Tag: Wayne Schmidt

Automatic wage increases, a term that can only be associated with those on a government paycheck, are actually being considered in a bill sponsored by 'Republicans.'  HB5097, as the Mackinac Center reports, will exempt certain PA312 of 1969 covered employees from PA54 of 2011.

".. House Bill 5097, which has 23 co-sponsors, would exempt law enforcement and fire department employees from the law. Specifically, the exemption would apply to employees who are covered by Public Act 312 of 1969, which is a compulsory arbitration law.

Perhaps next, they might propose an automatic wage increase for farmers?  Without the heroic acts of farmers none of us might eat! What about plumbers? Fighting fire without water wouldn't work too well.  How about auto makers, etc.. ?

According to Mackinac there are 18 Republicans co-sponsoring the legislation.  Reps: Kevin Cotter, Hugh Crawford, Kevin Daley, Jeff Farrington, Frank Foster, Ken Goike, Nancy Jenkins, Eileen Kowall, Ken Kurtz, Andrea LaFontaine, Matt Lori, Lisa Posthumus Lyons, Mike McCready, Rick Outman, Peter Pettalia, Wayne Schmidt, Pat Somerville, and Dale Zorn.

Five Democrat Reps: Vicki Barnett, Paul Clemente, Brandon Dillon, Tim Greimel, and Henry Yanez.

Considering the ridiculous assertion by Wayne Schmidt in 2012 that he was a superior gun rights advocate with his deceptive bright orange mailer which stated: "Vote on August 7 to protect your gun rights"; with no candidate carrying anti gun views in competition at that time.  The implication that voting for the challenger (myself) would imperil such rights was frankly, "Nutty"

Schmidt's progressive attitude with regard to big government, complete streets, expensive transportation schemes, expansion of welfare, and pandering to whomever is in power demonstrates a left of center (read: Democrat) socio-type,  and should hardly leave anyone comfortable with him protecting such rights anyhow.  And as for the gun positions, in 2012, he wasn't even rated by Michigan Coalition For Responsible Gun Owners like most other candidates.

Passed 74 to 33 in the House on October 3, 2013, to mandate that vehicle owners must replace their license plate after 10 years, even if it is still legible. Under current law the state imposes a $5 extra charge to replace a plate.

But to the base of the Republican Party?

Alrighty then.

The Michigan lawmaker sponsoring a bill authorizing red light cameras has made a U-turn on the issue.

Rep. Wayne Schmidt, R-Traverse City, who chairs the House Transportation Committee, last year co-sponsored a bill that would have banned red light cameras. This year, he sponsored a bill that would have brought red light cameras to traffic intersections across the state.

However, Rep. Schmidt said he has chosen not to move the red light authorization bill forward because of concerns he says he now has about traffic cameras and privacy issues.

Concerns about privacy?  Sure it is.  At testimony, Rep. Peter Pettalia spelled that all out for Wayne.

Manufacturers of red light cameras have a reputation for heavy lobbying in state capitols. It is not clear if sponsors of the bill have received any campaign support from red light camera manufacturers. Contributions do not have to be reported until the end of the year in an off-election year, according to the Michigan Secretary of State's office.

Traverse City and Traverse County have been under financial pressure from unfunded pension liabilities, and revenue from red light cameras could provide some relief. However, Traverse City Manager Jered Ottenwess said he is not aware of any interest in installing the cameras.

All but one of the eight co-sponsors on the red light camera bill are Democrats from the Detroit area.

I suppose it's not a good day to be a Show Pony in the 104th with further political aspirations.

Each of these representatives put their mark on the dotted line for eventual higher federal taxes, Obamacare, and expanding reliance on a bigger government. They are Republicans, who have sought and won the trust of those who believe in a LIMITED government, and support a platform that says Republicans will do so. Many wouldn't even be in office if it were not for the grass roots conservative revolution in 2010; a group that is hardly out of the picture.

JamesBolger@house.mi.gov; mikeCallton@house.mi.gov; HughCrawford@house.mi.gov; CindyDenby@house.mi.gov; AnthonyForlini@house.mi.gov; FrankFoster@house.mi.gov; BenGlardon@house.mi.gov; JosephHaveman@house.mi.gov; BradJacobsen@house.mi.gov; KlintKesto@house.mi.gov; EileenKowall@house.mi.gov; AndreaLaFontaine@house.mi.gov; MattLori@house.mi.gov; LisaLyons@house.mi.gov; GregMacMaster@house.mi.gov; michaelmccready@house.mi.gov; MargaretOBrien@house.mi.gov; DavePagel@house.mi.gov; EarlPoleski@house.mi.gov; AlPscholka@house.mi.gov; AmandaPrice@house.mi.gov; BillRogers@house.mi.gov; MikeShirkey@house.mi.gov; WayneSchmidt@house.mi.gov; JimStamas@house.mi.gov; JohnWalsh@house.mi.gov; KenYonker@house.mi.gov; DaleWZorn@house.mi.gov;

We know of a couple who have said they will change their votes.  They are not responding to threats of activists, but realize after making their choices, that they have been lied to along the way by the governor, the Lt governor and lobbyist after lobbyist looking for that next windfall on the taxpayer dime.  Help the rest of them get the information they need.

The last chance is tomorrow or this week.  

As many of you are aware, State Senator Howard Walker R-37th has decided to forgo a second term, thus leaving a fairly solid Republican seat up for grabs.  Walker might well have gotten tired of the threats to primary him, but he has publicly  responded that it was a family decision.  We wish him the best, and hope he departs the senate with head held high, SANS a Medicaid/Welfare expansion vote when the time comes.  Voting FOR such a thing would be a pretty serious blemish on a fairly decent record to walk away with.

Unfortunately, the shame of expanding government is carried by the already announced would-be replacements.

Wayne Schmidt RINO-104th, and Greg MacMaster R-105th, are vying for the seat, each with the distinction of having supported the growth of government through their vote for Obamacare.

Note the designated (R) difference used, as their overall records could be parsed to paint a true picture of ideology.  Schmidt's frequent support of many things expansion and subsidy, stand in contrast to the GOP platform of smaller government, and intrusion. Of course Schmidt's record is longer, and more easily scrutinized than that of MacMaster, who riding the Tea Party wave of 2010, has since revealed that on key issues, he cannot be counted on to hold the conservative line. MacMaster has been a vocal opponent to disastrous A21 policies, and has introduced legislation that has made it no further than the committees, one of them chaired by Schmidt.

So we are at the starting gate with Wayne "I Like Big Government" Schmidt, and Greg "I tried to cut a deal for small business" MacMaster.  The former being one you can trust to disappoint frequently; the latter not solidly rooted in conviction.  The former not nearly as 'popular' as the latter, being one who doesn't raise money so well.

So do we break out the checkbooks, hold our noses, pirouette, or sit on our hands?

Why is it that government must constantly move the line in the sand in a way that chips away at our liberties?  Why do we continue to elect those who are so readily available and capitulating to the Lansing and National parasites which outnumber them 8 to 1?

Schmidt didn't write this legislation any more than he built Cobo Hall with his bare hands.  This is likely template legislation provided by ATS to Schmidt, and the reward for being such a bold legislator remains a mystery.

Any dummy that follows him into this rabbit hole just adds another reason to distrust our legislators' ability to learn from history.