The Michigan Chamber of Commerce has historically been a
large supporter of transportation funding; however, representatives announced this
week that the Michigan Chamber will remain neutral on Proposal 2015-1. The
Proposal would increase sales tax to raise $1.2 billion for road funding and
$700 million for schools, local government services, and transit. Rich Studley,
President of the Michigan Chamber, commented that they will instead be educating
their members leading up to the May 5th vote.
Mr. Studley stated an inability to reach a board consensus
as to why the Michigan Chamber will not take a position on Proposal 1. When it
was originally proposed, Mr. Studley himself was exceedingly critical of the
decision to put the proposal on the ballot instead of handling the matter
legislatively.
While the Chamber decided to remain neutral, the CEO and
President of the Michigan Manufacturers Association (MMA) Chuck Hadden announced
the MMA’s endorsement for the proposal. Although there are no plans to finance it
in the future, the MMA’s support adds yet another major business organization
to the mix.
The Michigan Environmental Council (MEC) also announced
that it is urging their members to support this proposal in the upcoming
election. Chris Kolb, the MEC President, mentioned in a statement that the
state cannot afford to wait to fix the roads any longer and Proposal 1 is the
best chance to build a safe and reliable transportation system that Michigan
needs.
The Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce also endorsed
the measure. Lansing Chamber President and CEO Tim Daman shared the
disappointment with the Legislature being unable to come up with a long-term
solution, but has decided to support the proposal. Although not perfect, he
thinks Proposal 1 still offers the best path to providing Michiganders safe and
reliable roads.
This sentiment is not shared by Attorney General Bill
Schuette. The Attorney General declared Wednesday that he will not be voting
“yes” on Proposal 15-1. His rationale is that the proposal funds an additional $700
million for other projects; and if the proposal’s main purpose is to fund the
roads, it should be focused exclusively on that. According to Schuette, this is not to
minimize the intention of the other funding projects, but there is just “too
much stuff under the Christmas tree.”
Mr. Schuette advised Governor Snyder of his position over
the phone, as the two of them are now on opposing sides of this proposal. Roger
Martin of the Safe Roads Yes Campaign dismissed the significance of the
Attorney General’s remark saying the roads need to be fixed, and this is the
only available avenue to do so. Mr. Schuette disagreed with his statement; he
personally believes there is always another avenue to fix these roads.
When asked if he would campaign against the proposal,
Attorney General Schuette mentioned it has not crossed his mind and he is
merely voicing his opinion as a voter and a citizen.