State Priorities Must Change: Vote No on Proposal 1

[XLFD]

The Mlive Media Group editorial staff recently came out with an editorial titled Vote yes on Proposal 1 for better Michigan roads, schools and cities with a rose-colored glasses look at how our financially-strapped state's roads, schools and cities can be magically repaired with Proposal 1.

"As a state, we have been underinvesting in our infrastructure -- as well as schools and cities -- for more than a decade. That means all of us haven't been giving our fair share."

This statement and the rest of the article is complete malarkey, and is just Mlive's editorial staff shilling for public shillings for their government friends.  It's somehow our fault for not putting enough money into our infrastructure is a complete fabrication of the record, and the editorial is at best propaganda propagated by the state government, whose involvement is only mentioned once in the editorial:

"Like many Michigan residents, we (the Mlive editorial board) wish legislators had shown the courage to address the problem head on, instead of pandering to the anti-tax fringe that holds far too much sway in our state."

According to latest polls, that 'fringe' looks to be at about 2/3 of the state's population, which rises close to the 3/4 mark once they are shown the tortuous wording of the proposal.  This is actually quite a change from just a little over two months ago, when the plurality of people polled indicated they would vote yes. 

The problem is far from the amount of money the citizens need to pay in state taxes, the problem is the efficient use of those tax dollars by our state government.  The best way to illustrate this is not through mindless rhetoric like the Mlive editorial board uses, but to compare Michigan with similar states that have approximately the same amount of highway miles and the same amount of people, but still manage to have much better road systems with less money to work with. 

 

Case 1:  Georgia

Georgia has slightly more people than Michigan (10.1 million to 10 million) and as you can see in the chart below, had only 20 miles of highway less than Michigan as of 2009 records made by the Census Department.  Two states could not be much closer in these two stats.

As of 2014, Michigan's state budget was $51.2 billion, while Georgia's was significantly smaller at $41.4 billion.  With 24% less money to work with, Georgia must have incredibly bad roads, right?

Wrong!  By the following federal assessment made in 2012 used to determine how much work is needed in resurfacing roads and fixing bridges, Georgia and Michigan are not even close

 

Reading the data, nearly three times as many miles need to be resurfaced in Michigan than in Georgia.  You will also note that Georgia needs to maintain more bridges than Michigan, yet has much less of them being structurally-challenged, with Michigan having more than 1 in 4 of their bridges deficient, while Georgia has about 1 in 6. 

So Georgia is somehow maintaining their same amount of roads much better than Michigan, doing so with about $10 billion less per year.  Doesn't this defy reason, Mlive editors? 

Even with such rationale, your most persistent and government-loving editor will put forth that the freeze-thaw cycle is much more severe on Michigan roads than in Georgia, which rarely gets below freezing temperatures.  In Michigan, maintenance per mile is nearly $30,000 per year— more than twice as high as Georgia, and fourteen other states including Montana, North and South Dakota which have their own share of freeze-thaw cycles. 

So this argument has its flaws, but let's say for sake of argument, that being situated in a wet northern climate involves a lot more needed maintenance to roads, let's check just to our west. 

Case 2:  Wisconsin

Our fellow mitten state, located right across the lake, has just over 40% less population and just over 5% less roads than Michigan, by the same table used earlier.  They spent just over half of what Michigan did in maintenance in 2012 by the above chart, and their state's budget is $44.9 Billion as of 2014. 

But whereas, Michigan needs 34.8% of their roads resurfaced, Wisconsin needs only 24.7% by the 2012 federal highway assessment.  Furthermore, only 14% of Wisconsin's 14,000 bridges were deficient or obsolete, while 27% of Michigan's 11,000 bridges were deficient or obsolete.

By any metric, both Georgia and Wisconsin, despite their similarities in many ways to Michigan, have figured out how to maintain their roads and bridges with far less money and far more efficiency.  The problem of our roads in Michigan will not be solved by devising more ways to get more money in a provably inefficient system, but by devising a solution to the underlying problem of wasteful spending by bureaucrats with few skills at bean-counting and held to no accountability by our state legislators. 

And then we have to deal with the out-of-touch editorial staffs of major media syndicates who believe a skim coat of asphalt named Proposal 1 is going to cure all our problems while they prattle on like snake-oil salesmen to a crowd of Michigan villagers who work hard for their pennies.

[shinblind]

Vote No on Proposal 1.

It is a 17% increase in tax.

It will take away $475- $510 in income from the average Michigan Household.

