Welcome
June 25, 2011
Battle Creek Enquirer editorial: Lawmakers need to be fair about health care
As the Michigan Legislature pushes forward with plans to require public employees to pay more of their own health insurance costs, lawmakers need to be equally diligent in doing away with their own overly generous retirement perks.
>>Read the entire Battle Creek Enquirer editorial.
__________________________________________________________________
June 20, 2011
Teachers and legislators: Who makes more, and works less?
So, back to the business of “shared sacrifices.”
The Snyder team down in Lansing, with the all too enthusiastic support of legislators from this area, keep pounding away at the fact that it’s way past the time when public education pay its fair share. Teachers make too much. Administra tors are spendthrifts. School boards are wastrels. Local school communities need to get a grip on things and start paying their fair share.
__________________________________________________________________
June 14, 2011
State-Mandated “Hard Cap” on Health Insurance Shifts Nearly All Responsibility for Expensive Medical Cases to Michigan Workers
A state-mandated “hard cap” on public employee health insurance would shift responsibility for nearly all future health care cost increases – including medical costs associated with serious diseases and catastrophic illnesses suffered by coworkers – to police officers, firefighters, teachers, nurses, corrections employees and other state and local public workers.
An analysis (click “read more” to view) of the proposed hard cap reveals the devastating financial impact on many public employees and their families who would bear most of the financial burden when co-workers suffer expensive illnesses such as cancer, heart attacks, stroke and premature babies.
__________________________________________________________________
March 29, 2011
Bernard Taylor: Asking employees to pay more for health care won’t cover budget cuts
Making all Grand Rapids Public Schools employees pay 20 percent of their health care premiums wouldn’t come close to making up all the proposed budget cuts the district is facing, Superintendent Bernard Taylor told lawmakers.
Taylor today testified before the state House K-12 Appropriations Subcommittee, which is considering Gov. Rick Snyder’s proposed budget.
__________________________________________________________________
Feb. 14, 2011
Michigan voters show “no love” for a mandatory state government‐run health plan
On this Valentine’s Day, Michigan voters show “no love” for a mandatory state government‐run health plan.
Michigan voters by a wide margin of 56 percent to 30 percent oppose a mandatory stategovernment‐run public employee health insurance plan, according to a new statewide survey conducted by Marketing Resource Group (MRG).
__________________________________________________________________
Feb. 4, 2011
Do Rick Snyder’s numbers add up
Read “Do Rick Snyder’s numbers add up?” — an insightful piece by Susan J. Demas – by clicking here.
__________________________________________________________________
Feb. 3, 2011
Another study finds public, private sector compensation comparable in Michigan
New EPI study finds public employee compensation lags private sector
A new study (released Feb. 3, 2011) by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) and a Rutgers University researcher finds total compensation — pay and benefits — is already comparable for public and private sector employees in Michigan. The study, “Are Michigan Public Employees Over Compensated?,” is the fourth report issued since 2008 to find public employees in Michigan are not “over paid” compared to private sector workers.
The EPI study uses complete data and important methodological controls to make the most accurate comparisons of private and public sector compensation. The study controls for like jobs, education levels, and years of experience. The study also uses the most reliable and complete database used by social scientists to measure and compare private versus public sector compensation on a micro level. The study uses a database produced every month by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics called the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series of the March Current Population Survey (IPUMS-CPS).
To his credit, Gov. Rick Snyder has acknowledged that two other studies released late last month comparing public to private sector compensation do not make “apples-to-apples” comparisons. Gov. Snyder invited others to contribute data that makes more accurate comparison. The studies were produced by respected researchers but were misleading because they failed to use complete data and did not control for education levels.
Read other studies that have reached similar conclusions as the EPI report about public and private sector compensation in Michigan.
__________________________________________________________________
January 13, 2010
Six Studies Examining Michigan, Other States Conclude Public Sector Workers Not Overcompensated
Six studies conducted in recent years examined total compensation of public versus private sector workers in Michigan, nationally and in specific states. Each study broadly reaches the same conclusions: public sector workers compared to private sector workers in jobs with comparable education qualifications are not overcompensated.
In fact, several studies conclude that if anything, public sector compensation now lags workers in the private sector. The researchers reached their findings by comparing workers with comparable education levels because, obviously, it would be unfair to compare the total compensation of attorneys or engineers in the private sector with, say, human service case workers or secretaries in the public sector, or engineers in the public sector to a cashier at the local grocery store.
>>Read the entire Citizens for Accountability in Reform blog post about these six studies.
