Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2010 Senate Bill 1158: Appropriations: 2010-2011 Department of Human Services (Welfare) budget
  1. Introduced by Sen. Bill Hardiman (R) on February 24, 2010, to provide the “template” or “place holder” for a Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Department of Social Services (Welfare) budget. This bill contains no appropriations, but may be amended at a later date to include them.
    • Referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee on February 24, 2010.
      • Reported in the Senate on May 19, 2010, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
    • Substitute offered in the Senate on May 19, 2010, to adopt a version of this budget that expresses the fiscal and policy preferences of the Republican-majority in the Senate on various spending items and programs. Among other things the Senate does not provide funding 197 positions eliminated in a previous budget cut, and funds fewer new child protective services workers than recommended by the Governor following a lawsuit settlement. Also, the bill prohibits appropriated money from being used to fund the "Michigan Home-Based Child Care Council" or to pay for collecting union dues from independent home day contractors hired by welfare recipients with government money provided for this (the subject of a Mackinac Center lawsuit). For more details see analysis from the non-partisan Senate Fiscal Agency. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on May 19, 2010.
    • Amendment offered by Sen. Martha G. Scott (D) on May 19, 2010, to revise details related to the administration of extra child protective services spending and employees to be added under terms of a lawsuit settlement. The amendment failed 16 to 22 in the Senate on May 19, 2010.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Deborah Cherry (D) on May 19, 2010, to increase spending by $20 million for a particular government jobs training program ("JET Plus"). The amendment failed 16 to 22 in the Senate on May 19, 2010.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Martha G. Scott (D) on May 19, 2010, to strip out a provision allocating specific state, federal and county funding responsibilities for adoption and foster care services. The amendment failed 19 to 19 in the Senate on May 19, 2010.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Martha G. Scott (D) on May 19, 2010, to authorize approximately 400 additional department employees and add money to pay for them. This mostly involves extra child protective services spending and employees the state must add under terms of a lawsuit settlement. The amendment failed 16 to 22 in the Senate on May 19, 2010.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Martha G. Scott (D) on May 19, 2010, to add $200,000 for a legal services to disabled veterans program. The amendment failed 16 to 22 in the Senate on May 19, 2010.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Michael Switalski (D) on May 19, 2010, to authorize more department field staff and the money to pay for them, strip out $3.8 million for a "marriage and fatherhood initiative" program favored by Republican senators, and make other changes. The amendment failed 16 to 22 in the Senate on May 19, 2010.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  2. Passed 20 to 18 in the Senate on May 19, 2010, the Senate version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010-2011 Department of Social Services (Welfare) budget. This would appropriate $6.953 billion in gross spending, compared to $5.941 billion, which was the FY 2009-2010 amount enrolled in 2009, and $7.004 billion recommended by Gov. Granholm. Of this, $916.4 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the FY 2009-2010 amount of $860.2 million. $5.932 billion of this budget is federal money (of which $818 million is “stimulus” deficit spending) compared to the FY 2009-2010 amount of $4.974 billion.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  3. Received in the House on May 19, 2010.
    • Referred to the House Appropriations Committee on May 19, 2010.

Comments