Whitmer Suggests Government Shutdown If No Big Gas Tax Hike
Democratic Governor challenges GOP legislature, my way on the highways
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s proposed 45-cent per gallon, $2.5 billion motor fuel tax increase has been represented as a plan to spend $2.5 billion more on roads. Bridge Magazine reported the plan would “increase state road funding by $2.5 billion by 2021.” The Small Business Association of Michigan said the plan would “raise $2.5 billion for roads.”
And the budget overview section of the governor’s recent executive budget presentation states, “This plan will generate $2.5 billion in new annual transportation revenue.”
What has not been widely reported is that just $1.9 billion of the $2.5 billion tax increase would go to road repairs. About $600 million of the tax hike, if enacted, would cover government spending that is unrelated to roads and transportation.
Whitmer’s executive budget recommendation for the next fiscal year proposes total state spending from all sources of $60.2 billion, up from $56.8 billion authorized in the final budget signed by her predecessor, Republican Rick Snyder.
Whitmer justifies the motor fuel tax increase by saying she was elected by Michigan voters who want her to “fix the damn roads.” If passed and signed into law, the proposal would give Michigan the nation’s highest gas tax.
Fiscal analyst James Hohman at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy is one voice who has noted the discrepancy between how much the governor expects the tax hike to bring in and how much of that she plans to use on road repairs.
“Whitmer is insisting she needs $2.5 billion in higher gas tax revenue, but only wants $1.9 billion more in additional road funding, and that is worth pointing out,” Hohman said in an email. “It looks like the governor wants more money in government and is trying to use the roads to leverage it.”
Hohman added, “The 2020 state budget already contains a ‘road funding piece’: An income tax earmark to road repairs is scheduled to increase from $264 million to $468 million.”
This refers to a law enacted alongside the last gas and diesel tax hike in 2015, which raised these taxes by 7 cents per gallon and 11 cents per gallon, respectively, to 26.3 cents per gallon tax on both fuels. Then-House Speaker Kevin Cotter insisted that the state government, and not just taxpayers, shares some of the burden of reprioritizing more resources to road repairs. The result was the income tax earmark from general government spending to road repairs, which, starting in October 2020, rises to $600 million annually.
The governor’s proposed gas tax hike has not gone over well with Republican lawmakers, nor has Whitmer’s statement that she won’t sign a new budget without one. Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey, R-Clarklake, says they’re two separate issues.
While it is too early in the process to start talking about a year-end budget impasse, Whitmer is using language that suggests this is possible.
“They want honesty in budgeting, and they want real solutions, not half-measures and shell games. And that’s exactly what I put on the table,” said the governor in a MIRS News podcast last week, during which she also reiterated that she would not to sign a budget that doesn’t include a comprehensive road funding solution.
Shirkey’s press secretary, Amber McCann, responded to Whitmer’s accusations in a statement to MIRS News. "She’s in luck. There’s an entire Department of Transportation portion of the budget."
House Speaker Lee Chatfield, R-Levering, agrees that passing an annual budget and devising a long-term solution to road repair funding are two separate issues.
“We are currently spending a record amount on roads and are serious about further investing the right amount to fix the problem. But if that doesn’t qualify as a fix, I could put her gas tax hike on the board and watch it fail,” Chatfield said in a statement to The Detroit News.
Whitmer’s office did not return requests for comment.
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.
Collective Bargaining Does Not Equality Make
UAW claims of equal pay are unfounded
A few weeks ago, United Auto Workers President Gary Johnson stated that collective bargaining creates equality. He claims that if you’re a woman who wants equal pay, you should join a union. But the data doesn’t seem to show that women in unionized workforces get equal pay with their unionized brothers.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the difference between median weekly earnings of unionized men and women in 2018 was $155 per week. In other words, unionized women received $155 less in weekly earnings than their unionized male counterparts. That is an increase in the wage gap from $89 in 2015. In fact, this gender pay gap shows up in the data every year from 2008 to 2018.
The gap in pay between unionized men and women for middle-aged workers is even larger than the overall average. The pay gap between men and women aged 45 to 54 was $198 per week in 2018, and for those aged 55 to 64 it was $187. And once again, over the past 10 years parity was never achieved in either of those age ranges.
UAW leadership doesn’t seem to practice what it preaches by a different measure as well. In 2017, only one of the three vice presidents of UAW was a woman, and that woman — Cynthia Estrada — was the lowest paid of the three. There was only one regional director during 2017 who was a woman.
Not much changed looking at the 2018 data. Cynthia Estrada was still the only female vice president at UAW, and she was the lowest paid by over $30,000. Her male colleague, Vice President Norwood Jewel, who recently pled guilty in the FCA-UAW training center scandal, was paid more than Estrada in both 2017 and 2018. UAW did manage to add a female regional director in 2018, bringing the total up to two during the year.
So, what is the takeaway from all of this? Well, most obviously, it rings hollow that the UAW is claiming that women and men reach pay parity with union representation when you consider that the female leadership of the UAW national office doesn’t seem to be equal in pay to their male counterparts. Unsurprisingly, the UAW has never had a female at the helm of the organization.
People have posited different reasons for the earnings gap between men and women. Some claim sexism is the only reason such earning gaps exist, even though that type of discrimination is illegal. Others have posited that the difference in earnings between men and women found in the data is a result of nuanced differences in behavior among men and women. Women tend to be more willing to take less pay in favor of more job flexibility, time off and other benefits. Men, on the other hand, tend to be more willing to work longer hours and forego certain benefits in exchange for a higher salary. Regardless of why a gender wage gap exists in the data, the UAW cannot claim that unionization is a tried and true method for eliminating it.
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.
Enjoying CapCon?
Make sure you aren’t missing anything! Sign up for our daily or weekly emails and get the quarterly print edition mailed to your home. All free!
Get CapCon emails! Get CapCon print!
No thanks, I prefer to visit the CapCon website!
More From CapCon