The Associated Press is reporting that a new poll released by EPIC-MRA shows the GOP beating Lieutenant Governor John Cherry, regardless of who will win the primary. The poll breaks down like this: Mike Cox receives support of 45% of those surveyed with Cherry receiving 30%.  Mike Bouchard is leading 39% to 31%. Pete Hoekstra is leading 40% to 33%. The poll is listed as having a margin of error of 4%. EPIC-MRA has a decidedly mixed reputation as a polling group and not a single ad has run against any of these candidates, but the MI GOP has to feel good about the general mood.

John Cherry running on the Granholm record would be an absolute disaster for the democrats. Really the only similar comparison would be if Vice President Cheney would have run for President in 2008. Granholm's job approval is similar to President Bush's when he left office. In my opinion, a different type of democrat, such as Andy Dillon, would pose a much greater challenge. Cherry is going to lose votes, just based on disgruntled voter attitudes towards Granholm.

Here's to hoping the current budget battle with Senate Leader Bishop further tarnishes the Granholm executive branch.

           Grand Rapids is a burgeoning medical center, with the new Michigan State University College of Human Medicine serving as the latest evidence. However, the current plans in Congress will seriously alter our future development in this area. West Michigan’s conservative streak may have consequences.

           Today, on a conference call, Representative Shadegg (AZ) stated that all of the current health care bills in the House and Senate will usher in “Soviet-style” health care in America. Specifically, he pointed out that the quality of our health care benefits may well be determined by the seniority, influence, or political affiliation of the Senators or Representatives who represent the state in which we live.

           Representative Shadegg pointed out a few telling examples to illustrate his point. First, Harry Reid (NV) added a provision to one of the Senate bills that would give four extra-special states, including Nevada, federal dollars to cover the state’s portion of the Medicaid expansion for four years. Harry is of course proud to fight “the good fight for Nevada.” Second, Debbie Stabenow (MI) and John Kerry (MA) have added a $5 billion measure to help cover the cost of union health care benefit plans for members below Medicare age, proving that it sure is nice to be a favorite son of the majority party. Third, Senator Menendez (NJ) has attached an amendment that gives tax breaks to “emerging” biotech companies. Approximately 86% of New Jersey’s biotech firms qualify for the credit.  

          These are just a few early examples of the type of health care system we will soon have in America. Representative Shadegg is exactly correct to label this type of unnatural selection as “Soviet-style.” When our political masters are given control over matters so central to our lives and well-being, we become easily managed. The political majority gains even more power by delivering life-giving services in an unequal fashion to those people, groups, and organizations that are most loyal.

          The market, even with inequities, does not evoke the same intuition of unfairness and injustice precisely because some basic opportunity for self-determination is present. Clearly, the medical industry and the health insurance industry are highly regulated, but a regulated market is still much freer than the state-run system. The capacity to change jobs, work more hours, and petition for charity offers individuals the ability to make rational decisions. If the favoritism outlined here prevails, individual health benefits, a basic requirement of modern life, will be determined by the majority party. Representative Shadegg’s warnings do indeed ring true, especially, if these early acts of statist-favoritism are allowed to persist. Suddenly, the lessons of Solzhenitsyn gain pressing relevance.  

The Michigan Senate should summarily vote down “Michigan Health Care Rebate Law.” The law, already passed by the house, is a misleading tax on physicians. The “Michigan Health Care Rebate Law” raises two very substantial issues. First, it represents another tax on the middle class. Second, the tax is a result of Michigan’s efforts to comply with conditions placed on receiving federal money.

As to the first issue, the “Michigan Health Care Rebate Law” places a 3% gross revenue tax on physicians. The tax revenues are then used to increase Medicaid reimbursement. Presumably, physicians who deal primarily with Medicaid reimbursement may actually support the increased rates of reimbursement, even with the 3% gross revenue tax. However, the local family practice that sees mainly middle class patients will not realize any of the increased rates of reimbursement. This, logically, will only result in increased rates or layoffs of support staff. Once again, entitlements are funded at the expense of people who pay their bills.