>>UPDATE (1/23/11): Go to “Michigan workers, teachers already have given roughly $4.7 billion in pay, benefit cuts,” an op-ed by Roger Martin published in the Sunday, Jan. 23, 2011 edition of the Lansing State Journal.
____________________________________________________________________
January 6, 2011
Attacking Public Employees
by Jack Lessenberry
Every culture and civilization has a set of myths which are sometimes partly true, but which are exaggerated out of proportion.
For example, they say any child in America can grow up to be president. That was made more believable when Barack Obama won. But for too many children today, a decent education, let alone the White House, is an impossible dream.
We take other things on faith too. These days, something most people seem to believe is that we have too many public sector employees, that they are paid too much, and that the cost of their pensions and benefits are killing us.
As a result, it is widely expected that Governor Snyder will seek deep cuts in public sector benefits to help close a nearly two billion dollar hole in next year’s state budget.
Well, there may be no alternative to painful cuts affecting almost everybody. But there’s evidence that suggests that what you think you know about public workers’ compensation was just plain wrong. I was reminded of this recently by Roger Martin, a colleague of mine years ago at the Detroit News.
Roger isn’t exactly an unbiased observer. His lobbying firm, Martin Waymire Advocacy Communications, represents a coalition of Michigan state and local public employees called Citizens for Accountability in Reform. Naturally, they want to keep their benefits.
But he wasn’t the first person to suggest that what we thought we knew about public employee pay was just plain wrong. Michigan State University Economist Charles Ballard talked to me about this in detail two years ago. He was a co-author of a study of our state employee workforce published that summer.
The study found that the state workforce has been dramatically shrinking. In fact, it fell by nearly one-fifth in the seven years starting in 2001, and has shrunk further since then.
What’s more, according to the non-partisan House Fiscal Agency, state employees earn, on average, less than their counterparts in the private sector at every level. Ballard’s study actually concluded that state workers who haven’t graduated from college do about the same as those in the private sector. But those who have a bachelor’s degree or better make much less.
What about overheated pensions and benefits? Well, state workers have been giving back. They are paying higher premiums for health care. The state has switched from the old, expensive defined-benefit pension model to a defined contribution model, which will save the state billions, over time.
Roger Martin directed me to five other studies, none of them sponsored by his firm or his clients that came to roughly the same conclusions that, up to now, public sector workers have been paid less and have had to sacrifice more.
That doesn’t mean that further cuts may not be avoidable. But we should consider two things. First of all, we should be a little suspicious when politicians who want tax cuts for the rich begin to demonize modestly paid public sector workers. And second, if we want to severely cut the modest compensation we pay teachers and policemen, we shouldn’t be surprised if we get inferior people in those jobs. For there is, after all, one thing that both public and private sectors have in common: You get what you pay for.
Read original post on Michigan Public Radio site here
____________________________________________________________________
November 19, 2010
Richardville: “I don’t think state employees are paid too much in general.”
Please read your Nov. 17 edition of MIRS, where you will find a fascinating conversation with new state Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville. Here is Sen. Richardville’s response to one of the questions:
There’s been a lot of talk about the role of state employees and their compensation. Do you think state employees are paid too much?
“No, I don’t think state employees are paid too much in general. I haven’t had the opportunity to go in and look specifically at every person, obviously. But I think there are some people who are paid more than what they produce and some people who are paid less than what they produce.
“I like the idea that (Gov.-Elect) Rick (SNYDER) and (Lt. Gov.-Elect) Brian CALLEY (R-Portland) both have backgrounds as CPAs. I think we’re all in agreement that we need to take a harder look at what the actual (government) activities are and whether they’re returning a good taxpayer investment dollar. If customer service is being what we guide our principles by in terms of state employees, I’m willing to see if they are actually accomplishing what they are set up to do.
“Working harder and getting paid less doesn’t necessarily help in the long-run unless you’re working smarter. And I think that’s what we want to do is see whether or not we’re actually working smarter in the various departments. There are 50,000-some state employees. I think they need to be analyzed individually, not in a lump sum like that.”
________________________________________________________________________
November 4, 2010
The Facts on Speaker Dillon’s HB 5345 (H-1)
Why a Huge State Government-run Health Plan is Still a Risky Idea
- Creating a mandatory state government-run health plan would be one of the largest — if not the largest — expansions of state government in Michigan in recent history.
- HB 5345(H-1) gives state government more than 300 new powers and responsibilities, including a public option.
