Tag: Politcal Patronage

Mr. Snyder acknowledged that the new bridge remains a tough sell in Michigan, where relatively few people understand the vital role the bridge plays in getting U.S. exports to markets in Canada and beyond. The project was first proposed more than five years ago.

The perception in many parts of the state is that the project is a political payoff for the heavily Democratic Detroit area, offering jobs and construction contracts to an economically depressed part of the state.

"This is a very tough project," said Mr. Snyder, who is in Ottawa to speak at a cross-border innovation conference organized by the U.S. embassy and Canada 2020. "I wouldn't underestimate the challenges. But we will get this to happen."

He blamed "special interest politics" for poisoning the debate on the U.S. side.

Certainly that has nothing to do with the $500 million gesture that you begged the Canadians for or your PAC.

"I understand why they're spending the money," he said of the Morouns. "It's economic self-interest. The troubling part is the lack of accuracy in what they represent."

Well, that inaccuracy has always been on the governments behalf, GoverNerd.  It's well documented here.  Simply hit any of the 'Tags'.

"Beyond this raising the question of: Does public ownership/private operation mean any losses are public, any profit private? (and I think the answer is, "yes"), I've seen this concept elsewhere, and Merriam-Webster has the definition."

But its more in how crony capitalists roll.  In fact, this would be a great place to stop and find a local 'occupier' for the purposes of redirecting them to the Michigan capitol's lawn.  No doubt much of the occupy movement is (for lack of a more appropriate word) 'occupied' by hardcore progressives, but one of the messages they seem to be sporting is they want an end to 'capitalism'.  And though they say 'capitalism,' we all know they mean 'crony capitalism,' as it has been the only thing allowed by the institution of an all powerful bureaucracy through political reward and economic gamesmanship.

This thing, this bridge thing.  As we watch the governor squander political goodwill in deal trade after deal trade, we also watch the effect of good legislators who are willing to question its efficacy, or the need for the bridge.

Minutes earlier, a substitute bill supported by Democrats, which provided community benefits for the Delray area of southwest Detroit, where the bridge would be located, was voted down, 5-2, on a party-line vote.

On the main bill, Sens. Judy Emmons, R-Sheridan, and Dave Hildenbrand, R-Lowell, were the only "yes" votes, with Sens. Mike Kowall, R-White Lake Township, Goeff Hansen, R-Hart, and Mike Nofs, R-Battle Creek, voting "no."

The vote is also a blow to Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, R-Monroe (YES!), who backs the bridge and pledged to secure the votes to get the bridge bill out of committee.

Thank you to all the No votes that killed this unwanted boondoggle.

The Michigan Senate's top-ranked Republican expects a committee scheduled to meet Thursday will advance a bill authorizing a new bridge between Detroit and Windsor, Ontario.

The Senate Economic Development Committee is scheduled to vote on the proposal after a one-day delay.

Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville expects there are enough votes in the Republican-led committee to advance the bill to the Senate floor, his spokeswoman Amber McCann said Thursday morning.

Sen. Kowall, I'm not sure what your interpretation of transparency is, but, I've looked here, here, and here... No substitute Sen. Hunter Bill for the constituent class to review.

From The Mackinac Center's McHugh:

"MIRS has reported that all 12 Democrats in the state senate -- only four of whom are from Detroit -- will vote "yes" on a controversial Detroit-Windsor bridge, but only if the deal includes a wish list of "community benefits" being written by Sen. Tupac Hunter, D-Detroit.

What are these "community benefits"? The fancy labels like "employment training and related facilities;" "housing;" "economic development;" "green development initiatives;" and more sound nice, but the benefits of these programs are, at the very best, uncertain. Here's what is certain: For the political system's foot soldiers, these programs translate into jobs with the government or organizations funded by government. For the moneyed interests that bankroll the political system, it means "economic development" -- business subsidies, sweetheart real estate deals, selective tax breaks, government contracts and so on. These benefits to the politically connected boil down to political patronage. "

In this case, lets fill the pockets of the community organizers just before the 2012 elections. That way fair elections are sure to occur.

McHugh has put the dot on the i. Between the patronage Snyder could guarantee for the left, and the crony capitalism that has no political center, the vote rewarding is apparent.