When the first straws in the wind appeared last December
indicating a major push for a tax hike in 2007, Mackinac Center Senior
Legislative Analyst Jack McHugh began a chronicle of events he called "Anatomy
of a Tax Hike Campaign." When McHugh’s prediction came to fruition with the
approval of a nearly $1.4 billion tax hike on the morning of Oct. 1, 2007,
McHugh detailed the event with an entry that began as follows:
"In the final hours before a shutdown of state government, to
avoid cutting spending in the fiscal 2007-2008 Michigan budget, the Legislature
votes to increase the income tax from 3.9 percent to 4.35 percent and expands
the 6 percent sales tax on a wide variety of services. The income tax will take
an additional $765 million out of the private economy, and the service tax $751
million in its first full year. This combined $1.5 billion tax hike [later
revised to $1.358 billion] is accompanied by a package of reforms that correct
some outright fiscal malpractice, but are not transformational for the state"
(see "Legislators Link Common-Sense Reforms ... ").
|   |
 (Click to enlarge) | |
Source: Sept. 25-27, 2007, survey of 599 likely voters conducted by Mitchell Research and Communications Inc. and commissioned by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. | |
|
As McHugh went on to add, there were "no substantive spending
cuts associated with the deal." Yet just over a week earlier, such options were
on the table. On Sept. 23, 2007, the Michigan Senate narrowly approved Senate
Bill 511 and Senate Bill 237, two proposals that would have closed the gap
between desired spending and projected revenue by $900 million with the
implementation of both actual spending reductions and reductions in the rate of
spending increase to nearly every major area of state spending. Some examples:
Impose mandatory citizenship verification for Medicaid recipients: $10.0 million.
Reduce local public bus transit grants: $2.5 million.
Reduce state aid to libraries: $6.2 million.
Freeze state spending on community colleges at current-year level: $7.1 million.
Deduct 3.5 percent from budget for Community Health: $111.7 million.
Strengthen welfare-to-work sanctions: $57.1 million.
Do not approve governor’s request for a 2.5 percent hike in the per-pupil school aid foundation allowance: $289.7 million.
Senate Bill 237, the bill to cancel the governor’s proposed hike
in school aid spending, was approved by the Michigan Senate on a strictly
partisan vote — all 21 Republicans voting for the cuts, all 17 Democrats voting
against. Senate Bill 511, the companion proposal to trim spending by $574
million in other state departments, was also narrowly approved — 20 of the
Senate Republicans voted for the cuts, with one Republican joining all 17
Democrats voting against.
The combined package of $900 million in spending restraint did
not become part of the budget agreement. The Michigan House of Representatives
declined to bring either Senate bill up for a final vote.
Just days before the agreement to balance the budget with tax
increases rather than spending reductions, Michael D. LaFaive, director of the
Mackinac Center’s Morey Fiscal Policy Initiative, announced the results of a
public opinion survey showing that 71 percent of Michigan’s likely voters
preferred a budget agreement that relied primarily on spending reductions.
Summing up the difference between what taxpayers wanted and what they got,
McHugh wrote the following: "[T]he political class surrendered to the special
interests who benefit from the status quo in state government and let slip an
opportunity to embrace transformational change. Given the economic trend lines,
it’s likely that a real crisis will strike the state within the next decade,
where unemployment rates skyrocket well into double-digit territory, the ‘last
person out turn off the lights’ signs acquire real meaning, and the option to
reach deeper into taxpayer pockets is not available. It’s not too late to adopt
budget, regulatory, labor law and tax policies that would avert that, but time
is running out." On Oct. 18, 2007, McHugh released a Mackinac Center Policy
Brief listing 55 specific spending cuts that would immediately trim $1.358
billion from the just-enacted budget agreement and allow for the repeal of the
tax hikes. These cuts include some that appeared in the two Senate bills. This
report is available at
www.mackinac.org/9060.
McHugh’s "Anatomy of a Tax Hike" diary of how the budget
agreement and tax increases came to pass may be viewed in its entirety at
www.mackinac.org/8532. The Mackinac
Center’s public opinion survey of Michigan voters regarding their preferences
for taxes and budget cuts is available at
www.mackinac.org/9015.
See an "Alternative View" of the tax hikes from the Michigan League for Human Services.
The
MichiganVotes.org tally for Senate Bill 511 — legislation that would have restrained spending in various departments by $574 million, the income tax hike, House Bill 5194, and the new 6 percent sales tax on
services, House Bill 5198 — appear below. The vote tally for Senate Bill 237,
which would have implemented spending restraint on the school aid fund, is not
listed for space reasons and because unlike these other votes, it was a strictly partisan decision, with every Republican endorsing the cut and every Democrat opposing it. The formal vote tally is available at
www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=236643.