Up next on this week's edition of on Off the Record, we have Senate Democratic majority leader Winnie Brinks.
Our lead story, The governor's $8.7 billion state budget is out.
What's in it for you?
On the OTR panel Dave Boucher, Clara Hendrickson and Jonathan Oosting sit in with us as we get the inside out.
Off the Record.
Production of Off the Record is made possible, in part by Martin Waymire, a full service strategic communications agency, partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and public policy engagement.
Learn more at Martin Way.
Meyer NBC.com.
And now this edition of Off the Record with Tim Scooby.
Thank you very much and welcome to Studio C as we continue to look at what's going on in state government this week.
Numbers, lots of numbers.
Your tax dollars being spent, what does the governor want that money to go?
When the governor writes a new state budget, it's a lot like you going to the grocery store where you pick and choose between what you like and what you don't like and what you can afford.
What the governor had on her budget shopping list presented to the full house of lobbyists and lawmakers included more money for education, a 2.5% increase, or $9,849 for every school kid in the state, including free lunch and breakfast programs On the list is also more money for higher ed, a 2.5% increase, costing 42 million, plus more money for cities, a 5% boost, 28 million more and more money to fix the roads and bridges, including $700 million in bonds to do it.
And there's more money to keep people safe.
Right now, there are some Michiganders who feel unsafe in their communities.
In this budget, we will help local and county governments hire, train and retain more police officers.
Firefighters and EMS will graduate another class of MSP troopers and better secure our capital.
And when the governor got to the checkout counter, her shopping list cost $80.7 billion.
And just in case the state's economy goes south, she has a $2.2 billion state rainy day fund just in case.
In a briefing afterwards, the governor says there are no tax hikes to pay for this budget and there is no funny money that is money that will materialize.
And guess what about her shopping list this year?
This budget actually is smaller than last year's budget, about a half a billion dollars left and less than general fund.
We're in a strong fiscal position.
We built this budget utilizing resources based on what we believe are sustainable.
Now the lawmakers will decide if some of the items on that governor's list should be put back on the shelf.
Alright so Clara, when you heard this budget, you said, wow, or did you?
I said, this is going to be an interesting test as to whether lawmakers are on board with Whitmer's education agenda.
We saw her overhaul education in the summer, using her executive powers to create a new education department and put it under her control.
Now she really wants to provide that funding to make pre-K for all a reality and tuition free community college.
Our lawmakers really on board with that being the key spending priorities.
How can they not do something for the kids?
Well, sure.
I mean, we we've heard all sorts of pushback typically from Republicans about this idea of the I always put it in quotes, quotes of a free meal, of free free food.
And they tend to point out that that goes to families that at times can't afford it.
So that has tended to be the pushback for that.
And then, of course, there's a discussion and a debate about whether or not universal pre-K actually leads to increased outcomes.
And that's happening and has happened across the country.
However, obviously, this is a big priority for Democrats and we'll see if they can get across the finish line.
Yeah, and the governor is right.
She's not calling for new taxes per se, but her budget does call for some new fees.
The tipping fee, for instance, a landfill fee to pay for some environmental priorities.
And on the education front, there is a proposal to basically put less money into the teacher retirement health care fund.
The governor argues that they have essentially paid down unfunded liabilities ahead of schedule and now can reduce their payments.
On paper.
It looks like she might have a case there.
But Republicans who have really spent years advocating for the state to make sure it doesn't accrue these unfunded liabilities are calling that a raid on the teacher retirement fund and are pretty clearly going to be opposed to the mechanism for freeing up money to pay for some of these free lunch, free college proposals from me.
And that's a good chunk of change.
670 million bucks is a lot of money, which goes to a lot of these programs.
But I think if there's a critics of this budget might say, where are the means test?
You just raise the point.
Do people that are making $2 million a year, do they need a free lunch?
But how do you control that?
And there are other programs in there as well.
Are the Republicans going to take on that, you think?
Well, the Republican criticism criticism here is that there are a lot of big universal programs that Whitmer wants to put on the table.
Once you create those, it's really hard to take them back.
We already see that free lunch and free breakfast now and moving in the direction of trying to become a permanent thing.
In Michigan.
