Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the Senate on March 17, 2005, to make it unlawful to pay a person an hourly wage that is less than $6.95 beginning Oct. 1, 2006, $7.15 beginning July 1, 2007 and $7.40 beginning July 1, 2008 notwithstanding any voluntary agreement between the employer and employee. The current minimum wage level required for hourly employees is $5.15 an hour. The bill would not index these levels to the cost of living. The bill would make Michigan low-skill or first-time workers covered by the law the fourth most expensive in the nation

The vote was 35 in favor, 0 opposed and 2 not voting

(Senate Roll Call 132 at Senate Journal 24)

Click here to view bill details.

I cannot believe that belief in minimum wage laws still exists. Ray must have gone to public schools to not know that minimum wage laws CAUSE unemployment. Unskilled workers are priced out of the market by minimum wage laws. Minimum wage laws distort of our economy, encourage mal-investment, boom & bust cycles, and unemployment of the very people the law aims to help. A quick illustration. I have a job for which I am willing to pay an unskilled worker, Bob, $3 an hour. Case 1: I offer too little $. Bob will not work for $3. Minimum wage law of $6.75 is meaningless. Ken can be happy and pass it, and no one cares. Case 2: Bob is WILLING TO WORK for $3. Bob learns a job, earn $3 an hour more than he was making, I get a job done. Everyone happy except Ray who in his infinite wisdom knows that the correct wage should be $6.75 (the man must be brilliant!). Ray's law dies. Freedom rules! Case 3: Rays's law passes. Enter the socialist state. I am not allowed to WILLINGLY hire Bob for $3. Bob is not allowed to WILLINGLY work for $3. Bob doesn't get $3 more that he did have, nor does he learn any job skills. Being an intelligent employer, I'm not going to pay more for work than it is worth to me: 3.1 I can go overseas and pay $3, and make Yuri happy. 3.2 I can suffer by not having my job done. I'm unhappy. 3.3 I will hire skilled worker Dave who can do my $3 job and another $3.75 job as well. (This presumes that I have a $3.75 job that needs doing, and that Dave is available.) Dave and I are happy. Bob is still unhappy, because he is LEGISLATIVELY kept from working. I hope Bob doesn't despair, do drugs, go on welfare, and turn criminal. Then Dave & I would have to pay taxes for his relief, medical care and incarceration, and that would make Dave & I unhappy. But the important thing is that Ray is happy. Yahoo. Stop the madness.

Senator Clark-Coleman's statement is as follows: The reason that I voted "no" is that we must discharge this bill from committee today because $10,712 is not enough to support a family; $10,712--that is how much a full-time worker making minimum wage will make this year if we don't act on this bill, Senate Bill No.318. We already know that over 450,000 workers work for minimum wage every year. We also know that 40 percent of them are the primary breadwinners in their families, and that means that 185,000 families are trying to survive on $10,712 a year. Well, my colleagues, the federal poverty level in 2005 for a family of four is $19, 350, and that is almost double the minimum wage. How can we act on budgets that cut people off welfare and then ask them to support themselves and their families on one-half of the poverty level wages? It is time that this body stood up for the 185,000 people trying to survive on $10,712 a year and give them a raise today. I beg you to reconsider.

Senator Basham's statement is as follows: The Senate needs to act today because 450,000 Michigan workers can't wait another day. Out of the 450,000 Michigan workers currently working on minimum wage, 40 percent are the primary breadwinners in their families. These families can't wait another day for the Senate to give them a hand. Workers who are not on minimum wage are more likely to spend their money in small businesses in their communities. Every week we don't act we are effectively removing $13.5 million from Michigan's economy. The passage of this bill would give those 450,000 families a raise of just 75 cents per hour beginning Friday, July 1st. Every week we don't act we are costing these families $30 a week. This bill has been held in the Commerce and Labor Committee for 13 weeks without a hearing. If we don't act by Christmas, we are costing these families $750, effectively removing $337 million from the economy. Mr.President, we are not talking about wealthy people here. A person working at the current minimum wage of $5.15 an hour working 40 hours a week grosses $206 a week--$206 a week. Michigan's workers need to make enough money to support their families. Our current laws are woefully inadequate and over 450,000 need our help today. Over 12 percent of Michigan's g population receives some sort of food assistance. I would encourage my colleagues to rethink their position.

