Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2007 House Bill 4350: Appropriations: 2007-2008 Higher Education budget (House Roll Call 317)
facebook  twitter 

Amendment offered by Rep. Alma Smith (D) on August 23, 2007, to require universities to admit any high school graduate finishing in the top 10 percent of his or her class in either junior or senior year. This practice is seen as a substitute for banned racial preferences in admissions, which were prohibited by the 2006 Proposal 2 Constitutional Amendment. The amendment passed 63 to 46 in the House on August 23, 2007.
View All of House Bill 4350: History, Amendments & Comments 

The vote was 63 in favor, 46 against, and 1 not voting.
(House Roll Call 317 at House Journal 78)

Print-friendly version

 Comment on this vote   View others' comments   Add to scorecard 


In Favor In Favor
Against Against
Not Voting Not Voting
58 total votes
52 total votes

What do you think? In Favor Against Undecided (log on required)


The amendment



Accavitti (D)Angerer (D)Bennett (D)Brown (D)Cheeks (D)
Clack (D)Condino (D)Constan (D)Cushingberry (D)Dean (D)
Dillon (D)Ebli (D)Espinoza (D)Gillard (D)Gonzales (D)
Hammon (D)Hood (D)Hopgood (D)Jackson (D)Johnson (D)
Jones, Robert (D)Law, Kathleen (D)Leland (D)Lemmons (D)Lindberg (D)
Mayes (D)McDowell (D)Meisner (D)Melton (D)Miller (D)
Polidori (D)Sak (D)Sheltrown (D)Simpson (D)Smith, Alma (D)
Smith, Virgil (D)Spade (D)Vagnozzi (D)Valentine (D)Wojno (D)
Young (D)    


Ball (R)Casperson (R)Caswell (R)DeRoche (R)Elsenheimer (R)
Gaffney (R)Green (R)Hansen (R)Hildenbrand (R)Hoogendyk (R)
Horn (R)Huizenga (R)Hune (R)LaJoy (R)Law, David (R)
Meltzer (R)Moore (R)Nofs (R)Palsrok (R)Stahl (R)
Steil (R)Ward (R)   



Bauer (D)Bieda (D)Byrnes (D)Byrum (D)Clemente (D)
Corriveau (D)Coulouris (D)Donigan (D)Farrah (D)Griffin (D)
Hammel (D)Lahti (D)LeBlanc (D)Meadows (D)Scott (D)
Tobocman (D)Warren (D)   


Acciavatti (R)Agema (R)Amos (R)Booher (R)Brandenburg (R)
Calley (R)Caul (R)Emmons (R)Garfield (R)Jones, Rick (R)
Knollenberg (R)Marleau (R)Meekhof (R)Moolenaar (R)Moss (R)
Nitz (R)Opsommer (R)Palmer (R)Pastor (R)Pavlov (R)
Proos (R)Robertson (R)Rocca (R)Schuitmaker (R)Shaffer (R)
Sheen (R)Stakoe (R)Walker (R)Wenke (R) 


Pearce (R)