The second issue is larger and potentially more troublesome. With Michigan’s daunting budgetary problems, federal money is tempting, but we make a substantial compromise when in order to alleviate our budget issues we sacrifice our capacity for self-determination. Federal money for Medicaid reimbursement is nice, but is it worth a 3% tax on revenue generated by physician services? Michigan must solve Michigan’s problems. Federal money is fleeting, but our problems are not.

With these glaring issues, the Republican-controlled Senate will undoubtedly oppose the bill. The Michigan State Medical Society is also holding a “White Coat March” to express its disapproval. Going forward, these are exactly the type of proposals that Republicans can use to garner support from the already-pinched middle class.

It has been well documented that the Michigan Senate has approved $1.2 billion worth of budget cuts. Amongst the cuts, is $140 million for the Michigan Promise Scholarship, which gives $4,000 total to Michigan residents who attend qualifying colleges and universities. Paying for college is painful, I know. Taking out loans is painful. But, at this moment in our state's history, providing subsidies to college students should be a low priority. The College Democrats have staged protests and are up in arms about Michigan's "broken promise." I think most Republicans are in agreement that college subsidies are nice when times are good, but they are simply not a necessary government function. Therefore, the Michigan Promise subsidy is expendable.

The motivation behind the grant was to encourage Michigan residents to attend our wonderful universities and settle here after graduation. Mike Cox is actually proposing a policy solution that will better meet this government interest. As part of his "Putting Michigan Back to Work" booklet, Mike Cox proposes that the State not tax graduates from a Michigan college or University for three years. This proposal will actually encourage graduates to stay and settle in the state, as opposed to the Michigan Promise Scholarship, which only promotes attendance at an in-state university. Over the long run, those graduates who decide to settle in Michigan because of the tax break will produce a lifetime of future earnings from which the state will benefit.

Our current budget situation is tenuous, and tax increases must be off the table. Republicans need to make the tough political decision to end the Michigan Promise subsidy, while proposing other ideas to keep graduates in Michigan.

The Detroit Free Press just released an article showing that Mike Cox is the current front-runner in the Republican primary for Governor. The poll was conducted by Inside Michigan Politics and Marketing Resource Group.  The poll indicates that Mike Cox currently has 27% of the Republican vote; Pete Hoekstra is second with 23%; Mike Bouchard is polling at 15%. The Bouchard number could fluctuate because the poll was taken from September 12-20, so the Land announcement as running-mate did not have full effect. Surprisingly, Rick Snyder only polled at 2%. His number is probably attributed to lack of name recognition. Conversely, Hoekstra and Cox receive state-wide press on a regular basis. Bouchard has received some press, just from the Land announcement alone. The primary is still almost a year off, but it is entertaining to have these numbers.

With Mike Bouchard’s announcement that Terri Lynn Land will be his running mate, other GOP gubernatorial candidates were prompted to consider ways to play up their east-west connections. Rick Snyder, an Ann Arbor venture capitalist, issued a press release and announcement highlighting his West Michigan connection. Snyder announced that long time GOP leader Chuck Yob and Jerry Zandstra, a former Director of Programs at the Grand Rapids-based Acton Institute, were endorsing his candidacy.

 According to the press release, Zandstra, a staunch pro-life advocate and economist, played up Snyder’s ability lead Michigan out of the recession and assuaged conservatives who are skeptical of Snyder’s past political ties:

Rick Snyder is the best candidate to fill the leadership void and put Michigan back on a path towards economic prosperity. He is the only candidate who has created jobs and his economic development experience is second to none. Having spent time with Rick, I know that he shares my pro-life and pro-family values so I encourage conservative Republicans across the state to support him. (Source: Snyder’s Press Release)

Chuck Yob also focused on Snyder’s business acumen. Yob stated that under Snyder’s leadership “we can transform this state and our economic future the right way.” The Chuck Yob endorsement is interesting because of Yob’s prominent place in Michigan politics. He is considered by some to be a veritable “kingmaker” in Michigan. For a good discussion of Chuck Yob’s role in past elections see this Weekly Standard Article from 2006.

It will be interesting to see if this “reach across the state” theme continues in the coming days with Hoekstra and Cox making similar announcements.