Senator Scott's statement is as follows: You know, Mr.President, I am real concerned. Do we want a Third World here? Do we want this to be the poor and the rich? You know, it is time for us to deal with the minimum wage here. These are people who are trying to pull themselves up, and we don't allow them the opportunity. These are the same people whom I talk about every day who can't even afford car insurance. We'd rather them not so that we can catch them, so that they can spend time in prison and that because they can't even afford an attorney when they get caught driving without auto insurance. It is time for us to stand up and care about all people. What is wrong with us? Raising the minimum wage is a bottom-up economic stimulus. When workers can't afford to go shopping for their families, they suffer, the employers suffer, and the taxpayers suffer. Minimum wage workers are most likely to spend their income locally, so raising the minimum wage will provide a boost of local retailers and restaurants. We look forward to working with small businesses to ensure their voices are heard on this important issue. A 2004 study conducted by the Fiscal Policy Institute shows that small businesses in states with minimum wage increases above the federal level grew twice as fast as those in states with lower minimum wages. We can't wait for Washington. We need to do the right thing in Michigan and hope the rest of the nation follows our lead. Michigan is not only the Great Lakes State; it has always been a great work state. Our state helped give birth to the American middle class. I see that we don't want that any longer. We want the rich and the poor, don't we? We should serve as a model to the nation in providing the opportunity for working families to live the American Dream in which hard work, equal economic prosperity, and raising the minimum wage is a great place to start.

Senator Schauer's statement is as follows: I rise to speak in favor of discharging Senate Bill No.318 from the Committee on Commerce and Labor for us to consider today on the Senate floor. We have been waiting for this bill that would raise Michigan's minimum wage to be taken up in committee. It has not done so. I find it alarming, colleagues, that minimum wage earners continue to fall further and further behind. It is immoral for us as a state and as a people to knowingly allow those who are working full-time and raising children to raise those children in poverty. That is just wrong. There are over 450,000 minimum wage workers in our state who can't wait another day for this bill to come before us. Please know, members, that 40 percent of those minimum wage earners are the primary breadwinners in their families. They cannot wait and they expect and demand action by this legislative body on Senator Basham's bill, Senate Bill No.318. My concern and why I think it's the right thing to do is that the purchasing power of Michigan minimum wage and our national wage continues to fall behind, and that is very important. Unfortunately, the federal government has decided not to act. There was even Republican support in the U.S. Senate to raise the minimum wage. That measure failed, and that's why Michigan needs to act. That's why we as a Senate body need to move quickly on this legislation in order to support families who are playing by the rules and to support their children. Now, be aware that in recent budget bills we passed last week, we are apparently moving to shorten the time that people can be on welfare. We are saying they need to work, and they should work. Unfortunately, if we don't' take up this bill today, we are saying that it is okay for them to work in poverty. So I would ask for a "yes" vote on this discharge of Senate Bill No.318.

Senator Cropsey's statement is as follows: Earlier today, we had a motion to discharge one of the committees from consideration of Senate Bill No.318, which I think is a very unfortunate motion for a very unfortunate bill. This bill is dealing with the area of minimum wage and having Michigan raise the minimum wage. This bill needs to be kept in committee, and if anything is done, perhaps a hearing should be held to determine whether or not actually increasing the minimum wage will help bring jobs to the state of Michigan. In testimony given in front of the United States House of Representatives, a Small Business Committee, the Subcommittee on Workforce and Empowerment and Government Programs regarding the economic effects of minimum wage, Paul Kersey brought several good areas that need to be considered before we adopt or discharge from committee a job killer of a bill. This is part of the testimony that was given. It says, "I have good news and bad news. The bad news is that the increase in minimum wage will do little to improve the conditions for the working poor. This is because relatively few of the recipients of the increase are living in poverty." He said an analysis was done in 2003 of the census that shows of the 7.6 million American workers receiving an average hourly wage of less than $6.65 an hour--the immediate beneficiaries of a change to the minimum wage--only 15 percent are currently living in poverty. One-fifth of the low-income workers belong to the families earning under $80,000 annually. The average family income of a typical low-wage worker was a respectable $40,000 per year. In other words, the typical beneficiary of a minimum wage increase will not be a poor father and mother scrambling to keep a family feed, clothe, or housed. The recipients of the pay raise that is demanded under this proposal are at least as likely, if not more likely, to be already solid members of the middle class. Scholars Robert Rector and Rea Hederman said that the values of a minimum wage increase for poor families is limited by the low amount of hours that parents and poor families, actually, tend to work. Increasing working hours would have far greater benefit for these families both immediately and in the long-term than increasing the minimum wage, although the minimum wage increase currently proposed may raise family income by as much as 30 percent in the short-term. Rector and Hederman showed that increasing work hours to the equivalent of having one adult working full-time nearly doubles the average income of these families, even after accounting for lost government benefits and increased taxes. What we need here are jobs in the state of Michigan, not artificially raising the minimum wage. I would call upon the Governor to start to try and expand bringing jobs here into this state instead of trying to kill jobs through legislation like this. Researchers at two universities, Florida State and Miami of Ohio, found that full-time workers hired at the minimum wage received a median pay increase of 13 percent within their first year. Research by the Employment Policy Institute shows that 47 percent of families living below the poverty line in 1997 managed to make it over the poverty line in 1998. The authors of that study concluded that earnings from minimum wage work and the Earned Income Tax Credit both significantly reduced the number of working poor in the 1990s; which, incidentally, it's my understanding that the Earned Income Tax Credit that has been proposed here in the state of Michigan is being opposed by the current Governor because it cost too much, but yet, that is one of the things that helps poor people work and come out of poverty. Artificially raising wages will cut off this difficult but direct path to greater prosperity for many poor families and will delay the entry of other workers, including youth, into the paid workforce by needlessly increasing the cost of unskilled labor. Employers will not be able to afford to hire as many unskilled workers and will respond by cutting back services or replacing workers with machinery. Increasing the minimum wage will not help the poor in this state. Getting jobs here to this state of Michigan will help people get out of poverty, and I call upon the people on the other side of the aisle to stop the destructive political posturing and help to get jobs here in Michigan.

