The tax hiking surrender monkey majority in Lansing, led by none other than a duplicitous twit from Livonia, lets the retaliation cat out of the bag.
Unionized police and firefighters could again receive retroactive pay raises through new contracts under legislation being considered in the state House that would exempt them from a 2011 law.
The Legislature three years ago outlawed retroactive pay raises for unionized local government workers for time periods when they were working under an expired contract.
But state Rep. John Walsh, R-Livonia, said the law was meant to be aimed only at public school employees and was not intended to cover police and firefighters, whose unions are governed by a different collective bargaining law.
Because those within the union of First Responders are Heroes™ propaganda, oh, say like this example here, have way more enforcement value to a politician than those within the MEA?
It took a little time for it to sink in, but Michigan’s legislature may have made the same mistake with ATT, that was made with BCBS.
Consider the decades of [government enforced] monopoly protections and the ability to hang their lines exclusively prior to deregulation. A compact that allowed ATT to profit heavily through its stand alone status, was then modified to ATT’s desires during the breakup of the bell system in 1974. Also consider the effects on small rural operators that rely on ATT for service access.
SB789, sponsored by Mike Green, would make numerous positive changes to the statutes concerned with concealed pistol licensure. This would include such things as:
Eliminate the county gun boards – requirements verification shifts to Michigan State Police
Count Clerk becomes the licensing authority
Remove the requirement to provide two references
Reduce the application fee $15 from $105 to $90
100% of court costs and attorney fees to the appellant if a denial gets overturned
Shorten and cement the timeframe for a go/no-go in regards to the application
NO WHERE does it remove the fact that the licenses shall be issued assuming the applicant passes the more or less objectively defined standards in 28.425b. In fact, the striking of 28.425b(7)(n) (shown below) further solidifies the the shall-issue aspect:
Most folks actively watching the goings on in Lansing might already be aware of the MichiganVotes.org site run by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
Nowhere else can you find a more complete collection of legislative efforts. Easily referenced, and with a record of votes by legislator, party, the chambers the votes were taken in, and legislative sessions. It is an incredibly useful tool when trying to find out how your legislator voted on any particular issue of interest. Its a great way of keeping these ‘servants’ in check when they claim to be conservative, but vote like the liberals or something even worse.