Legislation watch
2012 Senate Bill 954: Appropriations: General Government
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Sen. John Pappageorge (R) on February 14, 2012, to provide a “template” or “place holder” for the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 General Government budget. This bill contains no appropriations, but may be amended at a later date to include them.
- Referred to the House Appropriations Committee on February 14, 2012.
- Reported in the Senate on April 24, 2012, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on April 26, 2012. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to require the Attorney General to post online data about all contracts and subcontracts with outside vendors, including the type and amount of the transaction, its purpose, financial records, invoices, and more. The amendment failed 18 to 20 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to require the creation of an executive office "ethics officer" position, which would be responsible for creating and enforcing ethics rules and conflict of interest laws. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to increase proposed state corporate subsidies for "economic development" from $66 million to $100 million. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to require the "citizens guide" local governments are required to produce as a condition for getting extra revenue sharing money to include the number of full-time police and fire fighters for each of the past 10 years. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to increase distributions from a from a county revenue sharing from fund created by extra tax revenue collected in a 2004 tax collection date shift. The amendment failed 14 to 24 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to prohibit the Attorney General from spending any money to pursue a lawsuit against the mandate contained in the federal "Obamacare" law that ever American must obtain health insurance. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to prohibit the Attorney General from spending any money related to ballot initiative campaigns (including the three or four such campaigns currently being pursued by government employee unions to roll-back various reforms enacted by tghe legislature in 2011). The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to prohibit the Attorney General from spending any money on staff effort, contracts, fees, consultants, or any other activity that involves a presidential election. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to require the Attorney General to submit a report on its efforts to stop bullies throughout the state. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Sen. Bert Johnson (D) on April 26, 2012, to give Detroit $220 million in state tax revenue. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on April 26, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Referred to the House Appropriations Committee on February 14, 2012.
- Passed 19 to 19 in the Senate on April 26, 2012, the Senate version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011-2012 General Government budget, which funds legislature, the executive office, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Treasury, Department of Civil Rights, and the Department of Technology, Management, and Budget. This would appropriate $4.236 billion in gross spending, of which $722.2 million is federal money. $1.048 billion of this budget is paid out in revenue sharing to local governments.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on April 26, 2012.
- Referred to the House Appropriations Committee on April 26, 2012.
- Substitute offered by Rep. Chuck Moss (R) on May 2, 2012, to strip out all of the appropriations of the Senate-passed version of the bill, which is basically a procedural method of launching negotiations to work out the differences between the House and Senate budgets. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on May 2, 2012.
- Passed 63 to 47 in the House on May 2, 2012, to send the bill back to the Senate "stripped" of all actual appropriations. This vote is basically a procedural method of launching negotiations to work out the differences between the House and Senate budgets.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on May 3, 2012.
- Failed 0 to 38 in the Senate on May 3, 2012, to concur with the House-passed version of the budget. The vote sends the bill to a House-Senate conference committee to work out the differences.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on May 30, 2012.
- Failed 18 to 18 in the Senate on May 30, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Moved to reconsider by Sen. Arlan Meekhof (R) on May 30, 2012, the vote by which the conference report was not adopted. The motion passed by voice vote in the Senate on May 30, 2012.
- Received in the Senate on May 30, 2012.
- Passed 21 to 15 in the Senate on May 30, 2012, the House-Senate conference report for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011-2012 General Government budget, which funds legislature, the executive office, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Treasury, Department of Civil Rights, and the Department of Technology, Management, and Budget. This would appropriate $4.309 billion in gross spending, of which $722.2 million is federal money. $1.076 billion of this budget is paid out in revenue sharing to local governments. Note: House Bill 5365 contains an identical version of this conference report.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on May 30, 2012.
Comments
1) Re: 2012 Senate Bill 954 (Appropriations: General Government ) by TaterSalad on May 4, 2012Exploited just like the President of the United States did with our money! This is what liberals do best.
...................... http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/04/stimulus-money-a-slush-fund-for-unions-and-democrats
Senators Johnson, Hood, Whitmer, Young, Gregory, Smith and Hunter, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 954.
Senator Johnson moved that the statement he made during the discussion of the bill be printed as his reasons for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator Johnson’s statement, in which Senators Hood, Whitmer, Young, Gregory, Smith and Hunter concurred, is as follows:
I rise today to voice my reasoning for voting “no” on this flawed budget that fails to address several critical issues facing our state. We have heard a lot from the Senator from the 13th District that we do not have the money. We just don’t have the money for many of my amendments. I would suggest the money isn’t there because you chose to prioritize corporate tax breaks over the things we are discussing here that would actually move Michigan and her residents forward.
When Governor Snyder was first elected, he proposed that the Legislature pass a two-year budget to help provide a more stable long-term vision for the state. Many of us agreed that that would not be the worst thing in life. Seeing the budgets that are being proposed this year, it is quite clear why you chose to ignore the Governor’s request.
The General Government budget provides a perfect example. Last year, we got rid of targeted tax credits and Brownfield redevelopment credits in order to create Governor Snyder’s economic gardening program. This year, we’re cutting the funding for community redevelopment and economic gardening. It’s a bit oxymoronic. I can see where in a two-year budget you would look a bit foolish for simultaneously creating a program and defunding it in the same vote.
This cut in funds will hamper our state’s efforts to retain businesses and help them grow. Cutting this program will not help us in achieving our goal of job creation; something we all believe is a priority for Michigan. At least you’re staying consistent in your resolve to strong-arm our financially-stressed communities by making them jump through hoops first before they can receive the funds necessary to provide even the most basic of services to our citizens.
If we were keeping metrics from last year’s revenue sharing cuts, we would see that they didn’t grow the economy, but they created hardships for our cites, triggered financial reviews, and led to emergency manager takeovers with police and firefighters being laid off along the way. Unfortunately, this budget does not present the opportunity to correct those errors, Mr. President, but instead seeks to do further harm to our cities and counties, deepening the negative impact on our beloved citizens.
Seeing the disaster that budget created over the past year and the failure for those wrongs to be addressed here in this chamber, I cannot, in good conscience, vote for this budget. I would ask my colleagues to review what has been stated here, has been done here, and has been proposed and denied. Mr. President, there are only two relationships in this life—one is reciprocal and the other is exploitative. I believe if you take a poll of Michigan residents, they would tell you that they believe they have been exploited at every point in this budget process.
Introduced in the Senate on February 14, 2012, the Senate version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011-2012 General Government budget, which funds legislature, the executive office, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Treasury, Department of Civil Rights, and the Department of Technology, Management, and Budget. This would appropriate $4.236 billion in gross spending, of which $722.2 million is federal money. $1.048 billion of this budget is paid out in revenue sharing to local governments
The vote was 19 in favor, 19 opposed and 0 not voting
(Senate Roll Call 258 at Senate Journal 0)
Click here to view bill details.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.
