Michigan Votes Forum

Rep. Genetski, 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 feel this money should be allocated to K 12 education instead of the new and unproven Centers for Energy Excellence. Sincerely- Bob Genetski”

Rep. Agema, 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: There are many additions to this original bill obtaining money from funds that don’t exist. How can we in good conscience vote for things that come from shadow funds. This will

Senator Scott’s third statement is as follows: Once again, I have something to say—Since the people cannot come and speak for themselves I’ve had a website for a number of years, www.insuranceredlinging.com , and I want to read to you a few, just a few, of the e-mails that I’ve received since they can’t be here for themselves

Senator Whitmer’s statement is as follows: I rise to add my comments to my colleagues who spoke before me. I think that they did a great job laying out some of the intricacies of this piece of legislation and the law that I think can be very complicated. You know, there was a man by the name of Jay Angoff who came to testify not too long ago,

Senator Clarke’s second statement, in which Senator Whitmer concurred, is as follows: I want to again commend the Senator from Highland Park for making a valiant effort to make insurance rate regulation fairer in this state. I ask you to support this bill that would remove the rating of home and auto insurance by territory. I want to deal with

Senator Jacobs’ statement is as follows: I do scratch my head trying to figure out why the dear chair of the committee has waited for six years and ten months to do this today. That being said, I rise in support of Senator Scott’s bill because of my Aunt Ruthie. I am going to tell you a story about her. My Aunt Ruthie is 86 years old—my

Senator Scott’s second statement is as follows: If you think that everyone should be charged according to the kind of car they drive, their driving record, and the distance that they drive—on the individual, not where they live—you should vote for this bill. Your rates are not going to go any higher just because that is where you live

Senator Sanborn’s statement is as follow: I am very confused right now, as I am sure some of you are. For six years and ten months, I have heard the Senator from the 2nd District get up and say, “Move my bill, Senate Bill No. 166”—a stand-alone bill. She never once in that time got up and said, “Debate my bill.” She