Capitol Report Archives
Go to current Capitol Report for links to complete archive.
2002
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2001
2000
|
October 2002
Lame Duck Session Looks to be Horrific At Best
Ballot Proposal Recommendations
Ballot Proposal 1: Straight Party Voting
Ballot Proposal 3: Collective Bargaining for State Employees
Ballot Proposal 4: Tobacco Settlement Revenues
Report Card on the 91st Legislative Session
Links to current Legislative Action Alerts
may be found on the Legislative Hotline page of this website.
Return to Top
Lame Duck Session Looks to be Horrific at Best
Lawmakers are promising that when they return for the lame duck session in November, legislation (ALL BAD), will be moving at lightening speed, especially if party control changes in the Governor's Office, Senate, or House. Some of the most likely issues we will be confronted with include:
- Charter School Expansion
- Privatizing Substitute Teachers
- Reducing Standards for Substitute Teachers
- Allow Withdrawal from Wayne County Community College District
- Transferring Adult Education to Department of Career Development
- Highland Park School/City Takeover
- Delay Referendum on Detroit School Board Takeover
- Education Budget Cuts
For this reason, it is essential that we have an expedient way to communicate with our Locals regarding legislative issues. We also urge you to set up a rapid communication system within your own local.
Please e-mail your local's e-mail address to us at mftsrp2@aol.com as soon as possible. It can be the local president or any member willing to assist with distributing information or responding to Legislative Alerts. YOUR HELP IS GREATLY APPRECIATED!
Return to Top
Ballot Proposal Recommendations
The MFT&SRP's Ballot Proposal recommendations are reproduced here, followed by a Legislative Report Card. Please give them your serious consideration and feel free to circulate them among your membership. If you have any questions, please call us at (517) 371-4300 or e-mail us at mftsrp2@aol.com.
Use the links below for printable copies of the Ballot Proposal recommendations in Adobe Acrobat format. If it is not already installed on your computer you will need to download the free
Adobe® Acrobat® Reader
to print these pages.
Proposal 1: Straight Party Voting
A REFERENDUM ON PUBLIC ACT 269 OF 2001 -
AN ACT TO AMEND CERTAIN SECTIONS OF MICHIGAN ELECTION LAW
Proposal 3: Collective Bargaining
A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO GRANT STATE CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING WITH BINDING ARBITRATION
Proposal 4: Tobacco Settlement
A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REALLOCATE
THE "TOBACCO SETTLEMENT REVENUE" RECEIVED BY THE STATE FROM CIGARETTE MANUFACTURERS
Return to Top
Proposal 1: Straight Party Voting
|
Michigan Federation of Teachers
And School Related Personnel
|
|
PROPOSAL 02-1
A REFERENDUM ON
PUBLIC ACT 269 OF 2001 -
AN ACT TO AMEND
CERTAIN SECTIONS OF
MICHIGAN ELECTION LAW
Public Act 269 of 2001 would:
- Eliminate "straight party" vote option on partisan general election ballots.
- Require Secretary of State to obtain training reports from local election officials.
- Require registered voters who do not appear on registration list to show picture identification before voting a challenged ballot.
- Require expedited canvass if presidential vote differential is under 25,000.
- Require ballot counting equipment to screen ballots for voting errors to ensure the accurate tabulation of absentee ballots. Permit voters in polls to correct errors.
- Provide penalties for stealing campaign signs or accepting payment for campaign work while being paid as a public employee to perform election duties.
Should this law be approved?
/_/ Yes
/_/ No
|
|
|
Proposal 1: Straight Party Voting
Voters in Michigan presently have several ways to vote in the partisan section of a general election ballot. These options are: 1) voting a straight party ticket; 2) splitting the ticket; and 3) making individual selections.
Voting a straight party ticket means that an elector makes a single selection for all of the candidates of one political party.
Regardless of the method used to vote for political party candidates, every elector may vote in the nonpartisan section of the ballot and on ballot proposals.
If Proposal 02-1 is approved, all voters will make individual selections for the candidates running for each office on the ballot.
Approximately 40% (1.5 million)
people in Michigan use
straight party voting.
|
|
The MFT&SRP recommends a "No" vote on Proposal 1 because:
- Removing the straight party voting option from Michigan ballots, which has been available in Michigan for the past 110 years, will cause long lines at polling places because voters will be forced to make individual selections in each partisan race.
- Long lines will discourage voting, and discourage participation in the democratic process.
- Removing the option could also have a disparate impact on poorer communities and may be discriminatory, or even in violation of citizens' civil rights.
- There are better solutions to reduce the number of spoiled ballots due to cross-over voting without slowing down the voting process for thousands of citizens.
bk:opeiu42aflcio
Return to Top
Proposal 3: Straight Party Voting
|
|
Michigan Federation of Teachers
And School Related Personnel
|
|
PROPOSAL 02-3
A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO GRANT
STATE CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES
THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING WITH BINDING ARBITRATION
The proposed constitutional amendment would:
- Grant state classified employees, in appropriate bargaining units determined by the Civil Service Commission, the right to elect bargaining representatives for the purpose of collective bargaining with the state employer.
- Require the state to bargain in good faith for the purpose of reaching a binding collective bargaining agreement with any elected bargaining representatives over wages, hours, pensions and other terms and conditions of employment.
- Extend the bargaining representatives the right to submit any unresolved disputes over the terms of a collective bargaining agreement to binding arbitration 30 days after the commencement of bargaining.
