  Hopefully she has decided to try something new.  What is interesting to me is that when the nation's economy shows signs of faltering, President Bush wants to give people money back.  We saw last year that Governor Granholm's  solution is to take more money from all of us.

If she truly wants to protect people's tax dollars and maybe even give some of everyone's hard earned money back, then I'd be happy to work with her toward making Michigan's marketplace as free from government interference as possible.  Letting people use their own resources is the way to get our economy back on its feet.      

Now the House Republican caucus has really been prevented from getting anything done, but you're still working.  Is there any legislation that you're particularly excited about or hopeful to get moving?  Something that affects your district?  Issues that are personally very important to you?

I have a strong bi-partisan 3 bill package of guardianship reforms that have been voted out of committee.  So far, they have failed to move on the floor.  These bills would close existing loopholes that unscrupulous people are using to take financial advantage of seniors and incapacitated minors.

These bills have wide reaching influence and would not only affect District 72 but our entire State for the better.  Our workgroup of specialists all agree the changes these bills bring are needed.  However, due to the current political climate, they are being stalled.  

One would think that really would be a bipartisan issue but then again, what is, right?  Any chance Andy Dillon will actually allow any legitimate progress later in the session?

I don't know.  I am doing my best to get the bills taken up.   All I want is for the guardianship package to get a vote.  They would pass easily.  I would like Speaker Dillon to show the leadership and decisiveness to put these on the board.  

While we're on the topic of the Speaker, he made some waves a couple weeks back by telling a conference of road builders that a vote to raise the gas tax was "probable" after the November elections.  Which is a brave admission about a pretty cowardly vote.  Since you'll still be sitting in that seat this coming November would you like to go on record beforehand so the voters know where you stand?  Will you vote to raise the gas tax come lame-duck?

I am against new taxes, and anything that makes gas prices go up even more is a bad idea.  So, I will oppose any gas tax increase.  I will quote the Governor's words, "The most important thing I learned is I'm not ever going to raise taxes again. It's too hard. It's too impossible."

Should that sort of vote be held after the elections or do voters deserve to know the result of that sort of thing and the way their candidates voted when they go to the polls?

Absolutely voters deserve to know whether a candidate wants to raise the gas tax or not!

We agree there!  Representative Steil, thanks again!