Y    Accavitti (D)  n  Acciavatti (R)  n  Agema (R)  n  Amos (R)Y    Angerer (D)
Y    Ball (R)  n  Bauer (D)Y    Bennett (D)  n  Bieda (D)  n  Booher (R)
  n  Brandenburg (R)Y    Brown (D)  n  Byrnes (D)  n  Byrum (D)  n  Calley (R)
Y    Casperson (R)Y    Caswell (R)  n  Caul (R)Y    Cheeks (D)Y    Clack (D)
  n  Clemente (D)Y    Condino (D)Y    Constan (D)  n  Corriveau (D)  n  Coulouris (D)
Y    Cushingberry (D)Y    Dean (D)Y    DeRoche (R)Y    Dillon (D)  n  Donigan (D)
Y    Ebli (D)Y    Elsenheimer (R)  n  Emmons (R)Y    Espinoza (D)  n  Farrah (D)
Y    Gaffney (R)  n  Garfield (R)Y    Gillard (D)Y    Gonzales (D)Y    Green (R)
  n  Griffin (D)  n  Hammel (D)Y    Hammon (D)Y    Hansen (R)Y    Hildenbrand (R)
Y    Hood (D)Y    Hoogendyk (R)Y    Hopgood (D)Y    Horn (R)Y    Huizenga (R)
Y    Hune (R)Y    Jackson (D)Y    Johnson (D)  n  Jones, Rick (R)Y    Jones, Robert (D)
  n  Knollenberg (R)  n  Lahti (D)Y    LaJoy (R)Y    Law, David (R)Y    Law, Kathleen (D)
  n  LeBlanc (D)Y    Leland (D)Y    Lemmons (D)Y    Lindberg (D)  n  Marleau (R)
Y    Mayes (D)Y    McDowell (D)  n  Meadows (D)  n  Meekhof (R)Y    Meisner (D)
Y    Melton (D)Y    Meltzer (R)Y    Miller (D)  n  Moolenaar (R)Y    Moore (R)
  n  Moss (R)  n  Nitz (R)Y    Nofs (R)  n  Opsommer (R)  n  Palmer (R)
Y    Palsrok (R)  n  Pastor (R)  n  Pavlov (R)  -  Pearce (R)Y    Polidori (D)
  n  Proos (R)  n  Robertson (R)  n  Rocca (R)Y    Sak (D)  n  Schuitmaker (R)
  n  Scott (D)  n  Shaffer (R)  n  Sheen (R)Y    Sheltrown (D)Y    Simpson (D)
Y    Smith, Alma (D)Y    Smith, Virgil (D)Y    Spade (D)Y    Stahl (R)  n  Stakoe (R)
Y    Steil (R)  n  Tobocman (D)Y    Vagnozzi (D)Y    Valentine (D)  n  Walker (R)
Y    Ward (R)  n  Warren (D)  n  Wenke (R)Y    Wojno (D)Y    Young (D)

House Roll Call 317 on The amendment



No cuts here, either -  by Anonymous Citizen on October 30, 2007 
"This appropriates $1.896 billion in gross spending, compared to $1.787 billion, which was the FY 2006-2007 amount enrolled in 2006."

Rep. Sheen's "no vote explanation"  by Admin003 on October 30, 2007 
Rep. Sheen, having reserved the right to explain his nay vote, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I cannot vote for these budgets as they are based on increased fees, an income tax increases, and the expansion of sales tax on services on top of all the other taxes. Government deficits are spending problems, not revenue problems. I cannot balance the budget on the backs of Michigan citizens and job providers that are barely hanging on and making ends meet.

Holding government harmless is elitist, disingenuous, and wrong. I was not sent to Lansing to preserve government spending to the detriment of its citizens and its job providers. The Income tax increase of 12% (from 3.9% to 4.35%) and spreading a 6 % sales tax on many services and business-to-business transactions on top of all the other taxes will in no way benefit the state's economy or its citizens. However, it will take more money out of people's paychecks and increase the cost of living, which is a double hit to the consumer. It will drive up the cost of doing business and drive out more employers, increasing unemployment and further exacerbating Michigan's plight. We might as well put a red flashing light at the state line warning businesses not to come here.

I could not vote to increase taxes on Michigan's citizens or job providers at a time when so many have either lost jobs, faced failing businesses and otherwise tightened their belts and made cuts in their own budgets. Why should government be held at a different standard than everyone else in the state?"

Rep. Agema's "no vote explanation"  by Admin003 on October 30, 2007 
Rep. Agema, having reserved the right to explain his nay vote, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I voted no on this budget because it failed to address several very important issues. First of all, I introduced legislation earlier this term to end free college education for Native Americans. Such an antiquated law only serves as an onerous drag on an economy that already is facing serious funding issues for higher education.

Second, I could not possibly support a higher education bill that allows for funding of same sex partner benefits by our institutions of higher learning. A state constitutional amendment already addresses this issue, yet we still continue to allow taxpayer dollars to fund a social anomaly that Michigan voters have already voiced their opposition to.

Last, I had introduced an amendment previously that does not allow illegal aliens to receive in-state tuition. Besides the fact that federal law prohibits such a practice, it is unconscionable that we ask taxpayers to fund the education of illegal aliens who are clearly violating our laws. We should not extend such a privilege when American citizens from other states cannot get in state tuition."

View pre-2013 Comments.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.