Republicans are worried that at this point it's going to get to the situation where spending is going to exceed revenues and a future legislature is going to have to figure out that bill.
And she pretty much decimated the Department of Education.
She took a chunk of change away from them and gave it to this new body.
Did you?
Sure.
I mean, she already shifted a lot of the responsibilities that she's doing with it.
So it makes sense that she'd have to fund it.
But yes, this is a chance for lawmakers to essentially vote on this change that she made unilaterally using executive authority.
I mean, to the larger point about the budget, that the governor is right, it's a little smaller than last year, but this budget is still way larger than the last pre-pandemic budget.
Basically, that that was approved before all this federal stimulus money in that general fund has actually under this budget would be larger than inflation.
Even, of course, there has been inflation.
Government costs have increased, too.
But this is still a very large budget that uses up almost all of the free money in the state has left floating around to use for discretionary purposes.
You wrote a piece this week about disgruntlement in the Democratic Party over Mr. Biden.
What's going on in Michigan?
Yeah, I mean, no voter wants to feel like their vote is being taken for granted.
And right now there are many Democratic voters who are unhappy with how the Biden administration has responded to the war in Gaza and his unequivocal support for Israel.
So given that the primary is not a particularly high stakes contest for Biden, some of these Democrats see an opening here to show that they could maybe make up the difference between Biden winning or losing in Michigan this fall.
And they want to show that this is an opportunity to sway it, sway him on the war, and to get him to back a cease fire.
By doing what?
By trying to get 10,000 voters in Michigan to vote uncommitted and not vote for Biden in the Democratic primary.
And that number is significant.
Donald Trump, of course, won the state by about a little more than 10,000 votes in 2016.
So they're trying to show this coalition, largely Arab Americans, but not only in Arab-Americans and in Michigan, in the Michigan Democratic Party, that they have the power to deny Biden reelection.
That's the point they're trying to make as sort of a bargaining chip to get him to change his position on Israel.
So if the governor reaches for her bottle of Excedrin, she's got yet another problem.
Well, sure.
And I think we all know that it is still exceptionally early in a presidential race.
I mean, anything that can happen in January and February, it depends.
But frequently that can be forgotten by August, September, October, when absentee ballots are starting to go out.
To your point, it's it's to a candidate's peril to take any vote for granted.
And so I think it makes sense.
And you understand why the Biden administration has sent somebody have sent people to Dearborn and to speak with people, leaders in the community.
It's also important to point out that the community is not monolithic and that there are, of course, Republicans who are Muslim and Arabs.
We we saw people fighting and supporting book bans and other things like that in the last campaign, supporting some the Republican candidates who are running in Dearborn and other places.
But again, I think that the Biden administration and the Biden campaign will continue to point out the alternative President Trump and some of the many things that he did during his both candidacy and presidency that were objectively perhaps not in the best interest of Muslim-Americans.
Does that play?
Possibly, I mean, so another thing that happened in the last week is The Wall Street Journal published an op ed that had a headline, basically an inflammatory headline that a lot of people saw as very prejudicial against Dearborn in particular, and the community there.
President Biden did, I think, earned some goodwill amongst members of that community by speaking out against that commentary.
And, you know, so again, showing that he was the one that stood up for them, not Donald Trump.
Donald Trump did not weigh in on it.
So I think that's the case they're going to make.
Also, Biden, we're taping Friday on Thursday night.
He did say that he think Israel has gone too far in their response to the Hamas attack in Gaza or against Israel.
Sorry.
And but, you know, they've mentioned forgetting the president has potentially a much bigger issue than Arab-American support in Michigan.
A special special counsel report came out yesterday that found they weren't going to charge him for keeping classified documents after his vice presidency, but raised serious questions about his memory and his mental acuity, which is a big issue for him going into his reelection campaign, which, of course, the governor, Governor Whitmer, and other surrogates in Michigan, you're talking about Excedrin.
She's going to be asked about that, too, repeatedly as well.
Almost every other Democrat on the campaign trail for months.
Well, she's got more on her platter with stuff like that.
She does not need this uncommitted thing because what would the headlines be coming out of Michigan that Biden loses the state of Michigan?
Do you think she wants that headline?
