LSJ Blogs: Capitol Journal by Scott Davis

Fiddling around, while Michigan burns....

With two days from a state government shutdown – and quite a ways from any sort of state budget agreement – things are awfully quiet today at the Capitol.

Neither the House or Senate is scheduled for session, although two conferences committees did meet on Sunday to approve budgets, with large cuts to libraries and prisons. They come back on Tuesday.

Why the inaction? Perhaps partly because Michigan Republicans are catching their breath after a three-day conference at Mackinac Island, in which they hashed over a number of issues.

While I have no doubt the conference was important, one wonders whether state Republican leaders could have re-scheduled the conference months ago when it became clear that a budget stalemate was likely due to faltering state revenues.

Clearly, the time spent in Mackinac last weekend could have been better spent working on viable solutions to the state’s budget crisis before Wednesday night's budget deadline. Perhaps next year, Republicans could schedule the conference for sometime in mid-October – when (in theory) Michigan’s budget will be settled and done.

State shutdown: One lawmaker is preparing for the worst

In the middle of last week, I tried to interview officials of several state agencies, asking what people should do now to prepare for a state shutdown, which may occur if the State Legislature doesn’t approve a new budget by Oct. 1. Within two hours, these interviews were basically shut down and most of my calls were referred to the office of Gov. Jennifer Granholm.

There, staffers told me that it was way too early to comment about a possible shutdown, and to do so, would create panic and worry among people. I did the story anyway, and to the best of my knowledge, it hasn’t spurred widespread panic and rioting in the streets.

What’s funny is that – despite the official protests about how premature those questions are – a state lawmaker this week introduced a bill to protect Michigan residents from any fees or charges, if a shutdown does occur. The bill by state Rep. Kenneth Korn, R-Frankenmuth, also gives residents a grace period to renew licenses, and allows businesses to continue to operate under existing permits.

It’s probably a long shot that the bill would be passed anytime soon, and lawmakers may end up passing a continuation budget to prevent a shutdown anyway. But at least one state lawmaker doesn’t think it’s too early to start worrying publically about a possible shutdown.

ACORN: Pitchfork mobs are going after the wrong target

It’s been quite a spectacle in recent days.

The county has gone nuts over ACORN, a nationwide community action group that assists low-income persons with housing and other issues – and it’s a pretty good indicator of how topsy turvy things are in this country.

Certainly, what prompted the outcry is eyebrow-raising. A conservative and self-described journalist posed as a pimp in many ACORN offices in the nation, and on video, apparently captured a few ACORN workers in Washington, D.C., Brooklyn and Baltimore advising him on how to circumvent federal laws on obtaining a loan to open a brothel.

Naturally, within hours, conservative talk hosts labled the entire community organization an evil Mafia-like gang, spurring a pitchfork-laden mob to demand its summary execution. Here at the Lansing State Journal, receptionists fielded many calls from readers, demanding the story receive front-page play.

True to form, the U.S. House and Senate courageously bowed to this pressure and quickly voted to strip ACORN of all taxpayer funding – calling it a “corrupt” organization -- and hilariously, a handful of states like Louisiana moved to strip ACORN of money it doesn’t even provide to it.

All of this would be very funny indeed, if not for one thing: ACORN does a large amount of good in this country, offering housing assistance to low-income persons who simply have nowhere else to go for help.

Without groups like ACORN, these disenfranchised people will be at the sole mercy of large lending institutions, many of which have engaged in subprime lending schemes or other shady ventures. Remember these guys? Our nation’s largest banks and brokerages engaged in financial shenanigans so appalling that they would make the robber barons of old blush.

And when these shysters pushed the economy last fall to the brink of collapse – after paying themselves many millions in salary – I don’t recall Congress moving to cut any funding or demand a pound of flesh.

Nope. I remember Congress and then-President Bush, supported by Barack Obama, handing out billions of additional dollars to these offenders.

Every organization has its bad apples, as we all know, and we know that ACORN has a few bad acorns, with some ethical lapses (some exaggerated). No one has ever called for the dissolution of the Department of Defense because of some isolated (or even widespread) corruption that has occurred at the agency. No true American has ever asked Congress to close up shop, despite its many cases of corruption. The notion of dismantling our banking industry has never been seriously entertained (nor should it).

