Taking away the options, our elected class leaves us with no choice, right?
That is, if you intend on voting for proposal 15-1. And all the animal sounds notwithstanding, will anyone reading this accept the fact that they have pretty much been ‘herded’ like common farm critters if they decide to support the measure?
Consider how ‘heeling’ with a border collie is done. By taking away the options for movement, a nip at the herded animal’s feet, and the dog manipulates the path of the animal so that it pursues the desired direction. When one goes astray, the new direction is blocked ensuring a return to the planned route.
When looking at proposal 15-1, it should not have gone unnoticed that the scheduling of the proposal’s vote is at the time when the roads are at their peak ‘crap’ condition. The end of winter and at a time when patching work by the local road commission has not completely caught up with the seasonal destruction.
This makes the path toward passage easier. We all want good roads, safe driving conditions, and safe bridges. Who wouldn’t, and with the desire for the above at its summit, a well placed trail is made to passage.
Then there is a recent change in education funding that removes money from K-12, and gives it to higher education. No doubt THAT was necessary before asking taxpayers to bump primary education funding with a 17% sales tax boost, right?
Add to this the stories of people possibly dying by falling into potholes, children at risk, bridges being held up with plywood and a prayer, its amazing there isn’t a straight line trench trampled through to 15-1’s passage already! As one of the proponents quoted by MLIVE point out:
“The bottom line is, a ‘yes’ vote means we get to fix the roads, and a ‘no’ vote means we’re going to be stuck with the roads we have for years and years to come,” said Roger Martin, a spokesperson for the Safer Roads Yes! committee. “That’s really the choice we’re confronted with.”
That is the “choice we’re confronted with.”
Some choice. The path of least resistance is made more easily so if there are no competing interests, truth?.
We’ve been told repeatedly that there is no “plan B.” We’ve been radio bombed with what appears to be conversations of ‘cowed’ voters who “Don’t like the proposal, but golly gee there is nothing else.” (which begs a side question of “what idiot writes that stuff?”) But apparently its not because legislators have tried and failed to find a plan B, or C, etc., but rather on purpose as what might instead be a top down directive from Michigan’s executive orifice to have no choice..
Tim Skubick has discovered yet another of the ‘herding’ aspects present here. He notes in his article that there are tea party efforts to revive an old option. Others, and in particular, Rick Snyder’s road boondoggle team want no part in it:
While the two go back and forth, there’s another more poignant political aspect to all this Plan B debate.
The popular wisdom is, the more chatter there is about a Plan B, the more reasons voters have not to vote, thinking Lansing will take care of it after May 5.
Confirming that notion is the former Senate GOP leader turned private consultant Ken Sikkema.
“It doesn’t help for the Legislature and others to be saying, “Well let’s talk about a Plan B.” Which is why the governor is not.
Mr. Sikkema says such talk “throws gas on those fires” of uncertain voters who might vote no if there is another alternative to a tax increase.
We’ll still be looking at other options however. Expect the roadblocks to magically appear in all areas that have a reasonable chance of success outside of this predestined catastrophe. Polling might be currently showing a stampede in the direction of non-existent alternate possibilities, but its not yet over.
Lets see what other nips on our heels we endure between now and May 5th.