Jack Lessenberry Essays and Interviews

Essay: Casino Madness - 10.14.09

Ohio voters this fall may approve adding four new casinos and there is a move in Michigan to add eight more. Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry is wondering if that’s really such a good idea...

Hear Audio Story   

I have a brilliant idea how we could restore prosperity in Michigan. No, wait a minute - that isn’t strong enough. I know how we all can become rich. We put a constitutional amendment on the ballot allowing everyone to open their own casino.

Doesn’t that sound like a good idea?

Actually, if you are of sound mind, it should sound crazy. Which it is, but a depressingly large number of people seem to think casinos are the secret to prosperity. There is a statewide initiative in Ohio this November which, if approved, will allow the building of four casinos, one in each of Ohio’s four largest cities, including Toledo.

That proposal seems likely to pass. Casino referenda have failed in Ohio several times before. But this time it seems likely to pass, thanks in large part to a smart advertising campaign. Ohioans are being told that vast sums of money are leaving the state and headed for casinos in Michigan. Nobody mentions, of course, that much of this money then leaves the Midwest entirely, for casino owners who live elsewhere. So Buckeyes are being spurred on to do their patriotic duty and allow people to ruin their lives closer to home.

This sounds eerily familiar to what happened in Michigan fifteen years ago. Detroit voters had rejected casinos a number of times, in large part because they were opposed by the churches. But then came Casino Windsor, and money began pouring across the river.

So Detroiters changed their minds, and three immense casinos were built - MGM Grand, Motor City, and Greektown. These were supposed to restore the city to gleaming prosperity.

That hasn’t happened. Instead, a lot of poor people who can’t afford it have lost the rent and grocery money. But now that Ohioans may possibly decide to lose their hard-earned money at home, we are fighting back. The solution: Open even more casinos.

A group called Racing to Save Michigan wants to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would open eight more casinos in Michigan. Five would be at horse racing tracks, in Hazel Park, New Boston, Northville, Mt. Pleasant and Swartz Creek. The rest would be auctioned off, so maybe you could get one too.

But first, it might be a good idea to stop and think about how incredibly destructive this is. On the question of casinos, I am one with the most deeply conservative religious folks.

Casinos are in a practical sense, evil.

Gambling doesn’t create any products or art or tangible wealth. Casinos entice poor people into losing the little bit of money they legitimately have with the tantalizing lure of getting something for nothing. The high-rollers, people who can afford to lose thousands, don‘t line up to play the slots in Detroit.

They take their Lear jets to the glittering palaces of Las Vegas. City officials in Detroit have become dependent on the casinos, which pay local governments millions a year.

But much of the money ends up out of state, and the social cost for those who have lost it is often huge. We have a huge task before us, namely, retooling and reinventing Michigan’s economy.

Making it even easier to encourage people to throw away what money they have isn’t the way to do that.

Essay: Playing Well With Others - 10.13.09

Governor Granholm and Democratic and Republican lawmakers continue to debate the state’s budget. Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry thinks the legislature could learn a lesson or two from the auto industry…

Hear Audio Story   

Long ago, say back in the 1970s, Michigan was a land where companies and unions did ferocious battle in the private sector over wages and benefits and working conditions. There were arguments in the public sector, too, but the mentality was different.

The presumption was that those in Lansing were there to look after the best interests of the public.

Now there were disagreements, naturally, on exactly what those interests were and how to achieve them. Some thought the state should be doing more to help business.

Others thought the state should do more to help the downtrodden, especially in Detroit, which even then was fighting many of the problems that plague the city today.

The legislature back then also had its share of slackers and incompetents, time-servers, drunks, and an outright crook or two.

But the essential philosophy was, I think, different than now. There was broad agreement that the state had to take care of its great universities, and the public schools as well, though the way they were funded then was not the same.

The lawmakers, spurred by Gov. Bill Milliken, also thought they had an obligation to take care of our parks and natural resources and the environment in general. There were battles about ways and means, but an overall philosophy that there was a public good.

