Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2008 Senate Bill 1111: Appropriations: Supplemental budget

Public Act 279 of 2008

facebook  twitter    Comments on this legislation    Post new comment    Text and Analysis    Add to Watch List 
  Previous   Next 

Most Recent Comments

1) "journal statement"  by Admin003 on September 19, 2008 
Senator Cassis’ statement is as follows:

First and foremost, there are some good and some not so good features of this supplemental, in my opinion. Some of the good things include implementation of the Great Lakes water compact and the implementation of the Real ID situation, but others in here really concern me because I think they are earmarks. I think that every time the General Fund is inflated due to earmarks, we are spending too much. Some of these earmarks are adding almost $500,000 for new Michigan State Police post in Hart and providing $415,000 for five hunting ranches struck by pseudorabies in pigs. Unfortunately, I guess these are pigs without any lipstick. That is my attempt to be funny, I don’t know. That is the first time I got a laugh out of this body, and I am glad to see that.

In any event, while I have supported the Detroit Zoo, I feel that another expenditure from the General Fund is just more than our state at this point can comfortably handle. These are the reasons why at this time I feel it necessary to vote “no.”
Reply

Line

2) "journal statement"  by Admin003 on September 19, 2008 
Senator George’s statement is as follows:

There is one provision in the supplemental budget bill that troubles me, and for that reason, I am going to be voting “no” on the bill. It is the provision that awards a special grant to one of our cultural institutions, and I mention this because as chair of the History, Arts, and Libraries Subcommittee, I have worked hard with my subcommittee colleagues to make sure that the process is fair and competitive.

There are hundreds of arts groups that apply for funding every year. The department recently released the recipients for the coming year and I think there are about 250. They come from all over the state, and most of them are struggling. To take a large chunk of money and to award it to a single cultural institution and bypass the normal process, I think, undermines what the Michigan Council for Arts and Cultural Affairs has attempted to do—that is, to have a fair and juried process.

There are arts organizations all around the state; the list is available from the History, Arts, and Libraries Department. There are over fifty-one, for example, in Wayne County. They are sharing a total of about $8 million this year, and that is down from about $30 million several years ago. Now to take $4.5 million and pick one winner, one institution, and bypass the process, I think, is patently unfair to all the others. By doing this, this one group avoids the application fee, the oversight, the reporting mechanism, and they have avoided the competitive process. It sends a bad message to the groups that are following the legitimate pathway and are patiently waiting in line for their funding. For this reason, I will be voting “no” on this measure.
Reply

Line

3) 2008 Senate Bill 1111 (Appropriations: Supplemental budget )  by admin on January 1, 2001 
Introduced in the Senate on February 13, 2008, to adopt a Fiscal Year 2007-2008 supplemental appropriations bill that shifts the source of previously appropriated funds between federal, state restricted and state general fund dollars. The bill also adds funding for various items including $4.5 million for the Detroit Zoo, $21.5 million for increased state employee health insurance charges, $2.5 million in federal money to implement “Real ID Act” mandates, a $415,000 grant to five hunting ranches, $450,000 for a new State Police post building in Hart, and more

The vote was 30 in favor, 6 opposed and 2 not voting

(Senate Roll Call 549 at Senate Journal 77)

Click here to view bill details.
Reply

Line


View Full Conversation