The problem with your little equations and cases is that you think the job is worth doing for $3, not the person doing it. If your employee told you your job was worth $15,000 annually, I'm sure you would smile and say, "you're right". I'm sorry you might have to play less golf at the country club and maybe own a few less cars because you have to pay your employees enough to feed their families.

A terrific summation of the absurdity of minimum wage. Well done. I especially liked the line about Yuri. Someone should introduce a bill raising the minimum wage to $30 an hour, then everyone would be happy. Of course, the lucky ones with jobs would be paying $10 for a carton of eggs...

Senator Sikkema's statement is as follows: A few short weeks ago, the Governor in her State of the State message challenged the Michigan Legislature to pass a minimum wage increase. Today the Michigan Senate, I think, has unanimously done so. In fact, the minimum wage increase that we have passed is significantly larger than the bill we amended, which was introduced by a member of the other side of the aisle. It is also an increase above the petition drive that is currently being circulated by various interest groups. The petition drive that is being circulated asks the voters to increase the minimum wage to $6.85 an hour next January. What we just passed increases the state minimum wage to $6.95 on October 1 of this year. Meaning, quite clearly, that passage of the ballot initiative--and I would argue the circulation of the ballot initiative--represents a decrease in the state minimum wage these would be this legislation. This legislation goes even further. It increases the state minimum wage to $7.15 an hour next July; and then $7.40 an hour in July of 2008. Now there are some pluses and minuses to increasing the state minimum wage. Let's all be honest about that. There are some obvious pluses for the people affected. I think one of the good economic arguments made byadvocates of increasing the minimum wage--that I accept and is true--is that that money does go directly into the economy.I think that that is right; I think it does. We have not had an increase in the state minimum wage in nine years. If you lookover the history of the increases in the minimum wage in Michigan and nationally, that is a relatively long period of time. There is some downside. I don't think there should be any question in the minds of most people that certain industries, particularly the hospitality industry which is important in this state, could suffer some cost increase. That is a fact of any time that you raise the cost of doing business, whether it's the price of labor or the price of raw materials that go into a business. So raising the minimum wage is not without some problems. But, all in all, I think it is the right thing to do at the right time. I, for one, to be totally candid about this, I do not think placing increases in the minimum wage in the state Constitution is the right thing to do. It is our responsibility as the Senate and the House and the Governor to make those decisions. To lock it into the state Constitution and to lock inflation area increases in the state Constitution, regardless of the economy, regardless of the business challenges faced by the employers who have to pay this, I think, would be a mistake. The passage of this bill by the Senate today increases everybody's minimum wage, regardless of whether you are a waiter or a waitress working in the hospitality industry, regardless if you are working for a small company, or if you're doing other kinds of labor. This minimum wage increase affects everybody. I have to note, a little tongue-in-cheek, as I was doing the research on this. It is even larger than the one proposed by the Senator John Kerry when he was campaigning for President. He only advocated a $7.00 increase by 2007, and we have raised it to $7.15 and then $7.40. This increase--going from $5.15 to $6.95 in October and then the $7.15 next July and $7.40 in July of 2008--represents a 44 percent increase in less than two years. I think it's a significant step. It's not without its problems, but I hope the House passes it and the Governor signs it.