But apparently poor people – and their advocates – make for easy targets in this country.

Extra innings? Senate is laying groundwork to extend the budget fight

Just when it seemed that state Democrats and Republicans were making key progress in crafting a 2009-10 budget by an Oct. 1 deadline, we now have another reason to lose hope.

Two days after both parties agreed in principle to $1.2 billion in spending cuts, the Republican-led Senate now wants to pass a one-month continuation budget next week -- just in case no budget is finalized by Oct. 1.

While it's true the continuation budget would ensure that the government does not shut down without a budget in place Oct. 1, it also sends a signal that leaders have no faith a budget can be crafted in time. And it also removes any real pressure for both sides to compromise work out a deal.

What's the end result? Quite possibly, another whole month of bickering and political posturing.

State police building: Moving target

Delay apparently is a winning strategy.

In July, the Senate sent a bill to the House that refused $3.7 million in funding for a newly completed state police headquarters in downtown Lansing, and House leaders, nervous about bringing the matter to a full vote in the chamber, have let the issue languish in committee until they could shore up support.

House sources say they expect the House to finally take the matter today and send it back to the Senate largely unchanged. There, the expectation is that the Senate will restore funding for the controversial project, and then resend it to the House.

So if everything goes according to plan, those state police officials can still plan on moving out from their existing headquarters on Harrison Road in January – a building now leased from Michigan State University .

Children's health care is on the chopping block

Concern is rising among children’s advocates that the state’s budget crisis will pressure the state to forgo $100 million in federal funding for children’s health insurance because it can’t afford the $33 million match.

 

Advocates say that turning away the money for MIChild could be disastrous for children whose parents lack health insurance because their numbers are increasing as jobless rates rise statewide, the Detroit News reported.

Both Republican and Democratic legislators agree that it is unlikely that the state will be able to come up with the matching funds. They now are trying to address a $2.8 billion deficit for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.

"Show me where the $30 million is and give me a way to mark that against other priorities," said Sen. Roger Kahn, R-Saginaw, chairman of the Senate budget committee that oversees the Michigan Department of Community Health.

About 983,000 children are enrolled in Michigan public uninsured programs, and 160,000 children still lack health insurance.

Please, pull my plug! I can't stand this healthcare "debate" any longer

Few things are as disheartening as the lack of debate on one of the most important issues facing the country – national healthcare reform. Certainly, intelligent, compassionate people can disagree on the role that society should play in ensuring that everyone has access to health care. But what we see today in the news is a sad farce – a cartoonish sideshow of people ranting about Nazis and imaginary death panels, and most recently, a disabled woman in a wheelchair heckled and jeered at a town hall meeting while describing how she faced losing her home because of the high price of health care.

Here's my bid to get the debate going. A few facts:

-- The Democrats' public option plan is not the country’s first entry into socialized medicine. We’ve had socialized medicine in this country since at least the mid-1960s, when Congress approved Medicare, socialized healthcare for senior citizens. Let me repeat that, since, incredibly, many people don’t seem to know this. WE’VE HAD SOCIALIZED MEDICINE SINCE THE 1960s. Everyone reading this blog knows somebody who has received Medicare benefits. Have they been denied medical treatments? Are they being denied benefits? Have they been subjected to death panels, or have their family members been pressured to pull the plug? I know people who receive Medicare, and I can say without hesitation that their benefits are better than mine. While it is true that Medicare is currently underfunded, that’s largely due to the skyrocketing costs of health care – affecting all aspects of the health industry. These are the rising costs that President Obama hopes to rein in with healthcare reform.

-- Without a doubt, the same people who bitterly oppose any form of national healthcare insurance – calling it a form of socialism or communism – would riot in the streets if the government tomorrow announced it is ending the Medicare program. Seriously, there would be bureaucrats burned in effigy, blood flowing on the sidewalks. That’s because most working-class people realize they will need the government (yes, gasp, the government) to help care for them in their senior years. So the question becomes: If elderly people are granted access to nationalized medical care, why not other groups? Ideologically, what’s the difference?

