RRB: Yes; even though we did not have the time to educate enough people before the petition deadline, we continue with our drive to adopt this proposal here in Michigan.

KRH: Just because I'm curious . . . what - as tight a ballpark as possible - was the final signature count?

RRB: We did not complete the count because it was clear we did not have enough.  It was pointless to continue putting volunteer effort to the count instead of a productive use of time that would move us forward.

KRH: Volunteer effort.  Is everyone in the MFTA a volunteer?

RRB: 100% volunteer, we put both time and personal resources into this effort.

KRH: That's impressive.  Did you at least have enough signatures to use them as effective leverage with the State Legislature?

RRB: What the petition drive did do was expand the awareness of the proposal and increase our membership.  Some of those additional members have contacted their legislators and that helps.

KRH: That's good to hear.  I understand that you've also surveyed all or most of the candidates for the State House races.

RRB: That's correct.  A three question survey was sent to the candidates.  We have posted those responses we have received to date on our website.

KRH: So not all the candidates have responded . . . yet.

RRB: We sent a second request to nearly 200 after about two weeks with no response.

KRH: That's 200 out of how many candidates?

RRB: I believe there are over 400 statewide.  Many of those not responding are incumbents strange enough.

KRH: So about half of the candidates originally surveyed haven't responded yet?

RRB: We did not have email addresses for all candidates.  And we only sent surveys to those with emails or fax.

KRH: And the e-mail addresses of all incumbents would be known through the State Legislature's website.

RRB: Well, most anyway.  I believe some only receive emails via the state site.  That's one way they use to control their mail.

KRH: Okay . . . did you survey only active candidates (including incumbents), or did you also survey term-limited sitting members of the legislature?

RRB: Both.

KRH: So even the term-limited members of the State House received the survey.

RRB: Correct.  Some, in their reply pointed out they're term limited and thanked us for our continued push to fix this state.

KRH: Good to hear.  Have you posted all of the respondents (with their responses) to the MFTA website?

RRB: As of yesterday!  Candidates and incumbents both.

KRH: So if someone's response isn't there, then the valid assumption is that he or she hasn't responded.

RRB: That would be correct, unless we didn't have a contact for them.  We ask supporters to pass on any contact info if their legislator or candidate is not listed.  The legislator may respond that they haven't seen the survey or they may say they didn't respond for whatever reason.  The survey is available on our website for them.

KRH: And have you also surveyed the State Senate?

RRB: Yes, the same survey.  Of course none of them are up for re-election this year.

KRH: Right, that's in two years. . . . But how has the response from them been?

RRB: Not many.  We have used responses to help indicate on our website whether they are in favor or against.

KRH: So the same logic applies to the Senate Survey results . . . if there isn't an indicator, then they probably haven't responded.

RRB: Yes!  It's kind of ironic.  Those already in office are less likely to indicate their stand on an issue compared to someone running for a position.

KRH: Okay.  And I probably should mention that there's a reason that we're discussing the legislature and their positions on this issue.

RRB: Yes, we will be working to inform all the new legislative members come November why the MI FairTax is the answer to turn Michigan around.  We have strong support amongst new candidates.

KRH: Do you still have a chance to get the issue on this November's ballot?

RRB: The current legislature could vote to put it on the ballot this year.  But they would have to do so by the start of September.

KRH: September 7th if I recall correctly.

RRB: That sounds about right.  That is less likely to happen given the legislature will only be meeting a few days between now and then.  Frankly one of our main problems is the legislature is afraid to do something not enough people understand.

KRH: So theoretically possible, but outside of a lot of citizen pressure . . .

RRB: Look, even the Michigan Chamber of Commerce still doesn't properly understand how it works!  Nobody wants to expend energy educating the people!

KRH: Well, not nobody, certainly.  I mean, MFTA is doing it.

RRB: Yes, you would think some of these other groups, which are supposed to be leaders in the community, even if only the business community, would take steps to at least educate their members.

KRH: Okay, you mentioned that some term-limited legislators are thanking us for continuing the effort.  Are we losing any big-name supporters in the House?

RRB: Well, whether we are losing them will depend on whether their replacement also supports the proposal.  Some are re-running so we only lose them if they don't win.

KRH: What I mean is, who are we losing to term limitation?

RRB: For starters, Representative Fulton Sheen!

KRH: Yikes!  Anyone else?

RRB: Out of the 36 original co-sponsors, 20 are being lost to term limitation.

KRH: Whom else among the co-sponsors are we losing to term limitation?

RRB: Dan Acciavatti, Tom Casperson, Bruce Caswell, Judy Emmons, Edward Gaffney, John Garfield, Jacob Hoogendyk, Philip LaJoy, David Law, Mike Nofs, Brian Palmer, David Palsrok, John Pastor, David Robertson, Rick Shaffer, John Stahl, John Stakoe, Glenn Steil, and Lorence Wenke.  On the flip side, Representative Steve Beida, current chair of the House Tax Policy Committee, is also leaving!  It at least opens the door for a possible positive change in leadership!

KRH: Has he been a closet supporter, or an open opponent?

RRB: He has not done anything I know of to move this issue forward!  He has not been an open supporter!

KRH: So Representative Beida has, at best, been an obstacle.

RRB: I'd say that's fair.

KRH: So Michigan voters would be best advised to identify which candidates support the MFTP and vote them into office.

RRB: Our job is to educate the public on how the proposal works and what it would do to turn our economy around and also educate the electorate on the candidates' position relative to that end.  So, yes, we want and need for them to elect FairTax-friendly candidates!

