Commentary

Prisons Not an 'Economic Development' Program

This week, Rep. Steve Lindberg, D-Marquette, offered the following amendment (defeated on an unrecorded “voice vote”) to the Department of Corrections budget for the fiscal year that begins on Oct. 1:

When the department determines that the closure of a correctional facility is warranted … (it must) fully consider the potential economic impact (on the community, and) … make it a high priority to close a facility for which the local economic impact is minimized.

That’s a nice sentiment if you happen to live in such a community, but does it really contribute to the general welfare of Michigan residents for prisons to be regarded as a government “jobs” or “economic development” program?

Clearly the answer is “no.”

The perverse incentives such an explicit policy would generate are not hard to imagine. However, that doesn’t stop the prison guards union from using its political muscle to prevent not just prison closures, but even sentencing reform proposals, and of course efforts to save money by seeking competitive bids on prison operations.

One lesson here is that by allowing government employee unions to engage in collective bargaining, the Legislature has created a permanent taxpayer-funded lobby for more and more expensive prisons.

On that last point — keeping prisons more expensive — several amendments were also offered recently to prohibit cost-saving privatization, and although these too were defeated on unrecorded “voice votes,” Democrats weren’t the only legislators opposing outsourcing.

According to MIRS News, Rep. Ed McBroom, R-Vulcan, was one of several GOP members supporting a Democratic amendment to halt the closure of a state reformatory for juvenile delinquents, and Rep. Rick Outman, R-Six Lakes, cited this as the reason he voted against the “omnibus” budget of which prison spending was just one part. The expectation is that these “juvies” would instead be housed in a privatized prison that former Gov. Jennifer Granholm promised the prison guards union she would shut down — a promise she kept in 2004.

Meanwhile, at least eight Republican House members are preventing passage of another bill specifically authorizing housing some prisoners in privatized prisons. The measure could save Michigan taxpayers more than $100 million as the unions and management of the nonprivatized prisons respond by cutting their own costs to remain competitive.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.

News Story

Emergency Manager Repeal Ballot Proposal Likely Headed to State Supreme Court

Whether Michigan voters will have a say on the state’s emergency manager law may end up before the state Supreme Court, legal experts and political observers say.

On Thursday, the Board of State Canvassers voted 2-2 on whether to approve the petition that would put repeal of the emergency manager act on the ballot in November. At issue was whether part of the petition was in the correct legal print size under state election law. The deadlock vote means the petition was not approved and will not get on the ballot.

Supporters of the proposal are expected to file an appeal to the state Court of Appeals. But few think the legal action will stop there.

“It could go to the Supreme Court,” said Rich Studley, president and CEO of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. “There is a lot at stake for either side.”

Eric Doster, an election law expert and general counsel for the state GOP, said he expects whatever the decision the Court of Appeals makes will be appealed to the highest court.

“Whoever loses is going to appeal to the Supreme Court. Will it get to them on appeal? Absolutely 100 percent,” Doster said. “My gut instinct is that they will hear it.”

Patrick Wright, senior legal counsel for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said he expects the issue to be resolved in time for the November election. He said the state Supreme Court can expedite the case because of the timeliness of the election.

“This will work itself out fairly quickly legally,” Wright said.

The legal dispute revolves around the language of the state law. One section states that the petition “shall be” a certain size. Another section of the election law states that type size of the petitions shall be “substantially as provided.”

The question revolves around just how close “substantially” has to be to get the petition approved.

The AP reported that Bob LaBrant of Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility said the header on the petitions was 10- and 12-point rather than the required 14-point size.

The group Stand Up For Democracy submitted 225,885 signatures to get the emergency manager act on the ballot, according to the Associated Press.  Studley said the signatures were not in question.

An email seeking comment from Stand Up For Democracy was not returned.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.