This as a time when wages have been stagnant for years.

 

The money sent to schools will be spent on retirement benefits and not make it to the classrooms.

Michigan's budget is 52 billion dollars. Let them find a better way to come 1.3 billion dollars for roads

that this proposal will raise.

It is a poorly written bill that should have never made it this far. The only good thing is that the people 

have been given the opportunity to vote it down.

[Willy]

shinblind, that's what I have been trying to tell the people I know who are going to vote yes on Proposal 1. They think it 's only a penny out of their dollar so what's the big deal. When I tell them that at by the end of the year they will have giving to the Government 17% more in sales tax, they begin to understand just what a penny is worth. Then I tell them that the 17% increase is not going to be spent solely on the roads. They were of course under the impression that their entire penny was earmarked for road repair.  Now they realize that this is just another "general" tax increase that they would be approving because the State and counties have neglected their duty to maintain our roads and they are, once again, back with hands out for more of your money. 

[Haiku Confucius]

Expect something more,

Than indecent proposal,

Scalping your wallet.

[Willy]

The truth about Proposal 1:

1. Will eliminate the sales and use tax on vehicle gasoline and diesel fuel.

2. Increase the fuel tax to 41.7 cents per gallon from 19 cents per gallon of gasoline and 15 cents per gallon of diesel.

3. Increase the state's sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent.

4. Dedicate 60 percent of the first 5 percent of the sales tax and an amount equal to 12.3 percent of the first 5 percent of the use tax to the School Aid Fund.

5. Dedicate 15 percent of the first 5 percent of the sales tax to be used for revenue sharing with townships, cities and villages. Currently, 15 percent of the first 4 percent is earmarked for revenue sharing with local governments.

6. Remove the depreciation discount for annual vehicle registration fees.

7. Create a $75 annual surcharge for electric vehicles and a $25 surcharge for hybrid vehicles.

8. Increase the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) from 6 percent to 20 percent.

9. Proposal 1 is actually 10 pieces of legislation and will alter the State Constitution.

10. Not a pothole road in Michigan will be fixed by the hiking of your taxes by this Proposal until at least 2018.

11. Will cost each taxpayer more than $500 more per year in State taxes and fees.

I found nothing that states how much money will be dedicated to road repair. This is a hodgepodge of legal foreplay and I hope voters won't be fooled by all of the propaganda by those that want this passed.

 

http://michigan.gov/documents/statewide_bal_prop_status_145801_7.pdf

[Willy]

County Road Association of Michigan says Proposal 1

Isn’t The End of Higher Taxes

Members Say Additional Local Road Millages Still Coming Even If Proposal 1 Passes

Lansing, MI –  Last week, the County Road Association of Michigan (CRAM) met for their annual meeting where more than 200 members were in attendance from across the state of Michigan. During the meeting, members were asked how many would need to ask their local voters for an additional local road millage if the statewide road funding even if the Proposal 1 passed this May. It’s been reported by news sources that nearly half of the hands in the audience raised their hands.

Paul Mitchell, Chair of the Coalition Against Higher Taxes and Special Interest Deals said, “Proponents of Proposal 1 and those thinking of supporting this bad policy should take note. Here we have those with the most intimate knowledge of our roads and they are clearly saying Proposal 1 won’t fix the roads and more tax increases are planned for communities throughout the state. Could it be because Proposal 1 directs $700 million dollars in non-road related spending? How much in tax increases will be enough?”

Mitchell continued, “the reality of the situation is this: whether you don’t believe we should increase the sales tax by 17% or you don’t believe $700 million dollars a year…every year…in non-related road spending is right; Proposal 1 is bad policy for Michigan. If local officials will need more money for roads, then we should allow the new legislature to have the opportunity to find a viable solution that clearly and concisely tackles our entire infrastructure problem without adding a 40% surcharge on to other things. The road problem is too important to muddy up with other things.”

CRAM Executive Director Denise Donahue also said improving the roads “will take years” and cost as much as $2.1 billion a year. Mitchell said, “how can we look Michigan citizens in the eye and tell them to pass a proposal that takes money away from the roads and gives it to other things? That’s just crazy.”

[XLFD]

The legislators made the mechanics of Proposal 1 unwieldy, which often spells doom for proposals.  Here is a chart prepared by the Mackinac Foundation charting the revenues created and where they all go.  Those who claim we need this to fix the roads may want to realize the 17% tax hike is already slated to go to things other than the roads.