-- Know your enema. The idea that marketplace/profit-driven health insurance provides the best, most consumer-friendly health care simply does not hold water. Consider this: Average premiums paid to U.S. health insurance companies have risen 87 percent since 2002, and in that time, profits have more than quadrupled among the 10 biggest insurers, according to Healthcare for America Now, a Washington, D.C. advocacy group for healthcare reform. Getting the picture? There is a certain, unpleasant bowel-cleansing procedure being done on you, and I think you know what it is.

-- It’s often repeated as dogma that America has the best healthcare system in the world. This is a lie, and the bigwigs who repeatedly push this assertion know it’s a lie. Most objective measures comparing America to the rest of the industrialized world show that America spends far more money on health care than other countries, especially those with nationalized health care, and it achieves less desirable outcomes. For instance, the U.S. ranks 50th out of 224 nations in life expectancy, according to 2009 estimates from the CIA World Factbook. Put simply, Americans spend more money on health care and die more quickly. No country’s healthcare system is perfect – including the single-payer systems of Canada and Great Britain – but to start the debate with something like “We’re the best!” seems sad and infantile.

These comments are meant to just scratch the surface on what obviously is a very complicated issue. So come on, let’s get that debate underway. Or just pull my plug – please!

Have a slice. And take tomorrow off -- without pay

Nothing says employee appreciation like a free pizza luncheon – one day before a mandatory unpaid furlough day.

Roughly 890 employees of the state Department of Management and Budget are being treated today to pizza during their annual employee appreciation luncheon – at which department leaders recognize long-term service and employee excellence.

Even in very tight fiscal times – when lawmakers are contemplating deep budget cuts to address a $2.7 billion shortfall next fiscal year – the department managed to scrounge up $4,200 for pizza and bottled water and a large tent outside their office building.

The event comes only one day before employees take the last of six furlough days that state lawmakers implemented earlier this year to save money in the budget.

So why should taxpayers fork over money for public employee appreciation in brutally tough economic times?

“DMB is a very frugal agency,” said Kassie Kretzschmar, spokeswoman for the department. “Since 2003, we have saved $2.8 billion for taxpayers through a lot of hard work by our employees. As a result we feel it's important to annually recognize their service and to thank them appropriately. We feel a piece of pizza and bottled water isn't excessive as a way to recognize years of service.”

A look at Dillon's plan: Study suggests savings are there

So, does lumping all public sector employees into the same health insurance pool really save taxpayer dollars? A new study by the Ann Arbor-based Center for Michigan suggests that it would.

The study shows the average taxpayer cost for health insurance coverage for state of Michigan employees and retirees was much higher than in six of seven other states that put a large proportion of public workers into insurance pools, the Detroit Free Press reported.

Michigan’s average cost in 2008 was $9,836 per enrollee – about 53 percent higher than the average in the seven other states.

Michigan's employees also contributed less to their total health insurance costs – 10 percent – than in the other states.

John Bebow, executive director of the Center for Michigan, said the study backs claims by House Speaker Andy Dillon that pooling Michigan public employees and retirees – including teachers and employees of local government -- would save more than $900 million annually. He has proposed legislation to place public sector employees into the same insurance pool.

On the sidelines: Insurance reform moves ahead without Granholm

The biggest potential cheerleader for a proposal to place all Michigan public sector employees in a state-run health insurance plan has yet to don her pom-pons.

This week, Liz Boyd, spokeswoman for Gov. Jennifer Granholm, told Gongwer News that Granholm remains undecided about the proposed mandate to place employees for the state, local governments and schools under the same program. House Speaker Andy Dillon’s draft bill for the measure was unveiled Friday.

Boyd said the governor instead believes that voluntary participation, rather than a mandate, is preferable.

"The governor continues to believe that pooling and other best practices can be used to drive down the cost of health care," she said. "This is essentially a pooling bill. But the governor would prefer an approach that recognizes the importance of local control. She believes that if we do this right, local units of government won't have to be mandated to join, they'll do this voluntarily."

But Boyd added the governor has not yet adopted a final position on the issue.