Senator Sanborn's statement is as follows: Please allow me to begin by thanking the chairman of Judiciary for agreeing to allow that we continue hearings on the important matters on which I am beginning to speak. When I stood here last week, I told you about the tragedy in my district and the actions by the Department of Corrections that allowed it to happen. When we held a hearing on this matter, Patricia Caruso, director of Corrections, told us that the buck stops with her. I appreciated her forthrightness, and I took her at her word. Now, a week later, the new message being put out by Corrections and some members of the media is that "It is the conservative Republican Legislature's fault. They cut and cut and cut when it comes to the budget, and as a result, this tragedy was simply allowed to happen." I stand before you to say that this is simply not the case. I am dismayed and disappointed and angry that yet another state department has decided to blame the Legislature for failing to appropriate money for the needs that the Governor never informed us of. I wonder if the administration is now supplying Corrections with the DHS playbook, which says that when things go wrong because of internal problems, do everything in your power to shift the attention and blame to the Legislature. Maybe both the DOC and DHS should adopt CYA as one of their new acronyms. The investigation into what went wrong into the Selepak case is ongoing, but that hasn't stopped Corrections and the Governor from laying the blame at our feet and saying that if we had given Corrections more money, this could have beenavoided. The Governor didn't ask for more parole officers nor did the Department of Corrections. We gave the Governor exactly what she said she needed. The problem is that this is not one of those situations where throwing money at the problem will make it go away. This is a matter of poor decisions and a lack of accountability, not one of dollars and cents. Is it really a matter of money when it comes to following the law? How much more money does Corrections need to follow their own policies--$1 million, $2 million, $10 million? What we need to remember is that the people of this state demand accountability from the government, and as the elected representatives of the people, we are the ones in charge of asking the tough questions. That is why I want answers. I want answers not only for myself, but I want answers for the family members of Melissa and Scott Berels who have contacted me and let me know how special these two young people truly were. I want answers for Scott's junior high teacher who called my office to tell me that Scott was an absolutely wonderful young man. I want answers for their neighbors who have seen this tragedy rock their community. I want answers for every parent in this state who is now afraid that we are not doing enough to protect their children from convicted felons. I want answers so that if needed, this body can create legislation that will protect its citizens in this state from either losing their life or losing the life of their loved ones in a similar situation to this. Director Caruso, I have not forgotten what you said at the first hearing. The buck really does stop with you, and I hope that you'll remember that when you appear at the next hearing to deliver the results of your investigation because you ultimately are responsible for the actions of your department.

Senator Basham's statement is as follows: It is a great day in the Michigan Senate when Senators on both sides of the aisle can agree that the working poor, who play by the rules, deserve an increase in the minimum wage; because, after all, it's been nine years. And if we'd have kept up with inflation, the minimum wage today would be $8.50, not $7.40. So, certainly, after nine years, it's time for us to act. I don't think this was premature. I hope it wasn't political. But for those folks who deserve a minimum wage, one thing that we're even forgetting here, they still don't have an increase in minimum wage and we're still not giving them a living wage. And me, personally, I think that if we can lock it into the Constitution--there was some mention about the Constitution, that minimum wage should not be locked into the Constitution. If we can lock into the Constitution the right to bear arms, then certainly we should lock into the Constitution the right for a hardworking person in this state to have a decent living or wage, paid for a fair day's work and a fair day's wage. So for all those reasons, I still think that although we've passed some action in this Senate, it's not enough. So I look forward to this debate, and I'm glad it's being taken up. I'm glad that the Senate passed an increase in minimum wage, and I certainly hope that the House moves forward on this bill also. Also I'm looking forward to seeing what happens on the ballot this November.

Senator Goschka's statement is as follows: I rise in very strong support for the bill that we just passed on minimum wage. I take note that it passed unanimously, and coming from the hourly ranks myself, I can attest firsthand how vitally important it is that we took this step today. Many of us have been able to look at our e-mails, look at our constituent calls, and after all, frankly, we are here in this Legislature to represent the people who put us here. I think the message of today should be one to the Governor. It is critical that when this bill reaches her desk for the good of the workers of the state of Michigan that she signed this bill immediately. This bill passed unanimously. It's a message. We believe strongly as a Legislature in the workers in the state of Michigan. I hope and trust that our Governor will sign this bill immediately when it comes to her desk. That is what the people of our state would expect and would desire. I hope just as we have listened to the people of the state that she certainly will as well.

Senator Clark-Coleman's statement is as follows: You know, this just really goes to show what we can do when we all come together for the will of the people. This is a great piece of legislation. This goes to show that we are really concerned about the needs of the working poor. You know, this is a great day in the Senate, and I can't help but thank our great Governor Jennifer Granholm for calling for us to pass this legislation, for pulling us together, and in her State of the State message asking for this legislation. We have got a great Governor who is pushing for the little people, and I just want to thank you all for supporting her.

The reply about owing fewer cars and playing less golf is typical of the defeatest mentality that prevails among "the enlightened set". People are worth what perople can produce. The fact of being alive does not mean anyone is worth a specific wage. It depends on what they have to offer. Unfortunatley, this bill will eliminate those who have little to offer, from consideration. Nice job Republicans, just another example of how you are no better the the Dems.

Kids and Indians have one thing in common. They are both oppressed, the only thing worse than being Indian is being a Negro/Negress. CEO's and Vice presidents make millions and millions in bonuses but the little person is stuck at minimum wage. Not on what they can produce-but on how they can suck snot out their bosses noses through their rectums. Or maybe how the rigged capitolist system is rigged to make the rich richer and poor poorer.

Rep. Sheen, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: Michigan has the worst record of producing jobs in the nation. This legislation will cost Michigan citizens jobs especially our low income earners, our youth, and those entering the job market who need a chance to get some experience. Kmart, Wal-Mart, Meijers, McDonalds, Burger King, and other minimum wage entrance job providers do not have any more money to pay workers, they will simply have no choice but to lay off workers. Minimum wage workers will not be laid off in other states, only Michigan workers. The Federal minimum wage is $5.15 an hour and Michigan wants to increase theirs to $7.40 an hour. This means Michigan will have the third highest minimum wage in the nation. The surrounding states of Wisconsin, Indiana, and Ohio will all keep their minimum wage at $5.15. I cannot go against the most basic conservative economic principles in favor of political maneuverism, however valid. I cannot support legislation that kills jobs and continues to make Michigan less attractive to employers and at a disadvantage to the rest of the nation."