KRH: All of the co-sponsors of the MFTP are Republicans.  Did the survey produce any Democrat supporters?

RRB: Ah, yes indeed it did!  We believe the phone calls and messages of our supporters in Michigan have made a difference!  We currently have one incumbent Democrat supporting and running for re-election.  We also have at least three additional Democrat challengers supporting.

KRH: Whom?  Any big names?  Which Democrats did you convert?

RRB: The challengers are James VanderZouwen, 89th, and John Faccin and John Larson, 110th.  Additionally, Representative Joel Sheltrown has openly indicated he will support the MFTP.

KRH: Joel Sheltrown . . . 103rd District . . . charter member of the Michigan Tax Hike Hall of Shame . . . is now a supporter of the MFTP?

RRB: It seems to be uncomfortable for some Democrats to openly support something many have trashed with the usual false statements!

KRH: But at least one has "seen the light."

RRB: It is when they see enough support from their constituents that make them think twice about using those false lines.  And that is not restricted to one party over the other!

KRH: So you've also had some Republican opponents?

RRB: Absolutely!  We have a number of Republicans that say "I like the idea but can't support it because of X, Y, or Z."  With each of them being: "protect somebody as a winner in the current system."  Some Republicans are just on the fence until they see more support, frankly education, by the public!  Although, isn't that what they're supposed to do?  Stand up for the right thing and educate/lead their constituents?

KRH: But if I recall the FairTax concept's history correctly, it hasn't lost once it's made it onto the General Ballot . . . either as the issue itself or as a candidate supporting the issue.

RRB: It has never, in its pure form, been on a ballot that I know of.  Certainly, ALL candidates but a few nationwide have won when they have run on the FairTax platform.

KRH: So it's safe to say that the public clearly realizes the value of the FairTax.

RRB: No question, when they have been educated on how it works, it's overwhelming.

KRH: Do you know of any other states that are putting forth a FairTax Initiative, either as citizen initiatives or as legislative initiatives, this election cycle?

RRB: There are about five states actively supporting a statewide initiative but I don't know if they have made it onto a ballot for this year.  For so long our public officials have focused on the retail cost of things instead of the cost of production.  We need to change our mindset!  People do not move into an area simply because it's cheap to live unless you have already earned all your monies.  People move to places that have stable, good paying jobs!  That's why so many are leaving Michigan for other places.  Not because it expensive to live here, but because we have ignored for too long what the cost of doing business is!

KRH: Do you know which five states those are?

RRB: In some form of the FairTax, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas - I think!  I believe Michigan is the furthest along though.  It also has the closest to the National proposal.

KRH: So we have these five states that are competing against us to be the first to get a true FairTax proposal passed.

RRB: There will be great rewards to be the first!  More and more of the advantage will disappear when other states tax the same.

KRH: The State of Ohio is in its second year of sweeping tax reforms in their state.  The tax compliance costs in Ohio have dropped 63% and soon, Ohio's corporate income tax will be completely eliminated, making it just one of two states in the nation without a general tax on corporate profits and without a general tax on tangible personal property.  A State of Ohio publication just released to Michigan businesses tells us that "by allowing companies to reduce costs and maximize profits, Ohio is becoming the ideal location for you (and your clients) to compete in the global economy."  What impact is Ohio's business tax phase-out expected to have on our state economy?

RRB: That is exactly why MOST of our Asian and European competitors have a substantial border neutral tax system.  It allows them to remove the identified tax cost when exporting.  It will accelerate our demise if we don't step up and adapt to the more competitive world we live in.

KRH: So Michigan's economy would be further screwed if our next door neighbor were to eliminate all business taxation.

RRB: When we first started the SBT people had to buy things made in Michigan.  It was the only place many car parts, etc. were made.  We could export (forcibly) our tax cost in our wholesale prices. But no longer is that the case!

KRH: And now with globalization that clearly isn't so.

RRB: We must adapt!  It's also a factor of liberty and fairness to the public.  How can anyone argue that the people should not see the full extent of what they're paying in true tax cost to operate their state?  Right now we put ourselves at the short end of the stick just by allowing any imported product to NOT be taxed as much as the same product made and sold in Michigan.  How is that fair to our own citizens looking for jobs?!

KRH: One prevailing argument against the MFTP is that it doesn't do enough to curb state spending or protect against the "back door taxes" of state fees.  How do you respond to that?

RRB: They are admirable goals but not the purpose of the MFTP.  Just because we fix the method we use to tax people doesn't mean we have to fix everything bad the legislature or local governments can do.

KRH: So these issues aren't the proper purview of a tax system.

RRB: Let's just say they're not tied to the method of taxation.  That's what the MFTP is trying to fix!  So long as those other fees and taxes are visible to the public they can fight or elect new leaders.  If the legislature needs more money, they can either justify it to the citizens at the ballot box (for a rate rise) or increase other fees that are also visible!

KRH: So the MFTP puts all the tax hoodwinking out in the open.

RRB: That is correct!

KRH: Ron, I think you've done a phenomenal job of laying out the basics of the Michigan Fair Tax Proposal.  Me, being a military veteran, I'll encourage you to not give up the fight to get it on this year's ballot until September 7th is in the history books.

RRB: No question, we push along everyday!  I was only reflecting on the likelihood, not our desire!

KRH: Fair enough.  Ron, it's been a pleasure talking with you.