More Big (brother) Government

HB 5543 - Creates a new act to allow local units of government to enact ordinances to require the fingerprinting of door-to-door solicitors, taxicab drivers and street vendors. Those fingerprints would then be transmitted by the local unit of government to the Michigan State Police for the purpose of conducting a criminal background check. The local unit of government can charge the applicant for the cost of processing the criminal background check.

This passed the House of Representatives today by a vote of 88-18. I guess Republicans like big government, too.

More Big (brother) Government

HB 5543 - Creates a new act to allow local units of government to enact ordinances to require the fingerprinting of door-to-door solicitors, taxicab drivers and street vendors. Those fingerprints would then be transmitted by the local unit of government to the Michigan State Police for the purpose of conducting a criminal background check. The local unit of government can charge the applicant for the cost of processing the criminal background check.

This passed the House of Representatives today by a vote of 88-18. I guess Republicans like big government, too.

William F. Buckley, 1925 - 2008

The conservative world mourns the loss of William F. Buckley. I am no wordsmith. All I can say is that he was an icon of conservative thought and action. One of my House colleagues said to me, "Bill Buckley kept the flame of conservatism alive." I responded to him, "No, my friend, I must correct you. William F. Buckley LIT the conservative flame in this country.

I believe that I have lost not only an ideological soul-mate, but also a brother in Christ.

Rest in peace, Bill.

William F. Buckley, 1925 - 2008

The conservative world mourns the loss of William F. Buckley. I am no wordsmith. All I can say is that he was an icon of conservative thought and action. One of my House colleagues said to me, "Bill Buckley kept the flame of conservatism alive." I responded to him, "No, my friend, I must correct you. William F. Buckley LIT the conservative flame in this country.

I believe that I have lost not only an ideological soul-mate, but also a brother in Christ.

Rest in peace, Bill.

And yet, here is another one...

Just received this note today from friend.

Hi Jack, I just met with a local successful businessman in Lansing who told me that his company's tax burden increased from $350,000 under the SBT to 1.1 million with the MBT. He was furious about getting the shaft. FYI.

Regards...

And yet, here is another one...

Just received this note today from friend.

Hi Jack, I just met with a local successful businessman in Lansing who told me that his company's tax burden increased from $350,000 under the SBT to 1.1 million with the MBT. He was furious about getting the shaft. FYI.

Regards...

This is getting all too common

I just received this posting...

My accountant contacted me at 7:00 in the morning she was so upset. We are a very small business with a Single Business Tax (SBT) liability in ‘07 of about $1600. This year, [under the new Michigan Business Tax] it's $10,000. That is about a 700% increase. Where will I find that much extra money?

This is getting all too common

I just received this posting...

My accountant contacted me at 7:00 in the morning she was so upset. We are a very small business with a Single Business Tax (SBT) liability in ‘07 of about $1600. This year, [under the new Michigan Business Tax] it's $10,000. That is about a 700% increase. Where will I find that much extra money?

The Impact is Only Just Starting to be Felt

Just today, I received the following note from a local auto body shop owner. I am getting notes like this on a weekly basis...

Jack,

We just received the news from our tax accountant of the estimated amount of MBT (Michigan Business Tax) for 2008 for our organization. For 2007 we paid about $20,000 of SBT (Single Business Tax). The estimate for 2008 is $68,000 an increase of 240%. If you see the governor tell her and the rest of your fellow legislators.

Thanks,
(Name Withheld)

I am not a pessimist, and I am not a "doomsday prophet" but, I am beginning to believe that when it comes to virtual destruction of our employment base in Michigan, we have only seen the tip of the iceberg.

The Impact is Only Just Starting to be Felt

Just today, I received the following note from a local auto body shop owner. I am getting notes like this on a weekly basis...

Jack,

We just received the news from our tax accountant of the estimated amount of MBT (Michigan Business Tax) for 2008 for our organization. For 2007 we paid about $20,000 of SBT (Single Business Tax). The estimate for 2008 is $68,000 an increase of 240%. If you see the governor tell her and the rest of your fellow legislators.

Thanks,
(Name Withheld)

I am not a pessimist, and I am not a "doomsday prophet" but, I am beginning to believe that when it comes to virtual destruction of our employment base in Michigan, we have only seen the tip of the iceberg.

