Tag: budget (page 3)

Just out:

The Senate Fiscal Agency projects that there could be a shortfall of about $1.85 billion for the state's general fund. The state's school aid fund is in better shape.

The House Fiscal Agency is expected to put out its own projections next month.

OK.. I resolve!  

Strange..  That was loads easier than quitting smoking.

Sec. 292. The department shall not expend money appropriated in part 1 for the processing, distribution, transfer, or dispersal of any money equivalent to or representing union dues for any contract to which the state is not a party.

Bang.

You will find few people that are not concerned with the educational system in this state and in this country. When measured against the accomplishments of other nations around the world, America is not considered anywhere near the top, and when compared to other states in this nation, tens of thousands of Michigan students are corralled in some of the most dismally performing public school systems from sea to shining sea.

When it comes to education, the success of any Michigan child is essentially dependent upon a roll of the dice. If a child is, for example, born below Eight Mile, his or her chances of ever graduating are about a third of what they are in many other parts of the state, and a diploma, if ever received at all, will often times be worth little more than the paper it is printed on.

"Oh, it doesn't bother me one bit. I love it."

That is my response to a question asked by MSU labor and industrial relations professor Richard Block.

"The question of compensation is always a difficult one. What is the right amount?"

"Levels of compensation are a function of the responsibility of the person, the culture of the organization as well as what other local officials are getting."

[...]

"It may not bother the membership, and the membership is paying the bills, so why should it bother us?"

But one group is actually becoming richer in Michigan: government employees. State and local government employee compensation increased by 5.5% during the same period, and federal employee compensation is up by 7.5%.

And the good times will keep rolling for state government bureaucrats who are scheduled to receive a nice 3% pay increase this year unless two-thirds of state lawmakers vote to halt the pay hike.

Assessment from the office of Republican Leader John Boehner: During today's White House health care summit, President Obama made this claim:  "What we've done is we've tried to take every single cost containment idea that's out there.  Every proposal that health care economists say will reduce health care costs, we've tried to adopt in the various proposals."

No, not so much.

Despite the President's rhetoric, Democrats' job-killing health care proposals do not implement a single major GOP reform that would lower costs for families and small businesses.  Yes, Washington Democrats have recently begun incorporating into their rhetoric a few of the same words Republicans have long used.  But when you dig beneath the newly-minted rhetoric and actually look at the text of their bills, it quickly becomes evident that they haven't actually incorporated any of the major health care reforms Republicans support.  

Of course, even if these GOP reforms were incorporated, they would still be attached to legislation that includes job-killing tax hikes, deep cuts to Medicare, massive unfunded mandates on states, unconstitutional mandates on individuals, an "abortion premium" levied on taxpayers, vast new powers for the federal bureaucracy, and other unacceptable provisions the American people reject.

Initial reviews of the President's costly, job-killing health care proposal revealed it didn't include any new GOP ideas:

"Mr. Obama's plan, released ahead of a televised health summit with congressional leaders Thursday, didn't include any additional nods to Republican ideas." (The Wall Street Journal, 2/23/10)

"Obama's proposal was not the blank slate demanded by the GOP and was short on new ideas aimed at winning their support." (The Hill, 2/22/10)

"President Obama's `opening bid' on health reform is not designed to entice Republicans to join the game." (Washington Post editorial, 2/23/10)

A Reading Guide to the Senate Bill's Backroom Deals

"I think the health care debate as it unfolded legitimately raised concerns not just among my opponents, but also amongst supporters that we just don't know what's going on.  And it's an ugly process and it looks like there are a bunch of back room deals."

-- President Obama, interview with ABC's Diane Sawyer, January 25, 2010[i]

The White House recently released its own health care proposal[ii] in the form of changes to the 2,733 page legislation (H.R. 3590) that passed the Senate in December.[iii]  While the proposal purports to remove the "Nebraska FMAP provision" that saw 49 other states funding Nebraska's Medicaid largesse (known as the "Cornhusker Kickback"), it does not address other deals negotiated by Democrats in the Senate legislation.  Many other backroom agreements are included in the Senate bill, which the White House has now endorsed as the platform for Democrats to enact "health reform" into law:

Page 428--Section 2006, known as the "Louisiana Purchase," provides an extra $300 million in Medicaid funding to Louisiana.[iv]

Page 878--Section 3201(g), known  as the "Gator Aid" provision, shields certain Florida residents from Medicare Advantage cuts.  In December, 57 Senate Democrats voted not to extend this special deal to all Medicare beneficiaries.[v]

Page 2132--Section 10201(e)(1) provides an increase in Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments for Hawaii, meaning 49 other states will pay more in taxes so that Hawaii can receive this special benefit.

Page 2222--Section 10323 makes certain individuals exposed to environmental hazards eligible for Medicare coverage.  The definition used in the bill ensures the only individuals eligible will be those living in Libby, Montana.

Page 2237--Section 10324 increases Medicare payments by $2 billion in "frontier states."[vi]

Page 2354-- Section 10502 spends $100 million on "debt service of, or direct construction of, a health care facility," language which the sponsors intended to benefit Connecticut.[vii]

Page 2394--Section 10905(c) includes language exempting Nebraska Blue Cross/Blue Shield and Michigan Blue Cross/Blue Shield from the new tax on health insurance companies, despite an Administration-released report calling Michigan Blue Cross/Blue Shield's 2009 rate increases "disturbing."[viii]

Page 2395--Section 10905(d) exempts Medigap supplemental insurance plans sold by Mutual of Omaha, headquartered in Nebraska, from the new tax on health insurance companies.

These specific agreements and provisions also do not display the full scope of the White House's legislative deal-making.  For instance, the head of the pharmaceutical industry said the Administration approached him to negotiate a secret arrangement with his industry: "We were assured, `We need somebody to come in first.  If you come in first, you will have a rock-solid deal.'"[ix]  And former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean publicly admitted at a town hall forum that "The reason that tort reform is not in the [health care] bill is because the [Democrat Members] who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers."[x]