________________________________________________________________________
Dillon Proposes Health Care Premium Tax and Massive Expansion of State Government Powers
Unable to gain legislative support for previous versions of his mandatory state-government run health insurance plan, House Speaker Andy Dillon today unveiled yet another draft of his bill that would create the largest and most expensive expansion of state government power in recent history and put Michigan taxpayers at risk to the tune of up to $5 billion a year.
Click here to read the Citizens for Accountability in Reform news release.
________________________________________________________________________
June 30, 2010
Update, Update, Update: A Massive Expansion of State Government
Speaker Dillon’s New Version Creates 303 New Powers, Duties and Responsibilities for State and Local Governments
The latest version of Speaker Dillon’s mandatory state government-run health plan would create one of the largest — if not the largest — expansions of government in Michigan in recent history. HB 5345(H-1) would require hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds to start up and hundreds of millions more to manage each year. And there’s no savings. The new version would also impose a new 2-percent tax on local governments and school districts to pay the state’s operating costs, while imposing new unfunded mandates and reporting requirements on the locals. The plan would be roughly equivalent to a $4 billion to $5 billion insurance company run by the State, and it would put taxpayers on the hook for shortages or losses that might occur. Here are the new powers and duties given to government under the latest version of HB 5345:
Click here for the full report
________________________________________________________________________
Update, Update, Update: Out of Public and Media Sight, the HB 5345 Committee Plods On
The special state House committee that has been holding hearings on House Bill 5345, the mandatory government-run state health plan legislation sponsored by Speaker Dillon, met again on February 11. It was the first public meeting of the full committee for some weeks. Since before Christmas, committee members have been meeting in smaller work groups — usually closed to the public and media — to closely examine certain parts of the bill. The purpose of the February 11 hearing was to allow committee members who chaired the work groups to offer status reports.
Click here for a brief summary of what was reported by the work group chairs
________________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Citizens for Accountability in Reform web site. Our aim is to provide you with information the politicians in Lansing don’t want you to know about state House Bill 5345. This misguided legislation creates a mandatory state government-run health plan that would be controlled by 13 political appointees of the Legislature and Governor — that’s why Michigan voters believe this scheme will cost taxpayers even more! While it does not guarantee any real cost savings for state government, it would potentially cost $900 million to start and run in the first year, money that would likely come from Michigan taxpayers. No other state in the nation has such a plan, and for good reason. One of the closest is North Carolina, where taxpayers will pay hundreds of millions of dollars over the next three years to bail out their mandatory state government-run health insurance plan.
House Bill 5345: Simple, Obvious, and Wrong
House Speaker Andy Dillon’s proposed mandatory state government-run health insurance plan for public employers sounds simple and obvious — but it is wrong.
It’s a bad idea that could cost Michigan taxpayers up to $500 million to launch and cost up to $370 million a year to administer, with no proof it would save anywhere close to what its supporters are claiming.
In fact backers of the plan, which has been introduced in the state Legislature as House Bill 5345, have dramatically overestimated the savings and substantially underestimated the costs and risks to Michigan taxpayers and the state budget. In other states with relatively similar mandatory state government-run health insurance plans for public employees, taxpayers have been forced to bailout the plans to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
A Bold and Bad Idea
While many editorial page editors and others across Michigan have embraced the “bold” concept of the House Bill 5345, an analysis of the proposal by one of the state’s leading independent and nonpartisan public policy research firms has raised raise serious questions about:
- the claimed savings of $900 million a year, which are wildly exaggerated,
- the costs and risks to Michigan taxpayers by creating a new $4 billion to $5 billion state-run insurance plan, which are real and significant and have not even been acknowledged by the proposal’s supporters,
- the serious constitutional problems with the legislation, which seeks to force more than 1.5 million police officers, firefighters, university and college employees, local government workers, and all state workers in Michigan — plus all of their family members — to buy their health insurance from new state government plan controlled by the Legislature and the Governor.
- taxpayer bailouts of state-government run insurance plans for public employees in other states, most notably in North Carolina. Just this year, North Carolina turned to taxpayers for $658 million over the next three years to bailout the state’s mandatory public employee insurance plan. In Georgia, the Legislature has raided the reserves in the state employee plan to balance the state budget — a move that puts all of the people who are insured by the plan at great financial risk.
- While some other states have voluntary plans for public employees, Michigan would become the only state in the nation that mandates … absolutely forces … all public employers and their employees — universities, colleges, local governments, cops, firefighters, teachers, school bus drivers, secretaries, conservation officers, scientists, professors, and on and on — to buy their insurance from a plan controlled by the state’s politicians.
Stay Informed, Join the Fight for Accountability in Reform
Follow our blog to stay informed about House Bill 5345. If you would like to join our coalition, please click here.
