I must be dreaming!

After looking through the report, I'll be honest, I've never heard of some of the programs proposed to be cut/eliminated (i.e. Commission on Spanish Speaking Affairs & Truck Safety Enforcement Team). I'm sure that I'm not alone there.

I also like the proposal to change the timing of school election to twice a year instead of four. My personal recommendation would be to make those two months August & November.

These report is certain to ruffle a lot of feathers in Lansing.

I like it.

One more thing, given that this will free up a boatload of money, is there any talk of really stimulating the economy and dropping the '07 income tax hike?

Letting people keep more of their own money to, I don't know, spend it as they see fit, will do more to help the economy, than some Washington/Lansing bureaucrat.

This type of concrete alternatives is what is adding to the momentum from the negatives of Obama and his policies.  I agree it is nice to see Republican standing up and not trying to sound like they are almost like Dems.

I even heard Jay Riemersma in Muskegon talk of a Republican Rennasaince.  

The new media is playing a big part in this too.  But I'm biased so I'll leave it at; I'll take a scoop of that red Republican brand Nick and I definately don't want a Cherry on top!!! lol

If we had some of the leading candidates that would jump on this I would feel better still.

It's risky since you know every bleeding heart adolescent currently running the Dem Party will scream bloody murder and more than likely their echo-chamber (AKA: Mainstream Press) will do their bidding from this point of view too.

But I'm hoping the majority of Michiganders will actually take a look at (or at least listen to)  what's being proposed, will realize we can no longer spend money we don't have, and vote for real and truly positive change in state government in November '10.

This is a step in the right direction.  If nothing else, it tells voters who the grown-ups are in Lansing.

DCuz
www.RightCuz.com

http://www.freep.com/article/20090722/NEWS15/90722031/Michigan-Democrats-aim-to-test-backing-for-hig her-minimum-wage

I no longer believe they are innocently leading people astray. That's why we don't hear angry regrets from ALL of Granholm supporters. Pres Elect Obama PICKED her to advise him on the economy! President Obama considered Grandhack for Labor Secretary until they realized too many people were waking up to the shenanigans, and she was forced to say she didn't want it. This is why they hate Palin. She's the real deal and they didn't want us to have her. Their typical hate fest.

For the thick-headed among you, let's review. Almost all of the increase in state spending has come from additional federal funding. The only thing that rolling spending back to 2004 levels is that we'll be getting less of our own tax dollars back from Washington. Many of you clearly don't understand the difference between state programs funded with state tax dollars and state programs funded with federal tax dollars. I would think that your representatives in Lansing would. The only conclusion one can reach is that they are stupid or they are deceitful and willing to lie to the voters to get them to believe that state tax revenues have been increasing by billions of dollars per year when the truth is almost all of the new revenue has come from federal sources.

The Republican proposal also deceives people into believing that state spending has been increasing across the board. Again, another lie. In most areas, state funding is less today than it was in 2004. State revenue sharing to local governments has been cut, funding for state parks is non-existent, funding for community colleges and universities is down. The two major areas funded with state dollars that have seen increases are in prisons and schools. We know Republicans love their prisons. The more people in prisons, the better!

Many of the big dollar proposed "savings" are completely arbitrary numbers. $90 million in savings from Medicaid fraud annually? They're going to go after the same crooks every year? Enforcement will never make that number go down? That's a joke.

The rest of the savings focus on making sure the state cuts fall on the back of the poor. Freezing the EIC and increasing co-pays for people on state assistance sound like a good way to kick down people who are already hurting.

Another target is support for college students. Gut the Merit Aid and General Fund support for financial aid. Let's kick out another leg of support from underneath poor students trying to better themselves. And let's not forget the young ones. Another $400 million cut to School Aid for K-12.

The final kicker is that the plan engages in massive amounts of gimmickery to pretend to create savings where none exists. One way is the claim that annualizing the EO 2009-22 can save over $300 million dollars a year. That's just plain fraud on the Republicans part. Most of the savings achieved in the EO were done so by ending programs. Those are one-time savings.

In other areas, the Republicans are double-dipping, claiming savings through the EO where they had already claimed they would cut elsewhere in their proposal like the Merit Award, 21st Century Jobs Fund and even small expenditures like the Commission on Spanish Speaking Affairs that someone noted. Do Lansing Republicans not understand that if you count a cut from the EO, you don't get to count it again by listing it separately?

They also stamped their approval for cuts that those here have howled about like the 2+ million cut in spending for veteran affairs and the 14 million dollar cut in the state police. You didn't see those get mentioned in the list of Republican cuts but they would be included in the annualized EO cuts.

Federal Funds
2004-05 12,855.5
2008-09 17,798.2

A $5 billion dollar increase that mirrors the increase in the overall state budget. You're two-faced because you cry about the lack of federal funding and turn around and cry about the increase of the state budget total which is due to additional federal funds. You can't have it both ways.

I know that dishonesty is the SOP for Republicans in Lansing but the facts are always going to trip you up. Is that why you wouldn't put up the numbers on the areas I called out? State revenue sharing? Higher Ed? Community Colleges? State Parks? How about some numbers to show that state spending is up in those areas as Republicans want voters to believe?