http://www.michiganvotes.org/forum/blogs/michiganvotes/archive/2009/05/05/300-million-in-spending-reductions.aspxGov. Granholm issued an executive order to close a $1.3 billion gap between desired spending and projected revenue with $300 million in cuts. The balance will come from &quot;stimulus&quot; money. $300 million is 1.1% of non-federal state revenue. SoenCommunityServer 2008 (Debug Build: 30417.1769)http://www.michiganvotes.org/forum/blogs/michiganvotes/archive/2009/05/05/300-million-in-spending-reductions.aspx#276369Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:40:44 GMT85480579-cbb1-4596-8e66-ca77d6981342:276369goodclosetkeeping<p>The &quot;new health bill&quot; under discussion in Washington will include massive funding for Medicaid from the states&#39; budgets. Are there any state legislators paying attention? </p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://www.michiganvotes.org/forum/aggbug.aspx?PostID=276369" width="1" height="1">http://www.michiganvotes.org/forum/blogs/michiganvotes/archive/2009/05/05/300-million-in-spending-reductions.aspx#274886Tue, 12 May 2009 17:49:13 GMT85480579-cbb1-4596-8e66-ca77d6981342:274886FreeSpeaker<p>Federally provided &quot;economic stimulus&quot; money presumably is intended to fund needed projects that state budgets otherwise could not support. &nbsp;That is the only way it will create jobs and spur economic activity. &nbsp;It should not be used to fund state budget shortfalls and support ongoing state government programs and operations.</p> <p>If the $1 billion in state operations to be covered by stimulus funds really is/are needed, then an increase in tax revenues is in order. &nbsp;Otherwise, those operations should be trimmed back to reduce the cost of operating state government. &nbsp;</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://www.michiganvotes.org/forum/aggbug.aspx?PostID=274886" width="1" height="1">