Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2010 Senate Bill 1150: Appropriations: 2010-2011 Capital outlay budget (Senate Roll Call 562)
facebook  twitter 

Passed 28 to 9 in the Senate on November 10, 2010, to authorize borrowing and spending $630 million for a number of state university and college building projects. The state would be responsible for repaying $326 million of the new debt, and the individual institions the rest. The bill also appropriates $9 million for a new hangar at the Oscoda-Wurtsmith airport. A list of the college and university projects is here. See also House Bill 5858, which would authorize more than $1 billion in new debt and spending.
View All of Senate Bill 1150: History, Amendments & Comments 

The vote was 28 in favor, 9 against, and 1 not voting.
(Senate Roll Call 562)

Print-friendly version

 Comment on this vote   View others' comments   Add to scorecard 

Line

Vote
In Favor In Favor
Against Against
Not Voting Not Voting
 Undecided
Republican
901090%
9919%
1000%
22 total votes
Democrat
505050%
435743%
6946%
16 total votes
Voters
1000%
100100%
1000%
1 total vote

What do you think? In Favor Against Undecided (log on required)

Line

Appropriations: 2010-2011 Capital outlay budget

IN FAVOR

SENATE DEMOCRATS

Anderson (D)Barcia (D)Gleason (D)Jacobs (D)Olshove (D)
Prusi (D)Switalski (D)Whitmer (D)  

SENATE REPUBLICANS

Allen (R)Birkholz (R)Bishop (R)Brown (R)Cropsey (R)
Garcia (R)Gilbert (R)Hardiman (R)Jansen (R)Jelinek (R)
Kahn (R)Kuipers (R)McManus (R)Nofs (R)Pappageorge (R)
Patterson (R)Richardville (R)Sanborn (R)Stamas (R)Van Woerkom (R)


AGAINST

SENATE DEMOCRATS

Basham (D)Brater (D)Clark-Coleman (D)Clarke (D)Hunter (D)
Scott (D)Thomas (D)   

SENATE REPUBLICANS

Cassis (R)George (R)


SENATE LEGISLATORS WHO DID NOT VOTE

Cherry (D)



SENATE LEGISLATORS ALL VOTES

Y    Allen (R)Y    Anderson (D)Y    Barcia (D)  n  Basham (D)Y    Birkholz (R)
Y    Bishop (R)  n  Brater (D)Y    Brown (R)  n  Cassis (R)  -  Cherry (D)
  n  Clark-Coleman (D)  n  Clarke (D)Y    Cropsey (R)Y    Garcia (R)  n  George (R)
Y    Gilbert (R)Y    Gleason (D)Y    Hardiman (R)  n  Hunter (D)Y    Jacobs (D)
Y    Jansen (R)Y    Jelinek (R)Y    Kahn (R)Y    Kuipers (R)Y    McManus (R)
Y    Nofs (R)Y    Olshove (D)Y    Pappageorge (R)Y    Patterson (R)Y    Prusi (D)
Y    Richardville (R)Y    Sanborn (R)  n  Scott (D)Y    Stamas (R)Y    Switalski (D)
  n  Thomas (D)Y    Van Woerkom (R)Y    Whitmer (D)  

Senate Roll Call 562 on 2010 Senate Bill 1150

Line

Comments

Re: 2010 Senate Bill 1150 (Appropriations: 2010-2011 Capital outlay budget )  by Judy on November 11, 2010 

 


 


 


 


Senator Brater’s statement is as follows:


There were a variety of people voting “no” on the previous bill. Lest everyone think we voted “no” for the same reason, I wanted to enter my “no” vote explanation. I voted “no” on this bill because a number of community colleges and great universities in this state were zeroed out in their capital outlay appropriations. I think at this time in the state’s economic situation, it is most imperative that we continue to invest in these colleges and universities. They are our economic future.


Many of these buildings that are being applied for are science and technology buildings. We are asking these universities, including Wayne State, University of Michigan, and Michigan Tech, which were among the universities zeroed out in this bill that is before us—we are asking them to prepare our students for the economy of the 21st century, so that we can move Michigan forward and diversify our economy. It is most imperative that we continue to invest in these universities and colleges at this time.


