Amendment offered by Sen. Irma Clark-Coleman (D) on June 24, 2009, to add final funding amounts for school "readiness" programs for pre-school children. As-passed the budget contains $100 "placeholders" for these programs, which allows negotiations to proceed between the House and Senate on the final amount of funding. The amendment failed 16 to 19 in the Senate on June 24, 2009.
View All of House Bill 4447: History, Amendments & Comments
The vote was 16 in favor, 19 against, and 2 not voting.
(Senate Roll Call 328)
|Anderson (D)||Barcia (D)||Basham (D)||Brater (D)||Cherry (D)|
|Clark-Coleman (D)||Clarke (D)||Gleason (D)||Hunter (D)||Jacobs (D)|
|Olshove (D)||Scott (D)||Switalski (D)||Thomas (D)||Whitmer (D)|
|Allen (R)||Birkholz (R)||Bishop (R)||Brown (R)||Cassis (R)|
|Cropsey (R)||George (R)||Gilbert (R)||Hardiman (R)||Jansen (R)|
|Jelinek (R)||Kahn (R)||Kuipers (R)||McManus (R)||Pappageorge (R)|
|Patterson (R)||Sanborn (R)||Stamas (R)||Van Woerkom (R)|
SENATE LEGISLATORS WHO DID NOT VOTE
|Garcia (R)||Prusi (D)|
SENATE LEGISLATORS ALL VOTES
|n Allen (R)||Y Anderson (D)||Y Barcia (D)||Y Basham (D)||n Birkholz (R)|
|n Bishop (R)||Y Brater (D)||n Brown (R)||n Cassis (R)||Y Cherry (D)|
|Y Clark-Coleman (D)||Y Clarke (D)||n Cropsey (R)||- Garcia (R)||n George (R)|
|n Gilbert (R)||Y Gleason (D)||n Hardiman (R)||Y Hunter (D)||Y Jacobs (D)|
|n Jansen (R)||n Jelinek (R)||n Kahn (R)||n Kuipers (R)||n McManus (R)|
|Y Olshove (D)||n Pappageorge (R)||n Patterson (R)||- Prusi (D)||Y Richardville (R)|
|n Sanborn (R)||Y Scott (D)||n Stamas (R)||Y Switalski (D)||Y Thomas (D)|
|n Van Woerkom (R)||Y Whitmer (D)|
Senate Roll Call 328 on The amendment
Senator Jelinek’s third statement is as follows:
Mr. Chairman, this bill lays a foundation for a dependable budget for schools for the next two years. It’s no guarantee, of course, because of revenues, but we hope it does. If additional funds become available, we certainly know where to use them. Let’s give schools some ability to plan ahead, and let’s vote “yes” on this budget. Let’s be real; let’s provide a dependable budget with real funds.
May our revenues stay at least level in the future. We cannot spend more than we have, so I ask you to vote “yes” on this budget.
2) Re: 2009 House Bill 4447 (Appropriations: 2009-2010 School Aid budget ) by Admin003 on June 25, 2009
Senator Cropsey’s statement is as follows:
I just want to echo what the previous speaker said. Once you start tie-barring policy bills to appropriation bills, you are really setting a terrible precedent. I would just urge everyone, as a matter of principle on this one, to turn down this amendment.
3) Re: 2009 House Bill 4447 (Appropriations: 2009-2010 School Aid budget ) by Admin003 on June 25, 2009
Senator Whitmer’s statement is as follows:
This amendment tie-bars this bill to House Bill No. 4313, which is a replica of the sinking fund bill I have introduced each of my legislative terms. This is an issue which 32 of us have expressly supported at one juncture or another in our respective careers. In fact, my friends in the majority have even co‑sponsored this same legislation. Which one of us, you’re probably asking. Well, my colleagues from Three Oaks, Saugatuck, Rochester, Fawn River Township, Kalamazoo, Algonac, Troy, Canton, Monroe, Midland, and Muskegon. And four others even voted for this bill in 2001. Traverse City, Novi, Gaines Township, and Holland all had Senators wise enough to support this legislation in 2001. I point this out not to embarrass anyone, but to encourage your support once again; to remind you, to refresh your recollection, to encourage you, and to prevail on your sense of fairness.
Now why did the vast majority of the majority in this chamber support this effort before? Well, I suspect it is because we see the wisdom in giving schools the flexibility of using their sinking funds for the purposes of including busses, bus maintenance, and technology to broaden the purposes for which they can use their sinking fund dollars.
Now this is not more true and necessary than in this time of economic crisis and the need to educate the workers of the future. Technology is undeniably a critical part of our ability to redefine who we are in the state of Michigan; to ensure our future individual and collective success. In this time of economic crisis, we are asking every person, every business, and every public and private entity to pinch pennies and chip in if they can. So I don’t have to tell you that schools throughout our state in many, if not most, of your districts have sinking funds that they are hamstrung from using to educate our kids. Let’s change that.
Just looking at the cuts in this budget bill sickens me. I can’t imagine how we are going to meet the tough curriculum, much less ensure that we are going to turn out competitive workers of tomorrow. But at the very least—the very least—let’s give them a lifeline and permit a broader use of the sinking fund dollars that they have. It’s a measure that the vast majority of us have supported at one time or another in our careers.
Please help me do something meaningful for our schools. When you look at this list of cuts that are in this budget bill, let’s hand them a lifeline. Let’s adopt the sinking fund legislation, and let’s show that we’re serious about doing this by tie-barring the sinking fund legislation that the House sent over here and say we’re going to do this along the measures that we are taking today; we are going to hand them this lifeline so they can stay afloat and educate our kids. I ask for your support.
View pre-2013 Comments.