No, especially since she has taken on such a key role in Biden's reelection campaign.
She is the campaign.
If it weren't for she is Biden's Michigan surrogate.
She is the co-chair of his campaign.
She launched this PAC to raise money to keep it in the White House.
And so if Democrats lose Michigan again to Trump, it would be it would prompt an existential crisis within the Democratic Party.
And Whitmer might be to blame for some of that very quickly in the time that we have left, I want you to comment on the mirrors piece that was in there this week, which I thought was kind of interesting.
I'm not sure it's, you know, stop the presses.
262 people in Michigan government make more money than the governor.
Does anybody care other than Dr. Mark Mallory, who?
Oh, the governor may or may not have a book deal in the works.
It's not true.
Regardless of whether she runs for president herself, someday is going to be in position to make a lot of money in the private sector after her gubernatorial tenure.
That said, I mean, that's not unheard of the extent may be, but state government, you know, the governor's position is mandated, how much she's paid.
There's nothing she can do about that.
But it's long been a struggle for state government to attract highly talented, qualified personnel without paying them significant money.
Why don't they adopt the model in the private sector that the CEO makes the top and everybody else underneath gets, you know, what's ever left over?
And that's a super popular model with the workforce, right?
Like the workforce really loves it when the CEO makes 300 times they do it.
So I can't imagine why they haven't done that.
I mean, I will point out and we reported about this at the Free Press about, you know, there's an elected official compensation commission that kind of sets these salaries.
And, you know, the mayor of Detroit said to make more than the governor of Michigan, That's that's been the case for a while.
He's going to make substantially more.
At the same time, you understand that in theory, the electorate wants a citizen to be running among them.
Right.
And they don't want somebody that is perhaps somebody that they can't relate to.
Now, of course, there are many politicians that buck that trend.
Donald Trump immediately comes to mind.
But the idea that, for example, a governor who was part of the people might make less than an epidemiologist who's an actual Ph.D. in state government is not probably the most stunning thing.
Well, or somebody over the investment bureau, which is dragging down 5300 excuse me, 53 five $535,000 a year, let's say.
I wonder why.
What kind of governor would those guys make?
You know, we'll see.
It was an interesting story.
Let's see if we can get another interesting story out of Dr. Winnie Brinks.
So I just gave you a Ph.D.
Senator.
You're a doctor of of lots of stuff.
So listen, what's what's the learning curve in in learning how to be a majority leader?
What's been the most challenging thing for you, which initially kept you awake at night?
Oh, man.
I think there were a lot more things that kept me awake at night when the Republicans were in the majority.
so.
Duly noted.
Duly noted.
Yes.
But yeah, you know, there's no job quite like working in the legislature, whether you're a member or in leadership.
And, you know, it's always an opportunity to learn more every day.
And if you don't have a posture of learning, you shouldn't sign up for this work.
So I've just learned a ton.
Most of it is about working with people.
It is so important to be able to establish good relationships, maintain them, have open and honest conversations about things, your differences, as well as the things that you agree on.
And do the best you can.
So I think that's the biggest lesson I would have for anybody in this line of work.
Along those very lines.
What does a majority leader do when the governor wants to get something and your caucus does not and you try to bargain a compromise and one is not available, who are you loyal to, caucus or the governor?
We always have to represent our caucus.
You know, we are in the legislature, a co-equal branch of government.
And of course, we have just an incredible body of policy priorities that we are aligned with on the governor, a lot of times it's a matter of degree or details.
If there's a commitment on the part of the House and the Senate and the governor to get something done, we will get to a solution on that.
If we can't get there, we can't get there.
But, you know, the it's it always comes back to the math.
And you know what I'm going to say here?
56 votes in the House, 20 in the Senate, and one in the governor's office.
Senator Brinks, I notice in Whitmers governor, or Whitmers presentation for the budget this week, 500 million additional dollars for the Strategic Outreach and Attraction Reserve Fund.
Lawmakers are currently trying to overhaul the process for warning those corporate subsidies.
Do you think that there's an appetite to approve additional funds there without changing the process?
That's certainly been the subject of so much conversation over the last year.
It was one of the first big topics that we took on as a legislature and as you'll you're completely aware, this was a program that was passed during Republican led legislature.
