The Video
I don't really talk about Politics too often. To be honest the topic annoys me because everything is always presented in such a us-vs-them way. However, on occasion, I can't help myself. This is one such occasion.
I don't have cable TV so I also don't watch any of the "news" stations but today I was sent this video clip on youtube from the Rachel Maddow Show. I know, going into it, that she is an outspoken liberal and thus I am taking my understanding of her bias along for the ride. Please watch the video before you read any further.
The Budget
I'm actually not all that fired up about the first half of the segment that discusses the budgetary changes in Michigan. I think that some of the elements highlighted seem pretty crazy and irresponsible but I can at least envision a logical reason for the shifting of budgetary priorities.
Michigan's economy is in the crapper - if the stories about Detroit are to be believed - thus it makes sense to try to lure more business to the state. I'm not sure punishing the poor and the universities is a good trade for an improved business climate but clearly something has to be done to draw companies to the state.
My problem with this video is the second half - the half on "financial emergencies"
Dire Financial Straights
The budget is setup in such a way that many towns and cities will suddenly find themselves in a dire financial situation. However, the governor has planned for that by adding in plans to help those towns out by letting him declare a "financial emergency"
And then things get kind of scary.
By declaring a town as a financial emergency the Govorner can remove the towns elected officials by Fiat! And, even worse, he can put anyone (or any company) in charge. I knew our country was crazy about commercialization but I had no idea we were on the verge of giving over rule of our people to companies directly. If that doesn't scare you at all then there is something wrong with you.
We are a democracy. If there was ever a topic for the "Tea Party" to get fired up about this is it! Forget about a big government or too many taxes - this is a clear violation of our democratic rights at the local level. The governor of Michigan wants to be a King and he to reward companies or people with their own duchies!
I'm not ready to be a serf. Sure, I don't live in Michigan, but if this passes into law there and survives what's to stop the idea from spreading to other states. Furthermore, why should I only care if it directly affects me. This is part of my country - my fellow citizens are on the verge of losing their democracy!
Even if you don't live in Michigan I suggest you spread the word, contact your representatives and let them know what you think, and write letters to the leaders of Michigan - do something to help stop this craziness from becoming a law.
EDIT:
Here is a link to the actual bill
Also here are some of the relevant portions of the bill dealing, specifically, with the Financial Emergency stuff:
Starting on Page 22; I've tried to maintain formatting and line numbers. You can go back a couple of pages to see exactly how a town is determined to be in a situation where it qualifies for this sort of takeover.
9 (4) Upon the confirmation of a finding of a financial
10 emergency, the governor shall declare the local government in
11 receivership and shall appoint an emergency manager to act for and
12 in the place and stead of the governing body and the office of
13 chief administrative officer of the local government. The emergency
14 manager shall have broad powers in receivership to rectify the
15 financial emergency and to local government and>> the local government's capacity
16 to provide > necessary governmental services
essential to the public
17 health, safety, and welfare. Upon the declaration of receivership
18 and during the pendency of receivership, the governing body and the
19 chief administrative officer of the local government may not
20 exercise any of the powers of those offices except as may be
21 specifically authorized in writing by the emergency manager and are
22 subject to any conditions required by the emergency manager.
The powers of the emergency manager are then detailed including these relevant bits starting on page 28:
Make, approve, or disapprove any appropriation, contract,
8 expenditure, or loan, the creation of any new position, or the
9 filling of any vacancy in a position by any appointing authority.
10 (h) Review payrolls or other claims against the local
11 government before payment.
12 (i) Notwithstanding any minimum staffing level requirement
13 established by charter or contract, establish and implement
14 staffing levels for the local government.
15 (j) Reject, modify, or terminate 1 or more terms and
16 conditions of an existing contract.
17 (k) After meeting and conferring with the appropriate
18 bargaining representative and, if in the emergency manager's sole
19 discretion and judgment, a prompt and satisfactory resolution is
20 unlikely to be obtained, reject, modify, or terminate 1 or more
21 terms and conditions of an existing collective bargaining
22 agreement. The rejection, modification, or termination of 1 or more
23 terms and conditions of an existing collective bargaining agreement
24 under this subdivision is a legitimate exercise of the state's
25 sovereign powers if the emergency manager and state treasurer
26 determine that all of the following conditions are satisfied:
This then goes on to discuss the conditions for satisfaction and then the further powers are picked up including these on page 31
6 (n) Consolidate or eliminate departments of the local
7 government or transfer functions from 1 department to another and
8 appoint, supervise, and, at his or her discretion, remove
9 administrators, including heads of departments other than elected
10 officials.
Finally starting near the end of page 33 and wrapping to page 34 is this:
27 (aa) Enter into agreements with 1 or more other local
1 governments > for the consolidation of services.
2 (bb) For a city, village, or township, the emergency manager
3 may recommend to the state boundary commission that the municipal
4 government consolidate with 1 or more other municipal governments,
5 if the emergency manager determines that consolidation would
6 materially alleviate the financial emergency of the municipal
7 government and would not materially and adversely affect the
8 financial situation of the government or governments with which the
9 municipal government in receivership is consolidated. Consolidation
10 under this subdivision shall proceed as provided by law.
11 (cc) For municipal governments, with approval of the governor,
12 disincorporate or dissolve the municipal government and assign its
13 assets, debts, and liabilities as provided by law.
14 (dd) Exercise solely, for and on behalf of the local
15 government, all other authority and responsibilities of the chief
16 administrative officer and governing body concerning the adoption,
17 amendment, and enforcement of ordinances or resolutions of the
18 local government as provided in the following acts:
19 (i) The home rule city act, 1909 PA 279, MCL 117.1 to 117.38.
20 (ii) The fourth class city act, 1895 PA 215, MCL 81.1 to
21 113.20.
22 (iii) The charter township act, 1947 PA 359, MCL 42.1 to 42.34.
23 (iv) 1851 PA 156, MCL 46.1 to 46.32.
24 (v) 1966 PA 293, MCL 45.501 to 45.521.
25 (vi) The general law village act, 1895 PA 3, MCL 61.1 to 74.25.
26 (vii) The home rule village act, 1909 PA 278, MCL 78.1 to
27 78.28.
I have heard, but not confirmed yet, that these same kinds of rules existed as far back as 1990 in Michigan. However, that doesn't really make me feel any differently about these crazy kind of power given to the governor. I have also been told that Detroit is in such bad shape these kinds of laws are needed to fix Detroit. If it is just Detroit then why is the entire state being targeted in the language to the Bill? Why not craft a bill that specifically deals with Detroit and its' problems? I still have a lot to learn about this topic but so far I'm not feeling any better about the stuff in the Maddow video than I was when I first watched it.