The Freep gets it right. More than I can say for Ricky "Republican" Albin. And yes, I know I shouldn't expect anything different from Mr. Albin. But this is my blog and I'll cry if I want to. You would cry too if Rick kept happening to you. Due to my C.O.L. (cat on lap) issues, I can't change the channel fast enough.
LANSING -- Republican lawmakers reheated leftovers Tuesday from 12 business tax cut bills Gov. Jennifer Granholm effectively vetoed last week, picking two cuts they said will encourage manufacturers like troubled Delphi Corp. to expand operations in Michigan.
One of the revived proposals immediately would cut the personal property tax on businesses by 15%. Another would give companies 100% credit on personal property taxes for equipment and jobs they move to Michigan in 2007 and 2008.
In addition, the state would continue specific tax breaks for Delphi and Visteon Corp. -- two of the world's largest auto parts suppliers -- which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year.
House and Senate GOP leaders chose to temporarily set aside the broader debate over how to overhaul or replace the Single Business Tax (SBT), which is widely viewed as a barrier to attracting new businesses to Michigan.
"Let's have that fight in January; let's pass what we can now," said Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema, R-Wyoming, who sharply criticized Granholm's vetoes last week. He joined House Speaker Craig DeRoche, R-Novi, in proposing the tax cuts again.
Despite her vetoes, Granholm urged lawmakers to pursue business tax reductions before the end of the year. Her spokesperson, Liz Boyd, said the governor would review the new Republican bills, but would oppose them if they would cause higher taxes for individuals or cuts in state spending.
Sikkema said the latest proposal would not require budget cuts. He said new calculations of state finances show more than $200 million in unexpected funds. He said the state should make tax cuts that spur the state's economy a priority over state spending.
DeRoche and Sikkema noted that Granholm last week signed the same two tax cuts they proposed again Tuesday. However, those bills were linked to other tax bills she vetoed, which effectively killed the entire package.
Granholm accused Republicans of breaking a deal on tax cuts because they insisted on letting stand a current law that will end the Single Business Tax altogether in 2010. That would cost the state treasury about $2 billion a year unless it's replaced with other tax revenues.
Granholm wants the SBT at least extended, to give the Legislature more time to shape an alternative business tax.
Sikkema said regardless of disagreements over the SBT, Granholm should sign the personal property tax cuts.
"Auto companies and auto suppliers are making decisions now as to where to locate," Sikkema said. "Our tax structure is uncompetitive. We're resubmitting word for word the same personal property tax cut that was part of the plan the governor vetoed."
My beef with Mr. Albin is that he always chooses to gloss over the facts that I have highlighted here. It's so much fun to run around yelling "tax cuts! tax cuts!" without explaining the consequences.
And on to Mr. Sikkema. Always the "fight" with the Republicans. Why does it have to be a "fight", Mr. Sikkema? Why can't there be co-operation? I think Mr. Sikkema's choice of words in very telling on the condition of relations in Lansing. Oppose the Governor at all costs, doesn't matter who gets hurt. Deal with the problems later, later, later...spend that money now. Someone else will pay in the end. Fiscal irresponsibility is the new Republican credo.
Ball is back in your court Jen. It will be interesting to see your next move. Perhaps our tax structure does need an overhaul- but at what price? We need to move away from dependence on the auto industry. Now. Too much of our fortune is tied to people that, in my lifetime, act like they don't have the first clue about successfully growing or retaining business.
If I get time today- I will tackle George Will's slam on Michigan in favor of Indiana. Or not. Will bores me to tears, and doesn't take into consideration quality of life issues. He points to a bunch of budget saving cuts- bottled water for state employess, blah blah blah- things that Granholm had already done years ago in Michigan. Will doesn't bother to do the research on that, or anything else when comparing the states, but that's not surprising.
I could pull up facts and figures on why Michigan is a better place to live than Indiana, but to what end. We who live here already know.