Rep. Green, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: Michigan currently has among the highest unemployment rate in the United States and many of our residents are struggling with economic hardship. The legislature should be focused on policies to strengthen our economy, encourage job growth and new business development. I am voting no on this legislation because this dramatic increase in the minimum wage will exacerbate our current business climate, causing business owners in Michigan to eliminate jobs. I have taken the time to seek input from hundreds of people on this issue over the past few days and have studied the impact this proposal will have on our already beleaguered economy. Minimum wage is the first rung of the ladder to help our children/students get a start on their work experience. It is not intended to feed and meet the needs of a family of four. Approximately 3% of all hourly wage earners are paid the minimum wage. Of this 3% only 15% are the chief breadwinners in their family. Young adults presently going to high school and college are the biggest group, by far, that receive minimum wage. It has been nine years since we raised this minimum wage in Michigan. If the minimum wage had been adjusted for inflation since the last increase it would presently be $6.35 per hour. If these proposal were at a more reasonable rate of closer to $6.25 to $6.50 per hour I could vote for an increase. However, this legislation increases the minimum wage by 40%! With a 7% unemployment rate in our state, we cannot afford to give business additional reasons to either outsource or eliminate jobs. If a small business has $103 to spend each hour they are open, at the present minimum wage this business could hire 20 employees. If the wage goes up to $7.40 within 2 years as proposed, the same employer could only hire 14 employees. That is a job loss of 30%. We must also pay attention to the argument that proponents of the minimum wage claim a high minimum wage shows that a person is valued for the work they do. Wages should not be viewed as a reflection of a person's worth. Surely the lawyer is not worth more as a person than the cashier at the grocery store. Salaries and wages should be established based on the task a worker does and the quality of the individual's work. The more compassionate approach is to continue to let the free market work and try to keep the jobs we have. We should focus our energies on helping the working poor better themselves thru job training and education, helping our businesses grow by keeping taxes low and eliminating regulatory burdens that inhibit job growth. What we need to be discussing in Michigan in a bi-partisan fashion is how to help our citizens become better trained to move up the ladder of success! Focusing our efforts on increased job training and education will bring quality of life to a higher level. With much thought and consideration, I have come to the decision to vote no on House Bill 318."

Rep. Robertson, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: My opposition to SB 318 comes from my genuine belief that an increase in Michigan's minimum wage would be detrimental to job creation in Michigan. In recent days I have heard from these job providers, large and small, expressing opposition to this bill. Whether it is a candy store owner in Fenton, a local real estate agent, or a retail clothier, they have told me the passage of a minimum wage hike will force layoffs of existing employees. Furthermore, jobs that would have otherwise been created will not be. Supporters of this legislation profess to be concerned about the working poor, yet ironically, it is those on the first rung of the job ladder who will have that rung taken out from under their feet. As State Representative, I must be concerned with the effect the passage of this minimum wage hike will have on all of Michigan's residents. This legislation is being advanced, in part, out of concern for the petition drive currently being circulated. I oppose that measure also. Both are contrary to the best interests of the State of Michigan. Passage of a minimum wage increase, whether it be in statute or constitutionally will slow Michigan's economic recovery and hurt the very people its proponents profess to help. For these reasons I cast a 'NO' vote on SB 318."

Rep. Huizenga, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement: "Mr. Speaker and members of the House: Much of the minimum wage debate has centered on who receives such wages. Most experts say a majority of those employees are students learning the ropes of the working world. Today I offered two amendments to SB 318 that would have helped the working poor and student employees while protecting our universities and small business owners from unexpected cost spikes. While keeping in tact the new minimum wage boost schedule, my first amendment would have allowed a continuation of a federal exemption that allows institutions of higher education to pay their full-time students, who work in on campus jobs, wages slightly below the minimum. This saves the colleges and universities hundreds of thousands of dollars and allows students employment opportunities on campus. The second amendment addressed the need to pay students a 'learning wage'. It would have allowed employers to pay up to $1 less than the minimum to students that are younger than 18 or who have not graduated high school. Many small and large employers have told me that they will simply stop hiring high-schoolers for their restaurants, hardware stores and grocery stores. My first few jobs while I was in high school taught me a tremendous amount about responsibility and work ethic. Opportunities for students to learn these life skills are disappearing. I could not support this bill in good conscience."

poor folks are that way from bad decisions that THEY have made. Get a grip. Nobody has a plan to keep you at minimum wage. Work at McDonalds and work harder and better than everyone there and you won't be at the minimum for long.