In the private sector, things were different. Everybody expected occasional titanic battles between management and labor over money and working conditions - especially in the auto industry. Every few years, we were conditioned to expect huge nationwide strikes by the United Auto Workers’ union against one car maker or another. Each side was narrowly focused on its own interests, and that was expected. It was how the system worked.

Well, what a difference a few decades make. Personally, I sometimes think we are living in an alternate reality universe.

Turning to the private sector first; the big three and the union have been so battered that they seem to be propping each other up, lest they both go under. For example, Ford and the UAW have been holding informal talks for weeks, and are about to agree on a set of concessions similar to those the union made to Chrysler and General Motors when they were in bankruptcy.

Ford is also going to give the unions some things it wants.

That is a stark contrast to the world of Lansing, where things seem to be moving backwards. Senate Republicans are sitting on six major budget bills, and won’t send them to the governor because they are afraid she will veto them.

Well, guess what. She has a constitutional right to do that. These bills were legally supposed to be sent to her weeks ago, but everybody has been dragging their feet. Now, there is once again talk of a government shutdown the day after Halloween.

Both parties have worked hard at giving us a dysfunctional state government that is fast becoming the laughingstock of the nation. I wonder if we should consider asking Ford and the UAW to step on and take over instead. They seem to be able to play nice with others, and neither has gone bankrupt, not yet anyway.

Don’t know about you, but I think that works for me.

Essay: Unpleasant Realities - 10.12.09

The legislature agreed on a budget to fund schools last week. But, as Michigan Radio Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry notes, lawmakers are far from sorting out the entire budget…

Hear Audio Story   

There was a sense of relief late last week when the legislature finally agreed on a school aid budget, and the governor announced she’d sign it. Well, guess what.

That’s no call for celebration. Some people seem to think this meant an end to the continuing crisis over the overdue state budget.

That couldn’t be further for the truth. The Senate is holding back at least four parts of the budget, which it intends to delay passing and sending to the governor until the last possible moment.

Appropriately enough, that moment is Halloween night. The senators are afraid that if they send their versions earlier, she might veto them. They think the chances that she’ll sign them will be greater if there is no time for renegotiation. They might be right ...

Or, they might be setting us up for another state government shutdown, which could happen November 1st.

If it does, my guess is that it will be a much longer, bloodier, and more destructive shutdown than before.

Once again, this budget is a long way from being done. And I know there is only so much bad news you can tolerate on a Monday afternoon, but you also need to consider this.

Even if the budget is finished in the next few days, they are attempting to balance this budget by selling out our future, and making sure that it will be harder to balance the books next year.

By the way, even the school budget isn’t completely settled. One of the most lucid comments about it was made by a spokesman for the Michigan Association of School Boards, who noted that the deal depends on new money the legislature has yet to supply.

What new money is that? Well, Senate Republicans want to supply about $300 million which they would get in two very bad ways.

They would delay an increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit, punishing some of our poorer citizens. They would also cut the film production tax credit, which may drive some movie-makers out of state. And in return, Democrats would have to agree to phase out the surcharge on the Michigan Business Tax.

Now, that surcharge does need to be gone. But not this way. The non-partisan Citizens Research Council says this approach would just add to the state’s long-term structural deficit. That means, in other words, the deficit will get worse every year after this.

What we need is a hard, realistic look at what our overall priorities as a state should be. By the way, even if it is fully funded, this school budget will drive more than 100 districts into deficit spending. A few may end up in receivership.

Then next year, the situation will get worse. Much worse. If there is any hope for the future, it lies in better educating the next generation. Remember, we could avoid any cuts at all by raising the state income tax three-quarters of one percent.

If you make $52,000 a year, that would cost you around $300 bucks, after deductions. But our lawmakers are afraid to ask us to do that. Some of them say we should invest in the future. You might want to ask them why they are unwilling to ask us to do that.