Should this law be approved?
/_/ Yes
/_/ No
|
|
|
Proposal 3 - Collective Bargaining
The Michigan Constitution gives the state Civil Service Commission the authority to set the terms of employment for state workers.
Although collective bargaining has been allowed since 1980, the CSC establishes the issues which may be negotiated, then turns over the actual bargaining to the Office of the State Employer.
When parties reach an impasse, the CSC has the authority to set the terms of the contract. State employees are prohibited by CSC rule from striking.
PROPOSAL 3 APPLIES TO
ALL UNIONIZED
STATE EMPLOYEES.
Does not apply to Public School Employees.
|
|
The MFT&SRP recommends a "Yes" vote on Proposal 3 because:
- The Civil Service Commission should not be allowed to interfere in the collective bargaining process of state workers. (The CSC has altered the current contract over 100 times.)
- A fair system requires an amendment to the Constitution making collective bargaining an absolute right of state workers, rather than a privilege that could be withdrawn by the commission.
- It is only fair to give employees the power to call for binding arbitration in the case of a labor negotiation impasse.
- State Employees should have the right to strike the same as private sector employees.
bk:opeiu42aflcio
Return to Top
Proposal 4: Tobacco Settlement
|
|
Michigan Federation of Teachers
And School Related Personnel
|
|
PROPOSAL 02-4
A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT TO REALLOCATE
THE "TOBACCO SETTLEMENT REVENUE"
RECEIVED BY THE STATE FROM
CIGARETTE MANUFACTURERS
The proposed constitutional amendment would:
- Annually allocate on a permanent basis 90% (approximately $297 million) of "tobacco settlement revenue" received by state from cigarette manufacturers as follows: $151.8 million to nonprofit hospitals, licensed nursing homes, licensed hospices, nurse practitioners, school-linked health centers and Healthy Michigan Foundation; $102.3 million to fund programs to reduce tobacco use, Health and Aging Research Development Initiative, Tobacco-Free Futures Fund, Council of Michigan Foundations and Nurses Scholarship Program; and $42.9 million to the Elder Prescription Drug Program.
- Guarantee recipients funding at 2001 appropriation levels plus additional state funds on an escalating basis for nonprofit hospitals, licensed nursing homes, licensed hospices and nurse practitioners. Should this proposal be adopted?
Should this law be approved?
/_/ Yes
/_/ No
|
|
|
Proposal 4 - Tobacco Settlement
The funding currently supports such key state initiatives as the Michigan Merit Award, the Michigan Life Sciences Corridor, prescription drug assistance for senior citizens and other vital programs.
The Michigan settlement with tobacco companies was deliberately unrestricted and was to reimburse the state for billions of dollars already spent for tobacco-related illnesses.
Michigan is currently ranked 15th (over $28 million) in the nation among states in per capita spending on anti-tobacco programs.
It would deny the promised $2,500
to roughly 250,000 students
who have already qualified for the
Michigan Merit Award.
|
|
The MFT&SRP recommends a "No" vote on Proposal 4 because:
- It would effectively wipe out the Michigan Merit Award Scholarship Program by requiring that the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement dollars be distributed only to certain health- related organizations and providers.
- It would allow the new legislature no flexibility in dealing with the state's budgetary crisis and would make it impossible to adjust these priorities in the years ahead based on changing needs or circumstances.
- The proposal would create in the Constitution a corporation that would receive $50 million of state revenues annually over the next 20 years with no state oversight as to its effectiveness, selection and pay for executives, or any aspect of its operation.
- It would appropriate most of the tobacco settlement revenue to private organizations that did not exist before Proposal 4 was created. These organizations could then spend public money almost free of public scrutiny.
bk:opeiu42aflcio
Return to Top
Legislative Report Card for the 91st Session
The 91st Session of the Michigan State Legislature will convene for a lame duck session in November. A total of 70 laws dealing with education have been signed into law so far during this session, 23 in 2001 and 47 in 2002.
Some of the accomplishments we made during the past two years are:
- Summer School Funding Released for 2000-2001
- Use Rainy Day Fund to Fund School Aid
- Help Insure Sufficient Funds for School Aid
- Declining Enrollment Funds
- Additional Funding for Detroit Public Schools Reform
- Delay Scheduled Single Business Tax Cut
- School Readiness Funding
- At-Risk Student Reading Funding
Detrimental legislation that we are (to date) successful in fending off include:
- Failing Schools Proposals
- Education Flex - District State Law Waivers
- Charter School Expansion
- Privatization of Substitute Teachers
- Ban on Promotion of Ballot Issues in Public Schools
- Graded Premium for Retiree Health Care Benefits
- Reducing Qualifications for Substitute Teachers
- Highland Park Consolidation/Takeover
- Wayne County Community College Separation
Detrimental legislation we have been successful in amending:
- School-Based Child Care
- Special Education Rules
- School Aid Budget Cuts
- FOIA Exemption of Student Directories
- "Ritalin" Bill Package
- Increased Penalties for Not Reporting Child Abuse
- School Readiness Funding
Listed below are issues that were introduced in the 91st Session, but were not enacted into law. We will continue to lobby for these issues until the end of the year:
- Use of Part-Time Faculty
- Paraprofessional Certification
- Teacher Loan Forgiveness
- School Infrastructure Funding
- School Building Inspections
- Ensure Future Education Funding
- MIP Window Reopener
bk:opeiu42aflcio
|