They were in the majority.
They worked with the governor's office.
So for Democrats in the majority now this past year to be able to put our stamp on it has been an important part of our conversation.
We will continue to work on those concepts and we are just looking for for a much more holistic approach to economic development in general.
This is just one tool in the state's toolbox.
So we're looking at a number of other things as well from an R&D tax credit to, you know, renewing our our commitment to Renaissance zones.
There are things that we can do.
And so we will continue that conversation.
We're hopeful that we can find some common ground there and get something to the governor's desk.
Senator, the governor didn't mention the saw fund in her State of the State address, even though she talked about an overhaul previously.
She also didn't mention the paid leave proposal that she talked about last year and did not advance in the legislature.
Are those talks still happening or is that proposal dead?
Yeah, we're still very interested in seeing if there's some way that we can support families in need and family leave and issues around, you know, making it easier for people to participate in the workforce, providing that safety net for them when things don't go as planned.
So there's a number of ways we can crack that, that nut, if you will.
And we're we're continuing conversation on paid family leave.
We're currently looking at a study.
We're in discussion.
But as you know, it's a big, complex policy and it's not something that is easy to do, particularly in an election year, particularly with a lack of buy in from folks on the other side of the aisle at this point.
So, again, continued conversation on a big policy idea.
Why does an election year make that harder?
Democrats reluctant to vote for a mechanism to fund that program.
I wouldn't say that as much as just fewer days to get things done.
Certainly with the election in the House, with the two specials right now, that takes a few days out where we we don't have everybody in those seats.
They're in the on the Democratic side of the aisle.
And when you're talking about an issue where it's difficult to get bipartisan support, that's significant.
And then just as we get closer to the election, just the reality of it is that there will be fewer session days for those folks who really want to be out talking to voters and talking to their communities and making sure that they're connecting again with with people before the election.
Senator, we're very close to the one year mark of the attack at Michigan State University.
In the wake of that attack, MSU announced a series of security changes that they would make.
They have done some of those changes, some of them they have not, including walking back a pledge to require active violent intruder training for staff and students.
And they're putting new locks on roughly half the number of doors that they initially promised that they would.
The legislature frequently set safety standards for for these sort of events at the K-12 level, including requiring active violent shooter training.
What role, if any, should the legislature play in creating similar standards for universities in Michigan?
Yeah, that's a great question.
And I think, you know, as I've been contemplating this week, as the anniversary, I can't help but remember, you know, sitting with my daughter the day after the shooting incident in the basement of her of the house where she was living right next to campus and thinking about all of the things that that could have gone better that day.
And I'm I'm really glad that the university examined all of the things that could be better.
I know that we have other universities that have great programs in place, and I think that they've learned from some of them.
In terms of the details of all of that.
I haven't dug into what they are and are not doing, but I certainly hope they're taking every opportunity to to do all of those easy things in changes to the physical buildings and the, you know, the locks and things like that that should be relatively no brainers to do to keep their students safe.
I like tens of thousands of parents and family members, watched in horror from a distance, wondering what was happening for many hours last year.
And so I certainly hope the university takes that very seriously.
Even though the spotlight is dimming on that particular incident.
We know that gun violence is a clear and present danger to people in our society.
And university campuses have an obligation to do their best to keep our students safe.
It's also important to note that this is the time where the bills that we were able to pass do go into effect.
And so I'm pleased that from the legislature's perspective, we have taken clear, definitive action to help reduce gun violence.
Senator, as you know, the media loves to focus on the relationship between the majority leader in the House speaker.
And so have there been any awkward moments between the two of you as you've tried to grapple with issues and you're sort of smiling, aren't you?
Between the two of who?
You and speaker of the House?
Okay.
Awkward moments.
You know, I'm not maybe you can clarify your question.
Are you asking about the relationship between me and the speaker or between the speaker and the minority leader in the House?
No, no.
The between the two of you, the two Democrats.
Oh, yeah.
You know, I'm confused a little bit by that because there haven't been any awkward moments between me and Speaker Tate.
We've been very much partners in this effort over the last year leading our various caucuses, doing the best we can with what we've got.
We are we're we're just really pleased to be able to work together to get things done for the state of Michigan.