Essay: Does This Make Sense? - 10.9.09

The Michigan Legislature passed an education budget last night that severely cuts per pupil spending for the next fiscal year. Michigan Radio Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry is wondering if we have our priorities straight…

Hear Audio Story   

Consider what your state legislature did late last night. They approved a budget reducing state aid to the public schools by $165 dollars a pupil. That is a staggering blow to education in this state, though not as bad as what legislative leaders originally wanted to do, which was to cut schools by $218 dollars a child.

Earlier, when they came up with the higher figure, lawmakers claimed that they had no choice given the enormous deficit. So, how will they find the money to lessen the impact?

Well, we don’t exactly know yet, but indications are that they may do so pretty much in the worst way possible. As in, on the backs of the poor. The state senate voted to freeze an income tax credit, not for millionaires, but for low income families. That would wring another $160 million out of their already frayed pocketbooks. The upper house also went after the newly expanding film industry. They voted to limit tax credits for perhaps the only major growth industry in the state. They made out-of-state workers ineligible for tax breaks and tied future film credits to job creation.

That might be nice … if it doesn‘t drive the film industry back out of state. Now, we don‘t know if the senate bills will finally become law, but we do know two things:

First, nobody is even discussing solving the deficit in what MSU economist Charles Ballard says would be the smartest and least painful way: Raise the state income tax from 4.35 to 5.1 percent. That would barely be noticed by those of us working, especially when our deductions are factored in.

But nobody is willing to think about doing that.

The other thing we learned was that the famous $2.8 billion dollar deficit the state has been struggling to close is now even bigger. Tax collections through September were down another $130 million.

What that probably means is that the last of the federal stimulus money will be long gone before this year ends.

That was money they’ve been planning to use to balance the books next year, but hey. If we aren’t willing to come up with a sensible and intelligent strategy, we can just always hope, like a character out of Charles Dickens, that something will turn up.

By the way, the governor is now also pushing another bizarre new revenue idea. She would allow bars to stay open till 4 a.m., provided their owners buy an expensive new permit. They would also be allowed to open at 7 a.m. on Sundays, and you would no longer have to wait till noon to buy wine at the grocery store.

The package liquor sale part makes sense. But letting bars stay open until four is a prescription for early morning highway mayhem. This would supposedly bring in less than $14 million a year.

Do we really think that would be worth it?

The bottom line is that we need educated young people, and we ought to make up our minds to just pay for this, even if it isn’t easy. Even if it involves on our part an old-fashioned concept called sacrifice. If we care about our future, it just might be worth a try.

Essay: Shaming our Schools - 10.8.09

Studies have known that in order for Michigan to become a more competitive state, we need a better-educated work force. But our school systems are being endangered by the state’s current budget crisis. Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry takes a look behind the scenes.

Hear Audio Story   

Essay: Reality Budget Check - 10.7.09

House Democrats spent yesterday voting on a number of tax increases to help balance the state’s overdue budget. Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry thinks they’re wasting their time…

Hear Audio Story   

Insanity, as Albert Einstein once famously said, can be defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. He was a genius, of course.

And whenever I hear that particular brilliant insight, I am awestruck as to how this man, who died in 1955, was so completely able to forecast the nature of politics in Michigan today.

I am being sarcastic, of course, dear listeners, but that is mainly so that I don’t cry. For the most part, our elected leaders seem to be incapable of either critical thinking or learning from the past.

Yesterday, for example, the state house of representatives spent the day voting on three minor revenue increases.

These were designed to affect as few people as possible, while lessening the pain from the huge budget cuts that are coming.

The Democrats should have been able to pass these in five minutes. They won a huge, 67 to 43 majority in the house last year. But instead, they fought for 11 hours. In the end, they passed the biggest of these, a three percent tax on physicians, by a single vote.

This bill makes a great deal of sense. It would collect $300 million from the doctors, but that in turn would trigger $525 million in new federal Medicaid funds. But guess what. This bill is stillborn.

Republicans control the Senate, and they’ll never pass it. Especially after the Democrats couldn’t even get all their members to vote for it. Republicans have been consistent: They’ve insisted they’ll never approve any tax bill for anything, no matter what. They don’t care if that means Michigan becomes Haiti, or we all starve to death.