Government Knows Best...when it comes to deciding who you should hire.

House Bills 4887, 4926, 4927 would prohibit employers or potential employers from failing or refusing to hire an individual for, among other things:

• having a particular body type or degrees of physical fitness


• having a known or believed illness or health condition


• having a bad credit history

In other words, the "at will employee" is slowly going the way of the buggy whip. State government does not want to allow you the freedom to hire and fire employees at will or without cause. Soon, an applicant who was turned down for a job, even though he may have been less qualified than the individual who did get the job, will be able to sue the employee for "not hiring me because he thinks my ears are too big." And it will be up to the employer to prove that this is not why he did not hire the individual.

Bottom line: "at will" means "without cause". An employer should have the right to hire or not hire for any reason or no reason. Who would you rather trust to make decisions about who is best to help your business grow and prosper? Yourself or the government? It's a Core Principle, folks. Do you want MORE government or LESS government?

Most employers will hire the most qualified candidate. But if this legislation passes, they will have to deal with individuals who can manufacture a reason for why they were not hired and force the employer to incur huge legal fees to defend himself in court, wasting precious time and money, when he could be creating wealth and new jobs.

Government Knows Best...when it comes to deciding who you should hire.

House Bills 4887, 4926, 4927 would prohibit employers or potential employers from failing or refusing to hire an individual for, among other things:

• having a particular body type or degrees of physical fitness


• having a known or believed illness or health condition


• having a bad credit history

In other words, the "at will employee" is slowly going the way of the buggy whip. State government does not want to allow you the freedom to hire and fire employees at will or without cause. Soon, an applicant who was turned down for a job, even though he may have been less qualified than the individual who did get the job, will be able to sue the employee for "not hiring me because he thinks my ears are too big." And it will be up to the employer to prove that this is not why he did not hire the individual.

Bottom line: "at will" means "without cause". An employer should have the right to hire or not hire for any reason or no reason. Who would you rather trust to make decisions about who is best to help your business grow and prosper? Yourself or the government? It's a Core Principle, folks. Do you want MORE government or LESS government?

Most employers will hire the most qualified candidate. But if this legislation passes, they will have to deal with individuals who can manufacture a reason for why they were not hired and force the employer to incur huge legal fees to defend himself in court, wasting precious time and money, when he could be creating wealth and new jobs.

They want your children...at a younger age.

Education Committee held a hearing yesterday on HB 4662 which would amend the Revised School Code to (1) require school districts to provide kindergarten and (2) require parents to send five-year-olds to school.

Currently under the law, five-year-olds have the right to attend school, but are not required to do so. The law specifies instead that every parent, guardian, or other person having control and charge of a child from the age of six to the child's 16th birthday must send that child to a public school during the entire school year. (The law has exceptions for private schooling and home schooling, among other things.) House Bill 4662 would make the mandatory school attendance requirement apply at the age of five.

Additionally, in committee yesterday, a substitute bill was submitted to mandate all-day kindergarten.

Despite the School Code 380.10 which says that the education of children is that of the parents alone, when I asked Louise Somalski, the legislative director of the Michigan Federation of Teachers the question "Who is responsible for making sure our kids actaully get an education", I first got a "deer in the headlights" look. Finally, Louise recovered and answered that it was her belief that the reponsibility for educating our children rested with "society." Wow, that's a comforting thought!

They want your children...at a younger age.

Education Committee held a hearing yesterday on HB 4662 which would amend the Revised School Code to (1) require school districts to provide kindergarten and (2) require parents to send five-year-olds to school.

Currently under the law, five-year-olds have the right to attend school, but are not required to do so. The law specifies instead that every parent, guardian, or other person having control and charge of a child from the age of six to the child's 16th birthday must send that child to a public school during the entire school year. (The law has exceptions for private schooling and home schooling, among other things.) House Bill 4662 would make the mandatory school attendance requirement apply at the age of five.

Additionally, in committee yesterday, a substitute bill was submitted to mandate all-day kindergarten.

Despite the School Code 380.10 which says that the education of children is that of the parents alone, when I asked Louise Somalski, the legislative director of the Michigan Federation of Teachers the question "Who is responsible for making sure our kids actaully get an education", I first got a "deer in the headlights" look. Finally, Louise recovered and answered that it was her belief that the reponsibility for educating our children rested with "society." Wow, that's a comforting thought!