I know I can speak for the University of Michigan, Wayne State University, and Michigan State University who have been working through the university consortium that they have formed and Michigan Tech in the U.P. are all striving to do exactly what we have asked of them; to foster technology transfer to spark new and diverse enterprises in our Michigan economy, which are what is so sorely needed in order to provide jobs and an economic base for our state. I also regret the removal of the project at Washtenaw Community College, which I also think is a very worthy investment, as it is for all the community colleges in the bill.


I trust that as this bill moves forward to the other chamber, there will be some give and take in negotiation, which will improve this bill. For the time being, I was unable to support it.


 



Re: 2010 Senate Bill 1150 (Appropriations: 2010-2011 Capital outlay budget )  by Judy on November 11, 2010 


Senator Brater’s statement is as follows:


There were a variety of people voting “no” on the previous bill. Lest everyone think we voted “no” for the same reason, I wanted to enter my “no” vote explanation. I voted “no” on this bill because a number of community colleges and great universities in this state were zeroed out in their capital outlay appropriations. I think at this time in the state’s economic situation, it is most imperative that we continue to invest in these colleges and universities. They are our economic future.


Many of these buildings that are being applied for are science and technology buildings. We are asking these universities, including Wayne State, University of Michigan, and Michigan Tech, which were among the universities zeroed out in this bill that is before us—we are asking them to prepare our students for the economy of the 21st century, so that we can move Michigan forward and diversify our economy. It is most imperative that we continue to invest in these universities and colleges at this time.


I know I can speak for the University of Michigan, Wayne State University, and Michigan State University who have been working through the university consortium that they have formed and Michigan Tech in the U.P. are all striving to do exactly what we have asked of them; to foster technology transfer to spark new and diverse enterprises in our Michigan economy, which are what is so sorely needed in order to provide jobs and an economic base for our state. I also regret the removal of the project at Washtenaw Community College, which I also think is a very worthy investment, as it is for all the community colleges in the bill.


I trust that as this bill moves forward to the other chamber, there will be some give and take in negotiation, which will improve this bill. For the time being, I was unable to support it.




Re: 2010 Senate Bill 1150 (Appropriations: 2010-2011 Capital outlay budget )  by Judy on November 11, 2010 


Senator George’s statement, in which Senator Cassis concurred, is as follows:


After much reflection, I voted “no” on this bill not because of an objection to any particular university or college project. Indeed, they are all meritorious when taken individually. I voted “no” instead because of their collective price tag.


When I look at the big picture, I see a state facing a $1.5 billion budget shortfall, a state where the Governor-elect has promised an additional $1.5 billion tax cut, a state with a 13 percent unemployment rate, and falling property values. In short, a state that is broke. Given these dynamics, the next Governor and the new Legislature will be hard pressed to find a way to balance next year’s budget. We should not be saddling them with additional debt. We should not be making the problem worse.


It has been stated that the cost of this bill is only $30 million. In fact, this is incorrect. The bill approves new state borrowing of $630 million. This is the combined figure taking into account the borrowing by the state, its universities, and its community colleges. All of this must be paid back.


As you will recall, the operational funding to our colleges and universities has already been reduced. We have reduced it by about 10 percent less than in 2002. That falling state aid has led to tuition increases. In a state that is pinched for resources, what is needed is a reassessment of our university and college system. In a state that has lost a million jobs, we ought to be asking ourselves how we can afford to maintain the system we have built. But instead of looking for consolidation or savings, we are here proposing to expand the system by building new buildings.


In doing this, we encumber our universities and colleges with new operating expenses and new debt. We are doing it in the face of a likely further reduction in state appropriations next year. Any application of a value-for-money budgeting system without a new source of revenue will lead to reduced university appropriations.  We are sowing the seeds for tuition increases by allowing our universities and colleges to build more buildings and accumulate more debt and more operating expenses in the face of an inevitable cut in appropriations. The end result will be another round of tuition increases. We are going to put a college education out of range for the average Michigan family. That is why I voted “no” on Senate Bill No. 1150.




View More pre-2013 Comments.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.