They have pretty much said they would sell the state back to the French before they vote to raise taxes. Not one house Republican voted for any of the tax bills.

I suppose there could be a chance of getting GOP support for another bill, which cuts certain Michigan Business Tax credits.

You could argue that stopping a credit isn’t the same as increasing a tax, and House Speaker Andy Dillon intends to try and persuade Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop to buy that.

Lots of luck, Andy.

Meanwhile, furious debate continues over how much of the remaining federal stimulus money to use to lessen the cuts to elementary and high school education. Right now, they are looking at a cut of $218 dollars a student. Everyone agrees that is too much.

Democrats want to cut that by using the last of the federal stimulus dollars. Republicans say it would be better to keep them to ease the pain that is coming next year. But now for the truth.

That money isn’t going to be there next year, regardless. The current budget won’t stay balanced, and the temptation to throw this money into the hole will be irresistible.

So we might as well use it now. Who knows? Once the last of the stimulus is gone, our lawmakers may finally be forced to face the fact that the present way of doing things doesn’t work.

They may, in fact, finally be forced to overhaul the entire system to keep the state running. Yes, I know I am a hopeless optimist, but hey. A guy’s gotta dream.

Essay: The Blogger and the Billionaire - 10.6.09

Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry has this story of a blogger versus a billionaire...

Hear Audio Story   

Years ago, when I started covering politics, a grizzled old reporter told me that most of the time, things operate in accordance with the golden rule. By which he meant, those that have the gold make the rules. Or if they don’t make them, they get lawyers, courts and judges to interpret them in their favor.

At the time, I thought the old guy was a sour old cynic. Thirty years later, I would say that he was, sadly, a hard-headed realist.

Most of the time, the rich and powerful get their way. But not always. Sometimes, the system works. Maybe not as fast as it should or as efficiently as we would like. But sometimes it does work.

And yesterday was one of those times.

Some time ago, Manuel J. “Matty” Moroun, the billionaire who owns, among other things, the Ambassador Bridge between the United States and Canada, decided to seize part of a public park, Riverside Park in Detroit. He put up a fence to keep people out of part of it and tried to ban photography from the rest of it.

This was brought to the attention of the public by Joel Thurtell, a gutsy, civic-minded blogger who retired a few years ago after a long career as a reporter. Thurtell is an adventuresome man in his sixties whose book “Up the Rouge,“ about exploring that river by canoe was published this year.

A year ago, he revealed in his blog, www.joelontheroad.com, that Moroun had fenced off part of the park and put up bogus Homeland Security signs. When Thurtell began snapping pictures, he was threatened by a private guard with a shotgun.

The city of Detroit seemed astounded. Moroun claimed that a previous mayor gave him permission to seize part of the park. If so, city council never approved that. Then, something else became clear. Moroun wants to erect a second bridge next to the one he has now. Twinning the Ambassador Bridge is a controversial idea opposed by many in the U.S. and Canada. To do so, Moroun would need to take over Riverside Park.

The City of Detroit sued to get him to leave. Yesterday, a 36th District Court judge ruled in the city’s favor, and gave Moroun 90 days to vacate the park. State Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who represents that part of Detroit, said this last night:

“Finally, justice has been served. The Ambassador Bridge Company stole a piece of our community and held it hostage for years. Riverside Park should be a healthy, vibrant community where families can gather and enjoy our city,” she said.

This doesn’t mean the decision won’t be appealed. But Mr. Moroun now has other problems. He is also in Federal Court trying to keep secret a safety inspection report on the Ambassador Bridge.

A great deal of trade between the United States and Canada moves across that bridge. Congressman John Dingell thinks Moroun’s request is outrageous, and that the thousands who pay to use the bridge are entitled to know what shape it’s in.

Whatever happens next, a retired guy armed only with a camera, a computer and the law, seems to be beating a billionaire accustomed to getting his own way.

And that pretty much has to make you smile.

Essay: Let's Get It Done - 10.5.09

Four days after state lawmakers voted to give themselves a one-month extension to balance the budget, the Legislature has done little to come up with a deal. Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry is getting impatient…

Hear Audio Story   

Four days ago, after a brief, two hour government shutdown, the Michigan Legislature voted to give themselves a 30-day-extension to finish passing a budget for this fiscal year.