.. that most of the sheeple have been taught in the government indoctrination centers that all their problem are caused by the evil rich. What they don't teach them is that the evil rich are the ones paying the taxes that support all the welfare programs. They also create all the jobs for the folks that don't want to go the welfare route. How many people make a nice living thanks to that evil Bill Gates? What about that evil empirre over in Dearborn, the Ford family. How many people have made a good life thanks to them? The schools and teachers unions want socialism and are getting dangerously close to getting it. Heaven Help Us If They Do.

We need to address the educational needs of dyslexics, and we wouldn't have so many poor folks. I think that's next on the to do list. We wouldn't rely on so many manufacturing jobs if this were the case. I think our schools have made great improvements over the past few years. This is the next step, though. I'm glad Governor Jennifer Granholm is in office.

...to check out Federal and state legislation regarding special education (specifically learning disabilities -- of which dyslexia is one). We are (as a whole) servicing our learning disabled population very well. We are learning more and more about learning disabilities (particularly in the area of reading -- check out the research of G. Reid Lyon) every year. That new knowledge is being implemented in the classroom. Overall, learning disabled children are having their needs met. We still have areas and districts that need improvement but the LD population's needs are being addressed.

I have looked at Reid Lyon. I spent an entire summer researching dyslexia. Our current special education screening process is inefficient and immoral frankly. The Education Department in Washington, D.C. is working on it right now to REPLACE. It is not a fair tool in qualifying dyslexic student for help. I see how hard the special education teachers work, the hours they put in doing all the paperwork. It's NOT the teachers, that's for sure. It's the tools, the current system. NCLB has helped to make some positive changes. And you're right. Some districts are right on track. Please try not to get defensive. Not easy to do I'm sure. Dyslexics need a specific screening tool like CTOPP. I'm not saying teachers aren't already working themselves into the ground. They need that good insurance because they DO work so hard. The alphabet itself stinks. Kids without solid phonemic awareness and fluency and memory need to be caught early. Period. Or there are cracks to fall between as a whole state. The cracks exist. I'm not blaming ANY PERSON. The SYSTEM needs a little tweaking. Our special ed. person is the LAST to leave the building.

I have checked out legislation already. In DEPTH. I was one of the Michigan citizens who testified at the Department of Education hearings supporting a change in current special education testing in order to have the specific learning disability of dyslexia have more fair access to regular and special education services. Early screening tools help prevent the need for the child to enter special education IN THE FIRST PLACE. It's works well with the QUALITY CONTROL Model that our manufacturers often use! Our current model for testing is too often a wait and fail model.

This model discriminates against dyslexics and is financially INEFFICIENT. We don't have money to waste in Michigan.

There is no valuation at all of the person; the person is of course worth more than the $3.00 I'm willing to pay for work I need done. That has nothing to do with it. Every person is a priceless gift. What has that to do with what salary they make? A doctor just saved your kid's life, and you'd pay everything you own. Does that mean you actually do it? Show how the example I gave is wrong. If you are required to pay a minimum of $150 for a glass of milk, how much milk are you going to buy?

...that the discrepancy model is not ideal. The response to intervention (RTI)model that is currently being put forward is not much better. RTI as it is currently being used/promoted does not take into account some reasons other than a learning disabilty that students fail to progress (failure to do homework, failure to come to school on a regular basis, attention/focus, just to name a few). I'd like to see a combination of methods along with some really good observations (I myself prefer to see what types of miscues a kid is making rather than just a score).

...trying to be defensive. I actually agree with you that the current method of certifying learning disabled students leaves much to be desired. I'm not very happy with the new model being proposed either -- response to intervention (RTI). I don't believe that RTI takes into account other factors that may influence whether a child is progressing such as failure to do homework, attendance, attention, etc. Probably a combination of methods would be the best of the lot. Ideally, I'd like to see much more emphasis on early intervention -- full day kindergarten, more focus on phonemic awareness, vocabulary building, etc. to catch problems earlier.

