Rep. Amash, 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:
I strongly support autism research. Autism is a devastating disorder,
and a growing threat to our children. But HB 4475 and HB 4477 are going
to weaken autism funding and reduce the chances of finding a cure.
These bills propose to create a checkbox through which individual
taxpayers can choose to pay additional taxes to a state-managed autism
research fund. Common sense-and historical experience-shows this will
backfire. A small percentage of voters will choose to donate money to a
state fund. (The actual percentage is unknown because no fact-finding
has been presented as to its actual effects.) Meanwhile, every taxpayer
will see the checkbox and gain false confidence that the government,
and some other concerned citizens, are taking care of the problem. When
these taxpayers consider other opportunities to contribute to autism
research, many will decline, convinced that autism research already has
solid funding. Even within government, legislators who support these
bills will move on to other issues because the autism fund is
supposedly doing its work. Everyone will feel good while no good is
being done to fight autism.
Historical precedent confirms my worst fears about this bill. In 2006,
our state tax forms contained three checkboxes for charitable causes -
the Children’s Trust Fund (focusing on child abuse), the Military
Family Relief Fund, and the Children of Veterans Tuition Grant Program.
All are good causes. Less than 1% of taxpayers contributed any money to
these funds, which raised only a few hundred thousand dollars each.
Even more tragically, every taxpayer was encouraged to believe that
these causes were being effectively funded by someone else.
Meanwhile, the small amounts of money that these bills may generate
will be offset by administrative costs and are vulnerable to being
misdirected. HB 4475 provides that the ‘state treasurer shall direct
the investment of the fund.’ The state treasurer is not in the best
position to evaluate how to direct autism money among state-wide
hospitals, schools, and charities. Lobbying, personal agendas, and
inside connections will influence how the funds are spent.
I have enormous concern for the many families across our state whose
children have been diagnosed with autism. But well-intentioned
government proposals that actually reduce total funding, breed
complacency, and encourage waste are not the right solution.”