We had an incredibly successful year last year, certainly not without its challenges over in the House and in the Senate, for that matter.
But those can be dimmed a bit by some of the chaos that's fomented by particularly the minority leader in the House.
But we continue to have a very good relationship between me and Speaker Tate, and I'm looking forward to continuing that.
Is it true that you did have a disagreement, though, on how to handle the gun issue in the House?
Is that true?
No, that is not true.
You know that story and you heard that story on the stump.
Have you heard that story in the lobby for that?
Basically, the charge was, is that you were directing the speaker on how to handle the gun issue?
No, I wouldn't say that.
You know, we're very clear.
I'm good about boundaries here.
I understand that he's in charge over there in the house and I'm in charge in the Senate and that we do what we can to get things done.
So there was certainly issues that needed to be worked out with the gun violence prevention package.
You said we got most of it done before the the spring break.
We still had conversations that continued during spring break about I think it was just one bill.
But the fact of the matter is, when you're working through policy, sometimes it takes something a different kind of conversation or a different negotiation in one chamber or the other.
And we had productive conversations and we got it done.
I want to ask you about what seems to be a Democratic dissatisfaction with the governor's budget.
There were a couple of questions about funding for public transportation, and it maybe not getting as much attention as some other items in the budget, especially given the Population Council's focus on investing in public transit.
Did you want to see greater investment in what Whitmer put forward?
You know, we're still digging into the exact numbers.
I'd love to see more investment in public transit in general.
Looking forward, that would be probably a multi-year plan and investment, and that looks different in different communities.
So I think we need to really dig into what we'd like that to look like.
You know, the report came out while the but the governor was putting together her budget proposal.
And I don't think any of us in the legislature are surprised to see that public transit was part of their recommendation.
We've been talking about that as one of the priorities we have when we talk about, for instance, rewriting PSAs.
Right.
Talking about what makes communities ready for those big investments from economic actors and public transit is one of those things that is Democrats we've always valued.
So we'll continue to have those conversations.
The governor put forward her proposal that legislature will respond with hearings.
Well vet those ideas and we'll come up with our own ideas and infuse those into what we send back to her.
The house has repeatedly passed legislation to include the legislature and the governor's office under open records laws and has perpetually died in the Senate.
Why should Michiganders expect that that might make any change?
We saw a hearing this week, But why?
Why should Michiganders expected that actually pass out of the Senate?
And what's stopping you as a leader from simply releasing records now, even though you are not currently subject to for you?
Yeah, we're we're certainly very serious about moving this policy forward.
You saw that we had the hearing this week.
There's a lot of good support for it.
We are outliers in the nation when it comes to our Open Records Act, applying to the legislature and the governor.
So I believe that this is legislation that needs to get done is good for democracy, and I think it's good for confidence.
And in our government, which is sorely lacking right now.
So as we look forward, I think we will do our best to get it through the Senate.
Obviously, I can't guarantee what happens in the House.
Per our previous comments in conversation here today, we are doing our best to set this up for success in both chambers and to get it to the governor's desk.
But at the end of the day, I am just hopeful that all of that work will pay off and that we will be able to get something that can earn the confidence of enough House members that it gets to the governor's desk.
Senator, thanks for being on our program.
How does a governor Brinks sound to you?
That's an interesting concept.
You know, 12 years ago when I was recruited to run for this office, the PTA and out of nonprofits and education, I would never have anticipated that.
I'd even have to consider that.
So I'll give it some thought.
Woah, all right.
Well, thank you very much.
It's good to see you.
Always nice to have you on our program.
Have a good weekend.
Okay.
Thank you.
It was a pleasure.
All righty.
See you guys next week.
For more Off the Record.
Production of Off the Record is made possible, in part, by Martin Waymire, a full service strategic communications agency, partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and public policy engagement.
Learn more at MartinWaymire.com.
For more Off the Record, visit wkar.org.
Michigan public television stations have contributed to the production costs of Off the Record.
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7sa7SZ6arn1%2BrtqWxzmidnppdbnpzfJFtZKydnmLEqrrNopxmmqKeu6y%2FjKidn2WknbJuvsScpqucXWu1urmYp2Y%3D