I must admit I am extremely surprised to see that such a bill passed unanimously in the Senate (accounting for the absence of two senators) and was passed in the House. As had been my understanding, there were a larger number of legislatures who were opposed to such a matter (read the minutes of the Senate session, though, and you'll see this was a political move, not a sincere effort on be half of the poor). I know I speak for a lot of people when I say that poverty is the bane of society. It is a matter that I have reviewed countless times. Like any responsible member of civil society, I want to see it cured. Yet I also know that poverty is a complex issue, rooted deeply into society, cultural norms and the economy. And while there may be many ideas on how to solve it, there are probably only a few initiatives that would actually be effective. I have serious doubts, however, that a raise in the minimum wage would help combat poverty. You may have asked yourself if the “potential economic pitfalls would be balanced by the potential social benefits” of a rise in the minimum wage. Or perhaps you feel that someone who earns the minimum wage desrves more, that employers tend to oppress the worker? The truth is, the economy is a complex interrelationship between individuals, and isolating cause and effect can be extremely difficult; understanding social factors like employee-employer relationships is even more difficult. Nevertheless, we do have some basic facts from emperical studies which confirm the predictions of economic models. The majority of studies measuring the consequences of a minimum wage show that either employment falls, prices rise, or a combination of the two occur when the minimum wage rises. This confirms the predictions of the competitive labor market model, in which a rise in the minimum wage (everything else being equal) tends to decrease the quantity demand for labor, thereby lowering entry-level jobs for an unskilled worker. Note that, as a consequence, this unskilled worker's inability to find suitable employment will not only keep him or her from getting a job in the first place, but prevent him or her from getting a job that might help him or her gain new skills and move up the job ladder. This new restriction in the job market is due to the higher minimum wage, which actually represents a form of oppression in an employment-opportunity sense. More hypothetically, a rise in the minimum wage lowers the cost of capital relative to labor, so there is a greater incentive for employers to invest in capital instead of workers than before. Like the previous point, on the whole this leads to fewer employment opportunities for minimum-wage standard workers, hence further oppression (economic-oppression in the immediate-term, but generally further oppression on the whole as time goes on). Now, it is entirely possible that a rise in the minimum wage will benefit society as a whole (in an utilitarian sense). I really do not know, so I can not argue against such a point. However, I do believe that such a rise will undoubtedly be bad for at least a few people, and that is why I am against it. After October 1 Michigan might have achieved greater social economic welfare, but that does not mean that those persons who lost their jobs are better off, too. Now, our government is a democracy founded upon ideals like equality and justice. To pass legislation which is likely to result in anyone being thrown out of work is unjust. Our government has no right to do that. Ten employees might see their pay rise significantly, but what good has been done when that eleventh person loses their job because his/her employer had to think on the margin? Considering that the economy and society are not on opposite sides of some balance and that they progress together, any economic cost really becomes a social cost. Raising the minimum wage in Michigan may help those who keep their jobs and now make $6.95 an hour, but those who are let go and are not middle-class students are in real trouble; not to mention they might also have to face higher prices. And while those higher prices may be “minimal,” they will be far more damaging to impoverished families than to, say, the upper classes who can overlook a one or two penny increase in a product. Poverty is oppressive and the minimum-wage earner must be empowered to free her or himself, but mandating a rise in his or her pay risks only further oppression. Our society literally can not afford a rise in the minimum wage. Max Melstrom

I must admit I am extremely surprised to see that such a bill passed unanimously in the Senate (accounting for the absence of two senators) and was passed in the House. As had been my understanding, there were a larger number of legislatures who were opposed to such a matter (read the minutes of the Senate session, though, and you'll see this was a political move, not a sincere effort on be half of the poor). I know I speak for a lot of people when I say that poverty is the bane of society. It is a matter that I have reviewed countless times. Like any responsible member of civil society, I want to see it cured. Yet I also know that poverty is a complex issue, rooted deeply into society, cultural norms and the economy. And while there may be many ideas on how to solve it, there are probably only a few initiatives that would actually be effective. I have serious doubts, however, that a raise in the minimum wage would help combat poverty. You may have asked yourself if the “potential economic pitfalls would be balanced by the potential social benefits” of a rise in the minimum wage. Or perhaps you feel that someone who earns the minimum wage desrves more, that employers tend to oppress the worker? The truth is, the economy is a complex interrelationship between individuals, and isolating cause and effect can be extremely difficult; understanding social factors like employee-employer relationships is even more difficult. Nevertheless, we do have some basic facts from emperical studies which confirm the predictions of economic models. The majority of studies measuring the consequences of a minimum wage show that either employment falls, prices rise, or a combination of the two occur when the minimum wage rises. This confirms the predictions of the competitive labor market model, in which a rise in the minimum wage (everything else being equal) tends to decrease the quantity demand for labor, thereby lowering entry-level jobs for an unskilled worker. Note that, as a consequence, this unskilled worker's inability to find suitable employment will not only keep him or her from getting a job in the first place, but prevent him or her from getting a job that might help him or her gain new skills and move up the job ladder. This new restriction in the job market is due to the higher minimum wage, which actually represents a form of oppression in an employment-opportunity sense. More hypothetically, a rise in the minimum wage lowers the cost of capital relative to labor, so there is a greater incentive for employers to invest in capital instead of workers than before. Like the previous point, on the whole this leads to fewer employment opportunities for minimum-wage standard workers, hence further oppression (economic-oppression in the immediate-term, but generally further oppression on the whole as time goes on). Now, it is entirely possible that a rise in the minimum wage will benefit society as a whole (in an utilitarian sense). I really do not know, so I can not argue against such a point. However, I do believe that such a rise will undoubtedly be bad for at least a few people, and that is why I am against it. After October 1 Michigan might have achieved greater social economic welfare, but that does not mean that those persons who lost their jobs are better off, too. Now, our government is a democracy founded upon ideals like equality and justice. To pass legislation which is likely to result in anyone being thrown out of work is unjust. Our government has no right to do that. Ten employees might see their pay rise significantly, but what good has been done when that eleventh person loses their job because his/her employer had to think on the margin? Considering that the economy and society are not on opposite sides of some balance and that they progress together, any economic cost really becomes a social cost. Raising the minimum wage in Michigan may help those who keep their jobs and now make $6.95 an hour, but those who are let go and are not middle-class students are in real trouble; not to mention they might also have to face higher prices. And while those higher prices may be “minimal,” they will be far more damaging to impoverished families than to, say, the upper classes who can overlook a one or two penny increase in a product. Poverty is oppressive and the minimum-wage earner must be empowered to free her or himself, but mandating a rise in his or her pay risks only further oppression. Our society literally can not afford a rise in the minimum wage. Max Melstrom

