Fireside Chat

by Jack Lessenberry
March 19, 2010

The poor, philosophers used to say, will always be with us. Michigan has two problems that have gotten worse, and seem unlikely to disappear anytime soon: the plight of the Detroit public schools, and the state’s enduring financial crisis.

Robert Bobb, the emergency financial manager who now runs the schools, is closing more than 40 schools at the end of the school year, and more in years to come. The schools have lost half their enrollment in the last seven years, their record at educating students is abysmal, and the district has huge financial problems.

Nobody disputes any of that — but many residents are angry that these decisions are being made by a state-appointed outsider. “Whatever happened to local control of our own schools?” said one angry woman demonstrating against the cuts.

Governor Jennifer Granholm offered her solution to the current $2-billion budget deficit more than a month ago: extend the state sales tax to most services, while cutting the overall rate slightly, from 6 to 5.5 percent. The money raised would be used specifically to prevent any further cuts to education.

After that is accomplished, it would be used to phase out a hated surcharge the lawmakers slapped on the Michigan Business Tax three years ago, during an earlier budget crisis.

However, the legislature has largely ignored her plan — and Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop has indicated that he will block any plan that proposes to raise revenues.

Finally, a frustrated governor said Monday that if Michigan’s lawmakers don’t have the courage to vote on her proposal, “they should put it on the [November] ballot,” and let the voters decide.

You can expect to hear a lot more about both the schools and the state funding crisis in the weeks and months ahead.

But here’s a different perspective. Both the outraged parents of Detroit and the governor are looking at their problems in the wrong way.

First, the issue of “local control” of the schools. This stems back to pioneer days, when education was strictly a local responsibility. Communities figured out how much they wanted to tax themselves and what kind of education they could afford.

That changed drastically when Michigan adopted “Proposal A” in 1994. Now the majority of education funding comes from the state.

Legally, the state is required to appoint emergency financial managers for cities and school districts that are not living up to their basic financial responsibilities, which was the case in Detroit.

The case can be made that the welfare of all children is a state responsibility— especially since the leadership of the Detroit Public Schools has failed to manage its money, properly educate students or keep them in school long enough to graduate.

As for the governor’s sales tax proposal:

Regardless of its merits, she is missing a big step before she asks the voters to support her plan. She has utterly failed to explain the situation, or why she feels it is urgently necessary to raise taxes.

The governor may suffer from the Lansing version of “Inside the Beltway Disease.” Most of those she deals with every day understand how state finances work. Most voters don’t.

That’s not because they are stupid, but because they are spending their time trying to make a living (or find a job), raising their kids and worrying about whether to get the roof fixed.

Michigan citizens know they don’t want to pay more taxes if they don’t have to. They also know, however, that they want their kids to have a quality education, and they want good roads fixed.

The governor is supposed to be a superb communicator — and she has shown her ability to connect with voters when she’s been campaigning for office. But she has repeatedly shied away from trying to persuade them to support painful decisions.

So here’s a suggestion. When Franklin D. Roosevelt wanted to sell Americans on a difficult decision, he came on the radio to explain it in one of his famous “fireside chats.“

The governor should do the same — on television. She should ask for half an hour of time to explain the budget crisis to the citizens, explain how we got into this mess, and explain her rationale for extending the sales tax. She should tell voters what she expects it will cost them and what they can expect to get from it.

That might not work. There is no guarantee that the lawmakers can be pressured into putting it on the ballot. Nor is it certain that if they do, that voters will support it.

But leaders need to connect with the people, and lead. Jennifer Granholm has the ability to get our attention for another nine months, after which, thanks to term limits, she is gone forever.

The baffling question is, what is she is waiting for?

Veteran journalist and national Emmy Award winner Jack Lessenberry teaches at Wayne State University, serves as Michigan Radio’s senior political analyst and writes regularly for several publications. He also serves as The Toledo Blade’s writing coach and ombudsman and is host of the weekly television show Deadline Now on WGTE-TV in Toledo.