Is Detroit Dysfunctional?

Allow me to relate a note I received recently from a friend. This note requires no comment from me. Read it and weep.

"We spent the weekend visiting the kids in Royal Oak. Visited the Cranbrook science museum & also the Detroit Institute of Art. (I had not been there in years). As we went into the DIA, there were two places to stand in line to get admission tickets. One line (with two clerks) for DIA Members. The other line (with one clerk) for everyone else. The non-member line had about 20 people in it and was moving slowly. There was no one in the member line. I casually asked the security guard who came by if perhaps one of the two clerks who had no one in their line could help out the other clerk in the non-member line. I was told, "No, they belong to a different union." NO WONDER THIS STATE IS IN SUCH A FIX! Common sense (& courtesy) are thrown out the window because of a union!"

Is Detroit Dysfunctional?

Allow me to relate a note I received recently from a friend. This note requires no comment from me. Read it and weep.

"We spent the weekend visiting the kids in Royal Oak. Visited the Cranbrook science museum & also the Detroit Institute of Art. (I had not been there in years). As we went into the DIA, there were two places to stand in line to get admission tickets. One line (with two clerks) for DIA Members. The other line (with one clerk) for everyone else. The non-member line had about 20 people in it and was moving slowly. There was no one in the member line. I casually asked the security guard who came by if perhaps one of the two clerks who had no one in their line could help out the other clerk in the non-member line. I was told, "No, they belong to a different union." NO WONDER THIS STATE IS IN SUCH A FIX! Common sense (& courtesy) are thrown out the window because of a union!"

Clarification on budget vote

There was a question regarding my previous posting about budget votes. For clarification, the $7.5 million I voted to spend was the total increase from last year's budget. In a $42+ billion budget, an increase of $7.5 million is an increase of about 2/1oo of one percent. (0.0002) increase in spending. Oh well, I guess nobody's perfect!

Clarification on budget vote

There was a question regarding my previous posting about budget votes. For clarification, the $7.5 million I voted to spend was the total increase from last year's budget. In a $42+ billion budget, an increase of $7.5 million is an increase of about 2/1oo of one percent. (0.0002) increase in spending. Oh well, I guess nobody's perfect!

The Last of the SMALL Spenders

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy put out a very interesting list. They compiled all the spending bills approved by the legislature last fall for the 07-08 budget year. Of the 17 budget bills passed, 7 did not grow, 10 were larger than previous year, by $1.5 BILLION.

Mackinac looked at how each lawmaker voted on those 10 bills and how much spending growth each one approved. In the House, EVERY Democrat voted for at least $1.3 billion in new spending. On the Republican side, of the 52 members, 21 approved at least $1 billion in new spending. Only four Republicans approved LESS than $10 million in new spending. They are, ranking 1st with $6.5 million, Fulton Sheen and tied for second at $7.5 million, Hune, Steil and Hoogendyk.

Let's face it, if it is wrong to take $1.5 billion in new tax revenue from businesses and families, then it is wrong to spend it.

The Last of the SMALL Spenders

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy put out a very interesting list. They compiled all the spending bills approved by the legislature last fall for the 07-08 budget year. Of the 17 budget bills passed, 7 did not grow, 10 were larger than previous year, by $1.5 BILLION.

Mackinac looked at how each lawmaker voted on those 10 bills and how much spending growth each one approved. In the House, EVERY Democrat voted for at least $1.3 billion in new spending. On the Republican side, of the 52 members, 21 approved at least $1 billion in new spending. Only four Republicans approved LESS than $10 million in new spending. They are, ranking 1st with $6.5 million, Fulton Sheen and tied for second at $7.5 million, Hune, Steil and Hoogendyk.

Let's face it, if it is wrong to take $1.5 billion in new tax revenue from businesses and families, then it is wrong to spend it.

What is the administration hiding, waste? fraud? favors?

A couple of weeks ago, Attorney General Mike Cox announced his office would be putting their financial activities online for easy review by taxpayers.  The governor's office said they have already done this.  Really?

Real Government Transparency: Does Michigan have it?

Attorney General Mike Cox should be commended for his leadership in putting his department's expenditures online for all taxpayers to review. He even has a "hot button" on his web page where you can "track your taxes", and find out how he is spending your money in his department. You can read his press release here.
 
Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader who joined the press conference via phone said it best: "I applaud AG Cox for taking this important first step of making government operations more transparent. I hope the governor follows his example and makes the full text of all Michigan state contracts available to the public via the Internet."
 
The governor made it all political with her response. "It sounds like just another PR stunt from these three," Granholm spokeswoman Liz Boyd said of Cox, House Minority Leader Craig DeRoche, R-Novi, and Rep. Jack Hoogendyk, R-Kalamazoo. "They are late to the game. The governor long ago ordered all state contracting information to be available online, and it is."
 
Tell that to Rory Mattson from Escanaba. He tried through the freedom of information act to get some disclosure from the DEQ and the DNR. They would not come forward with the information until he paid over $15,000 for "copying fees". Six months after he submitted the check, he was still waiting for the information.
 
Tell that to taxpayers who want to know where their dollars are going for information technology. When the Department of Technology was awarded a $5 million contract to upgrade the Child Support Enforcement System, they ran the cost up to over $200 million. When my office asked for information, they responded that they didn't have the information. (In the last three weeks of the contract, there was a "change order" approved by a bureaucrat for $10 million with no explanation. When I asked them for the detail, they sent me a letter and and told me, "we don't have it, it doesn't exist.")
 
Come on governor! Several other states and the federal government have implemented transparency in government; they put the entire checkbook online.  Why won't you?

Media Advisory: Hoogendyk Files Papers for Senate Run

PRESS RELEASE
February 13, 2008

For Immediate Release
Contact:  Ben Wetmore
ben@jackformichigan.org
cell: 517-803-3010
Hoogendyk Files Papers for Senate Race

Lansing, MI- Current State Representative Jack Hoogendyk is filing papers tomorrow morning to become a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate, in the race against 30 year incumbent Democrat Carl Levin.

Hoogendyk has rallied the support of many of the party leadership and county chairs, gathering their endorsements and raising money in anticipation for a significant campaign against Levin.

"I'm glad that Carl Levin has raised $5 million dollars in anticipation for this race," said Representative Hoogendyk.  "He's short, he'll need twice as much to win.  I'm also glad to see there's no chance the bank will foreclose on Carl's campaign office, I just wish I could say the same for working families in Wayne county, and of course the rest of the state.  Everyone I speak to is struggling to make ends meet in this state, I guess Carl managed to make friends with all the millionaires."

Jack Hoogendyk has been a state representative in district 61 from Texas Township since 2003.  Jack has never voted for a tax-increase.  Jack has previously worked in sales and non-profit management.

Jack has been married to Erin for 32 years, and together they have 5 children and 7 grandchildren.  In their spare time, Jack and Erin have been involved with Alternatives, a Kalamazoo clinic that serves pregnant women in need.

 

###

Hoogendyk for U.S. Senate
Lansing, Michigan
Jackformichigan.org

PAID FOR BY HOOGENDYK FOR SENATE
Forward email

On today's agenda

We are running quite a few bills this week. One in particular is quite controversial:

• HB4627 to establish a government “commission on pay equity” to “develop definitions, models, and guidelines for employers and employees on pay equity.” Members of the commission would have to include representatives from the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, the Michigan Women's Commission, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO union, the United Auto Workers union, the Michigan Small Business Association, the National Organization for Women, and the Michigan Women's Studies Association. In other words, we should let the government, through a commission which is tilted to the left, tell the private sector how much they should pay their employees.

On today's agenda

We are running quite a few bills this week. One in particular is quite controversial:

• HB4627 to establish a government “commission on pay equity” to “develop definitions, models, and guidelines for employers and employees on pay equity.” Members of the commission would have to include representatives from the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, the Michigan Women's Commission, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO union, the United Auto Workers union, the Michigan Small Business Association, the National Organization for Women, and the Michigan Women's Studies Association. In other words, we should let the government, through a commission which is tilted to the left, tell the private sector how much they should pay their employees.

Governor's new high school idea sound familiar?

In her state of the state address a couple of weeks ago, the governor introduced a new idea to improve high school graduation rates and encourage more students to attend college. There was a note familiarity to the idea...
--------------

The Proposal: Specialized High Schools

As described by Peter Luke in his column of February 4th, "A new $300 million state fund would over the next three years provide planning grants and startup cash to districts that agree to dramatically change the way high school students are educated. The proposal would replace large high schools that don't work well with smaller schools of 400 pupils or fewer. The principal and a teaching staff of his or her selection would have broad freedom to personalize learning environments for students.