Ludwig von Mises: "There is but one way toward an increase of real wage rates for all those eager to earn wages: the progressive accumulation of new capital and the improvement of technical methods of production which the new capital brings about. The true interests of labor coincide with those of business." - Bureaucracy This quote is from www.mises.org which honors the single greatest economist of at least the last 100 years - Ludwig von Mises. In the 1940's, he explained causes of business cycles, inflation, employment and the proper use of money and credit. If you REALLY want to help the poor, the unemployed, along with everyone else, we need to start listening to what Mises tells us. Along with Rothbard, Hayek, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and friends, who took things further. If we don't, then we will continue to have these crises year after year.

Job loss: up close and personal As everyone is well aware, our Lansing politicians last month passed two large tax hikes to help fix a so-called budget "deficit." I say "so-called," because most of the deficit was created because of increased spending, and not lack of tax dollars. The decision to raise taxes has come under a lot of criticism, particularly from the business community, because the larger tax burden here in Michigan will make it even harder to attract job creators and entrepreneurs, and very likely will drive them away to other states. Michigan's state and local tax burden was 14th out of the 50 states even before the two tax hikes; we have undoubtedly moved even higher on that dubious list since then. But debates about the "business climate" and overall tax burden can be somewhat theoretical. Many people hear facts like "14th highest tax burden," and simply shrug. "What does that have to do with me," they may say. Unless it affects them personally, they really don't pay much attention. So let's focus on an individual case of how Michigan's business climate has affected a local entrepreneur. This summer, the Godfather's Pizza restaurant on West Main Street in Kalamazoo closed its doors after 16 years in business. Three full-time workers and 22 part-time workers lost their jobs, adding to Michigan's worst-in-the-U.S. unemployment rate. Owner Richard Johnson said there were two main reasons his business could no longer compete. "Our governor just keeps raising taxes," he said. "It's hard for a business to hang on." Johnson also blamed Michigan's increase in the minimum wage for putting him out of business. On July 1, the state minimum wage increased from $6.95 to $7:15 an hour; next year it will go up again to $7.40 per hour. Now it may sound compassionate for the government to raise the minimum wage to "put more money in workers' pockets," but the result is almost always the same: businesses that are simply making ends meet often have to lay off some of their minimum wage workers. We should ask the Godfather Pizza workers who lost their jobs this question: Would you rather have a job at $6.95 per hour, or no job that pays $7.15 an hour? I think I know what their answer would be. Ironically, two weeks after Godfathers Pizza closed its doors for good, Governor Granholm came to Kalamazoo to tout her brand-new "No Worker Left Behind" program. This is a job retraining program that supposedly helps laid-off workers get new skills to find new jobs. The program will cost millions of dollars and contributed to the budget "deficit" that resulted in the two tax hikes in October. This is what it's come to: state government's high taxes and burdenson regulations put people out of work, so state government creates a new government program that will help them--and will cause taxes to go even higher, putting more people out of work. Does the image of a dog chasing its tail come to mind? That's the trouble with government programs like the minimum wage and job retraining that are enacted supposedly to "help" the people. Politicians get to pose for pictures with graduates of the retraining program, while no one tallies up the the number of lost jobs and failed businesses caused by the ever increasing cost of government. But the politicians get to claim that they are "doing something" about unemployment. Our free-enterprise economy, if unfettered from needless regulations and high taxes, is the greatest engine of economic opportunity ever created. What government needs to do is get back to the basics--provide good roads and infrastructure, safe streets, and a fair system of justice. Michigan's one-state depression will not be solved with more government programs. Raymond H. Wilson is president of the Kalamazoo County Taxpayers Association. He can be reached at stoptaxes@kaltax.org. Membership in the Taxpayers Association is ten dollars; details are at www.kaltax.org. Some of the information in this column appeared in the August 14, 2007, Kalamazoo Gazette.

Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Nice page.Nowdays,drugs are one of the biggest social ills facing many cultures today.However, once you have determined you have a problem, how do you choose a drug rehab center?here is the good news for you,guys.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

jackie

<a href="http://www.drug-intervention.com/michigan-drug-intervention.html">Drug Intervention Michigan</a>

Nice page.Nowdays,drugs are one of the biggest social ills facing many cultures today.However, once you have determined you have a problem, how do you choose a drug rehab center?here is the good news for you,guys.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

jackie

Drug Intervention Massachusetts