Cameron Brown (MI)

Sen. Cameron S. Brown for Secretary of State

• How to follow Cameron Brown for Secretary of State
  Now that I've announced my candidacy for Secretary of State, you can find news updates and information about my campaign on my website: www.cameronsbrown.com. I also have over 1,300 friends and counting on Facebook, which is updated daily and over 600 followers on Twitter. Please join me!
  
  - Cameron
  
  
  
  
• Democrats: "If only we had raised taxes more..."
  In the wake of Gov. Granholm's executive order intended to scare legislators and the public into supporting another tax hike, several Democrat legislators are arguing that the record setting income tax hike of 2007 didn't go far enough. In fact, the message seems to be "If we had only raised taxes higher, everything would be ok today."
  
  From MIRS Inc:
  
  

  Tax Hike Talk Is Back
  
  Some Democrats are now advocating a position that was unthinkable amid the recall threats: The tax hikes of 2007 didn't go far enough.
  
  The idea is that if the State had raised revenues more for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008, there wouldn't be the need to slash and burn budgets for FY '09 and '10.
  
  "In 2007, I told them it wasn't enough," said House Appropriations Committee Chair George CUSHINGBERRY (D-Detroit).
  
  Although Cushingberry voted for Gov. Jennifer GRANHOLM's Executive Order today issuing $304 million in mid-year General Fund cuts, he told MIRS that he favored tax increases opposed to cuts.
  
  Stressing that he was not speaking for the caucus, but "as a Representative from the 8th District," Cushingberry said that he favored a tax on physicians who refuse to see Medicaid patients, raising the income tax and/or closing tax loopholes. He said that he expected to see some of these by the end of the calendar year.
  
  Sen. Martha G. SCOTT (D-Highland Park) said she voted no on the E.O. because it hurts the people who are "cut, cut, cut all the time," like the mentally ill and those on Medicaid.
  
  "I said we should have raised taxes last year," she said. "We needed to bite the bullet."
  
  Scott said she favors hikes to both the income and sales taxes.
  
  Sen. Irma CLARK-COLEMAN (D-Detroit) was the other no vote in Senate Approps. She didn't push a tax increase in her criticism, but said that the $41-million slash to revenue sharing went too far.
  
  "I never thought I would see our state in such a demoralized condition," Clark-Coleman said. "I thought I could support the painful cuts because I know what the alternative would be. But the pain and suffering that will grip Detroit, Dearborn and River Rouge because of the cuts are equally egregious."
  
  The Granholm administration has said it does not plan to raise taxes. But Treasurer Bob KLEINE today did argue that the tax increases for FY 2008 were a net positive.
  
  "If we hadn't raised taxes in 2007, the problem would be really unmanageable," he said in a joint House and Senate Approps meeting.
  

  
  
  This fundamendal disconnect between legislators and the reality of the economic situation in our state is disturbing. The people and businesses of Michigan are in no position to pay more taxes - too many are unable to make ends meet as it is.
  
  
  
  
• Governor resorts to budget scare tactics (again)
  Only two years after massive income tax and business tax hikes, Michigan once again finds itself facing a budget crisis. And once again, Gov. Granholm is threatening state government's core services. Last week, her office leaked plans to layoff up to 83 Michigan State Police troopers as part of a potential budget-balancing move.
  
  But are such drastic measures really necessary to balance Michigan's books? Absolutely not. There are dozens of cost-cutting measures available to the governor and legislature that do not threaten the core functions of state government. For example, the bipartisan "Center for Michigan" has offered up $1.5 billion in potential savings. You can see their list here: http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/more-than-15-billion-in-mi-reform-choices/. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy has also published numerous suggestions.
  
  Now, I may not agree with all of the suggestions from these organziations and others. You may not either. But the larger point is that options are available to the governor and legislators that don't involve massive cuts to essential government services. Scare tactics aren't necessary or useful.
  
  
  
  
• The fallacy of "green" jobs exposed
  Gov. Granholm and President Obama have made the creation of "green" jobs a focus of their economic platforms. $20 billion worth of "Obamabucks" will go to the renewable energy industry, and last year the governor pushed for a "renewable portfolio standard" that will mandate how much energy utilities must provide from renewable sources. Both plans require significant investment from taxpayers and rate payers, with the promised payoff of thousands or millions of "green" jobs.
  
  Spain has instituted one of the most aggressive renewable energy programs in the world. President Obama has regularly referenced the country as an example of what should be done here at home. However, recent news from Spain indicates that "green" jobs may in fact kill more jobs than they create. Take a look:
  
  

  Subsidizing renewable energy in the U.S. may destroy two jobs for every one created if Spain’s experience with windmills and solar farms is any guide.
  
  For every new position that depends on energy price supports, at least 2.2 jobs in other industries will disappear, according to a study from King Juan Carlos University in Madrid.
  

  
  
  So it seems U.S. taxpayers and Michigan electric rate payers are being asked to fork over billions to fund an industry that in fact kills two jobs for every one it creates. Is this the way out of our recession?
  
  Full story at: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2PHwqAs7BS0
  
  
  
  
• More fallout from the re-monopolization of Michigan's energy market
  11% rate hikes during a recession and no competitors left for customers to turn to.
  
  Do you know how your legislator voted on this ill-advised legislation?
  
  

  Comprehensive energy reform will bring modest rate increases to customers, but doing nothing is the most expensive option."
  
  Those were words of Rep. Frank Accavitti D-Eastpointe, and Sen. Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, in the LSJ on Sept. 7, 2008, as they defended the Legislature's work to rewrite state energy law.
  
  Fast-forward to 2009. The state's two largest utilities, Consumers and DTE, have both filed rate increase plans. Unless the Public Service Commission rejects the plans, residential customers of Consumers face an 11 percent increase. DTE residential customers will be on the hook for 11 percent, as well.
  
  It's doubtful that hard-pressed Michigan residents think an 11 percent price increase is "modest," despite what some of their well-paid state legislators might say.
  
  When members of the public don't like a business' prices, they always can take their business elsewhere, right?
  
  Well ... not really in this case.
  
  The same legislation Accavitti and Richardville were defending last year also places limits on competition. No more than 10 percent of DTE's or Consumers' customers can get their power from competitor firms. For 90 percent of the market, it's the big utility or bust.
  
  That's what passed for bipartisan, comprehensive energy reform in Michigan last year.
  

  
  
  
  

  Full story at: http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20090415/OPINION01/904150318/1086/OPINION01