They did this because despite having struggled for weeks, the lawmakers hadn’t been able to agree on a way to make their spending match how much money is coming in.

Never mind that creating and balancing a budget is their most important duty. Never mind that they had an entire year to get it done.

They proved unable to do their jobs. Oddly enough, as divided as the major parties are, the impasse had little to do with ideology in the conventional sense. This wasn’t a case of Democrats wanting to spend with abandon and Republicans insisting on living within our means. This wasn’t a case of Democrats begging for more money to run social programs and hard-hearted Republicans barking no.

This was a case of both parties being unwilling to take responsibility for their actions. They know what the problems are. They know what the potential solutions are.

But they don’t have the guts to make the necessary decisions.

Here’s what really happened last week:

Speaker of the House Andy Dillon, a Democrat, decided he would support a budget solution nearly identical to that of the Republicans who control the state senate. Under this plan, the budget would be balanced and the huge deficit erased by combining massive spending cuts with federal stimulus dollars.

No new taxes whatsoever. Then, after the budget was passed, Democrats would attempt to get Republicans to agree to some form of new money to restore some of the cuts.

You would have thought that approach would at least guarantee passing a balanced budget, no matter how cockeyed its priorities might be. But no. At the very last minute, everything broke down. Lawmakers of both parties refused to pass the education budget.

The Dillon-Bishop solution would have cut state spending by a staggering $218 dollars for every public school student in the state.

Nearly everybody could see that this would dramatically weaken the quality of education Michigan kids get. It would eliminate programs in many places, including sports, art and music, and probably push some school systems into receivership.

And the lawmakers lost their nerve. Now, okay. If they feel they need to spend more on schools, you don’t have to be a math whiz to know that they have to come up with more money.

However, that‘s an inconvenient truth our lawmakers won’t face. They don’t have the guts to vote for more taxes, even if that is the only way to keep programs running we can’t bear to be without.

Four days after they voted themselves an extension, the legislature has done essentially nothing. You know what’s likely to happen; they’ll just raid the remaining stimulus money in the end.

That’s the money they were saving to cushion next year’s deficit, which will be even worse. We, the voters can do something about this. We can let our lawmakers know we want this overdue budget balanced, and we want them to get it done now.

Too many of us don’t have jobs, and we aren’t amused by the fact that our elected leaders aren’t doing theirs.

Essay: It Ain't, By Any Means, Over - 10.2.09

You may have thought the state shutdown scare ended when lawmakers gave themselves another month to finish the budget. But Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry thinks the worst may be yet to come…

Hear Audio Story   

After remaining mostly silent throughout the long budget battle this summer, Gov. Jennifer Granholm emerged yesterday and defiantly drew a line in the carpets at the Capitol Dome.

For weeks, she had been strangely absent from the budget wars, and bafflingly non-committal about whether she would veto a budget bill that did things she didn’t like.

But she was anything but wishy-washy yesterday.

Earlier that morning, the legislature passed and the governor had signed a law giving them another month to get the tardy budget done. Suddenly, her attitude was anything but passive. She announced she would veto parts of the budget already approved by the legislature. She said the heavy cuts to the schools were unacceptable, as was the elimination of the Michigan Promise college scholarship grant, and she vowed to fight to restore them. The governor also indicated she would fight for a new tax on all doctors and use the money to head off cuts to Medicaid.

Now there is nothing wrong with her taking a strong position on the state‘s spending priorities. That’s what governors traditionally do.

And my guess, frankly, is that a majority of the state’s citizens agree with her on most of this. But the baffling question for Governor Granholm is, why didn’t you do this months ago?

Where have you been? If you intended to veto the elimination of the Promise Grant, why didn’t you say so before the legislature did so? Why didn’t you take a stand on these other issues?

That doesn’t really matter now. It is worth noting that the governor did admit she bore some responsibility for the train wreck that ended with the state failing to meet its legal budget deadline.

