The Michigan House just voted to give the Detroit Public Schools a $500 million bailout and the State Senate wants to give $800 million.
104th State Representative and incumbent Larry Inman explains it away as a necessary evil. He suggested on the Ron Jolly radio program Wednesday morning, that lawyers warned house leadership that if they didn’t do something, the courts would take over, and it could be far worse. He referenced the Michigan constitution, and its requirement on the legislature to provide funding for the schools.
My guess is that he did not ask the question of the attorneys advising the house “what might happen if every school district subjected the taxpayers to the same challenge?”
YES, the state is supposed to provide an education. The legislature is supposed to “maintain and support a system of elementary and secondary schools.. ” In fact, From the state constitution:
The problem is not the expense of the tools, but the tools themselves.
I have frequently argued that the problem with campaign finance is not the ability of donors to support candidates, but rather the destructive hammer that government wields.
Full disclosure, as we have argued on these pages is critical. The process out in the open encourages good behavior, and provides a limiting effect on pandering to financial interests by politicos. Even the amounts even being less important to the argument. Saying:
We DO agree that limits should be removed from campaign finance. We agree that limiting to an arbitrary amount can impede free speech and political expression. What is considered a fair contribution into the process is a completely subjective matter that can only be resolved by the person who is willing to contribute into that process. A person’s individual priorities and where a subject reaches a level of importance are hardly the providence of external assignment.
The full argument making the point that ‘effect’ of the contributions being known, lessens the harmful power of the influence.