The financial incentive for districts to participate is clear. Every student who drops out of school represents a loss of nearly $7,500 in annual state aid."
-----------

Why Does This Idea Sound Familiar?

Five years ago, retired businessman Robert Thompson offered $200 million of his own money to build 15 specialized high schools in Detroit. You could accurately describe it as startup cash in a district that dramatically needed to change the
 way high school students are educated. His offer would have replaced large high schools that didn't work well with smaller schools. The principal and a teaching staff of his or her selection would certainly have been given broad freedom to personalizelearning environments for students.

If it was such a good idea five years ago, why didn't it happen? Follow the money.

As described in a National Review article on July 28, 2004, "Granholm may have committed her most ignoble act in late 2003: the craven rejection of $200 million proffered by Michigan businessman Robert Thompson to build charter schools for Detroit's inner-city poor. Her cave-in to Michigan's powerful teacher-union lobby was a slap in the face of Democrats' claimed constituency, the thousands of urban black families on waiting lists to send their kids to charters."

The Thompson offer of five years ago and the governor's idea of two weeks ago are similar; they both look for ways to improve graduation rates in failing districts. They key difference is that Mr. Thompson's proposal uses private dollars and works outside of the MEA and union scale employment; the governor's proposal is a government solution that will cost much more to implement.

A private investment of $200 million would have provided hundreds of new jobs in an ailing economy. Under the governor's proposal, new schools will be constructed under the prevailing wage which means inflated labor costs with the bill going to
the taxpayers rather than a private business owner.

While I certainly am open to any ideas the governor has to improve the abysmal graduation rates of inner city school districts, I find it unfortunate that the governor and the city of Detroit were unwilling to accept a $200 million gift and the Legislature was unwilling to lift the cap on charter schools to give students in Detroit better opportunities for success.

Busy days in Lansing

I haven't been blogging much because generally, I only do so while we are in session. We haven't been in session much this year. In fact for the entire month of January, we took a total of 15 record roll call votes. Yes, that's right, we have voted on 15 bills.

Actually, this is probably a good thing since most of the time, when we vote on a bill it is something that either makes government bigger, increases spending or increases taxes or fees.

Education committee did meet last week and move a bill to the House floor that would raise the compulsory education age to 18. The governor says this will lead to higher graduation rates. There is no data to support that assumption. What it will do is inflate the school population by 25-30,000 "students" who have no interest in being in school, and probably shouldn't be there. This will increase the expenditures to the school aid fund by over $200 million, putting pressure on a fund that is already short of cash.

Busy days in Lansing

I haven't been blogging much because generally, I only do so while we are in session. We haven't been in session much this year. In fact for the entire month of January, we took a total of 15 record roll call votes. Yes, that's right, we have voted on 15 bills.

Actually, this is probably a good thing since most of the time, when we vote on a bill it is something that either makes government bigger, increases spending or increases taxes or fees.

Education committee did meet last week and move a bill to the House floor that would raise the compulsory education age to 18. The governor says this will lead to higher graduation rates. There is no data to support that assumption. What it will do is inflate the school population by 25-30,000 "students" who have no interest in being in school, and probably shouldn't be there. This will increase the expenditures to the school aid fund by over $200 million, putting pressure on a fund that is already short of cash.

A word from Isaac Morehouse at Students for a Free Economy

Global Warming - The Great Debate! Is it man made? Can it be stopped? Should government take an active role? - A panel discussion featuring experts representing both sides of the debate, followed by Q&A...

Wednesday, February 6, 2008 7:00pm - 8:30pm
Michigan State University - South Kedzie Hall Room 105
East Lansing, MI

Come hear two sides to the debate over global warming.

A word from Isaac Morehouse at Students for a Free Economy

Global Warming - The Great Debate! Is it man made? Can it be stopped? Should government take an active role? - A panel discussion featuring experts representing both sides of the debate, followed by Q&A...

Wednesday, February 6, 2008 7:00pm - 8:30pm
Michigan State University - South Kedzie Hall Room 105
East Lansing, MI

Come hear two sides to the debate over global warming.