She deserves credit for that. However, now we need to know where we go from here. What happens next?

There was an assumption early yesterday that things might go relatively smoothly. They’d get everything done in a few days.

Now, that doesn’t seem likely. Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop made a comment that had a sneer in it:

“Now that the governor is engaged with the process, we are going to have to figure out exactly what she wants.“ Not that he was suggesting the legislature was going to give it to her.

Senate Majority Floor Leader Alan Cropsey’s attitude seems to be: If she wants war, let it begin here. He announced that the Republican-controlled Senate just might hold on to all the different budgets it hadn’t completed final action on. Those include Community Health, State Police, and Higher Education.

Hold on to them, and send then to the governor at the very last minute on Halloween, when the continuation budget is set to expire.

They would finally arrive with the unwritten message: Here. Take ‘em or leave ‘em. Sign these, or plunge us into another shutdown. One that’s likely to last much longer than two hours.

That may never happen. Our lawmakers might, in a best-case scenario, arrive at a compromise that includes less heated rhetoric and some new revenue, and establishes a foundation to go forward.

They may do that, or they may behave as they have been behaving and plunge us all into another shutdown the morning after Halloween. So, what happens next? Your guess is as good as mine.

Essay: Bottom of the Hill - 10.1.09

The state government shutdown ended at 2 o’clock this morning, when lawmakers voted to give themselves another 30-days to come up with a budget deal. Michigan Radio Political analyst Jack Lessenberry says these legislators have nothing to be proud of...

Hear Audio Story   

Okay, so the state is back in business after an embarrassing two-hour shutdown this morning. But anybody who thinks this is any kind of positive achievement has no idea what’s going on.

What we have just seen is one more total failure of leadership, a near-total breakdown of the governmental process. Sometime in the wee hours of the morning the legislature finally passed and the governor signed a 30 day “continuation budget.”

This gave them all the ability to do what they do best: Further put off difficult decisions. House Minority Leader Kevin Elsenheimer got it right. “Regardless of whether we are technically open or closed for business, this is a black eye on our state.”

Both political parties have failed us. You have to give Republicans credit for being politically smarter than the Democrats. Technically, the GOP shouldn’t even be a factor in these decisions. Three years ago, Democrats won the governorship by a landslide and control the state house almost two to one.

Furthermore, 54 percent of Michigan voters chose Democratic candidates for the state senate. But because of the way the districts are drawn, Republicans hung on to senate control.

They are united, ideologically driven, and know what they want: No tax increases, no matter what. No matter if that destroys our ability to compete in the future. No new taxes.

You might have expected the Democrats, led by the governor, to mount a major counterattack aimed at persuading the citizens that there are vital and essential services worth sacrificing for.

They didn’t even try. The Detroit Free Press has consistently been a strong supporter of Jennifer Granholm, so its editorial today, “Profiles in Incompetence,” is worth considering

The state‘s biggest newspaper said “The failure here is monumental and multilateral.

But much of the blame must be laid at the feet of Granholm. She never stepped in to lead. How is it possible that Granholm, who promised so much to this state, can deliver so little on such a basic issue as rational budgeting?”

They had no praise for the legislature either. House Speaker Andy Dillon seemed to believe the best strategy was to first, adopt the Republican budget. Then, hope that the GOP would later agree to tax increases to restore some of the cuts, even though they basically said they aren’t willing to do that.

The budget didn‘t get done last night because both parties lost their nerve when it came to the kind of devastating cuts to public education this budget calls for. State Senator Gretchen Whitmer shamed her colleagues by rising to say:

“It almost brings me to tears, what you are doing to the kids of our state. Businesses of tomorrow need educated work forces. This budget rips apart the fabric of our education system. How the heck are we to compete with China, India or even Indiana when you balance the budget on the backs of our kids?”

After that, the lawmakers voted to do what they do best, and gave themselves another month to avoid making hard decisions.

What’s clear is that our system isn’t working. Next year the voters will be asked if they might like a new constitution.

Today, it seems hard to imagine saying no.